The Speech of Callicles
After reading "The Speech of Callicles" I noticed that Philosophers were not what I originally thought they were. I have always pictured them being men who were ahead of there time. Who were searching for the answers to life. In the first paragraph these beliefs I once had about philosophy were changed. Callicles states that Philosophers would get into pointless arguments about the problems of everyday life rather than look for the truth. They would also attempt to make a man who doesn't study philosophy but studies practical affairs second guess himself. No matter what side of the argument the man would speak about the philosopher would take the other side. The distinction made in paragraph one is that nature and custom are antagonistic to each other. Nature being the order and behavior of all living things that make up the universe, and custom meaning the everyday habits that have fallen upon society. I feel that they are antagonistic of each other. I imagine nature to be all that there is that we don't really have control over, and custom to be all things that we have adapted to. With this being the case the philosopher would flip from debating the custom with the nature and vice versa. It almost seems as if the philosophers would get a kick out of just arguing with someone who doesn't know any better rather than educating them on the real truth of the matter.
In the second paragraph Callicles states that by going against conventional theory a man should feel ashamed. What I understood from this is that feeling ashamed is not standing for what you truly believe is right and letting someone who might sound right convince you that you're wrong without giving you any real sources or concrete facts about the matter. He gives an example of an argument regarding whether it is better to do wrong or to suffer wrong. By doing wrong you are going against convention and feel ashamed. But to answer it is better to suffer wrong...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document