Cross Examining Socrates

This book is a rereading of Plato's early dialogues from the point of view of the characters with whom Socrates engages in debate. Socrates' interlocutors are generally acknowledged to play important dialectical and dramatic roles, but no previous book has focused mainly on them. Existing studies are thoroughly dismissive of the interlocutors and reduce them to the status of mere mouthpieces for views which are hopelessly confused or demonstrably false. This book takes interlocutors seriously and treats them as genuine intellectual opponents whose views are often more defensible than commentators have standardly thought. The author's purpose is not to summarise their positions or the arguments of the dialogues in which they appear, much less to produce a series of biographical sketches, but to investigate the phenomenology of philosophical disputation as it manifests itself in the early dialogues.

There is no better way to understand our present world than by exploring the Great Books written by the great minds that have made it. There is no better way to study the beginning of modern political philosophy than by studying its foundations in Machiavelli's The Prince. There is no better way to study the Great Books than with the aid of Socrates, the philosopher par excellence. What if we could overhear a conversation in the afterlife between Socrates and Machiavelli, in which Machiavelli has to submit to an Oxford tutorial style examination of his book conducted by Socrates using his famous "Socratic method" of cross-examination? How might the conversation go? This imaginative thought-experiment makes for both drama and a good lesson in logic, in moral and political philosophy, in "how to read a book", and in the history of early modern thought. Thus this book is for readers looking for a thought-stretching "good read" and for use in college classes in logic, philosophy, ethics, political science, literature, communication, rhetoric, anthropology, and history.

Socrates presents a compelling case for some life-changing conclusions that follow from a close reading of Socrates' arguments. Offers a highly original study of Socrates and his thought, accessible to contemporary readers Argues that through studying Socrates we can learn practical wisdom to apply to our lives Lovingly crafted with humour, thought-experiments and literary references (from the Iliad to Harry Potter), and with close reading sof key Socratic arguments Aids readers with diagrams to make clear complex arguments

Christian philosopher Kreeft (philosophy, Boston College) uses an imaginary dialogue between Socrates and Sartre to challenge the fundamental concepts of existentialist philosophy. The conversational style and non-technical language he employs serves to make the concepts discussed accessible to both students and general readers. Kreeft is also the

Immanuel Kant is one of the greatest philosophers in history. But, as Peter Kreeft notes in this book, Kant is really two philosophers--a philosopher about how we know things (epistemology) and a philosopher of right and wrong (ethics). If he had written only on either topic, he would still be the most important and influential of the modern philosophers. The combination of the two, though, makes for a formidable thinker, one it would take a figure such as the Father of Philosophy, the relentless Socrates, to confront. Confront he does, in Peter Kreeft's next installment of the popular Socrates Meets series. Set in the afterlife, the conversation between the two great minds lays out the key issues. Kreeft's Socrates reflects what the historical philosopher would likely have made of Kant's ideas, while also recognizing the greatness, genius, and insightfulness of Kant. The result of their dialogues is a helpful, highly readable, even amusing book, useful for beginner as well as master. Kant's philosophy of knowing truly is a "Copernican revolution in philosophy" as he dubbed it. His ethics was intended to set out the rational grounds for morality. Did he achieve his goals? What would Socrates say about the matter? Dr. Kreeft has written a book no student of modern thought should be without.

Serghides breaks down the writings of recognized English and American masters of trial advocacy Edward William Cox, William Ballantine, David Paul Brown and Henry Hardwicke into principles that offer specific guidance on cross-examination techniques. "As the book proceeds, the long-established and perfected principles and rules of cross-examination unfold with logical consistency and interrelation and are illustrated by simple and practical references, reminding us that what was obtained in older times is still as valid and relevant today." --Demetrios H. Hadjihambis, ix George A. Serghides is a graduate in law of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, and holds a Ph.D. in law at the University of Exeter, U.K. as well as a holder of a doctorate law degree (Ph.D) at the national and Kapodistrian University of Salonica. He practiced law in Cyprus for some years and since 1990 has been a Judge and President of different Family Courts in Cyprus. He is also a Liaison Judge for Cyprus for the promotion of an international Judicial Network in matters of Family Law, especially on children. Dr. Serghides' first book, written in Greek and published in Nicosia in 2007, is entitled The Technique of Cross-Examination, the Golden Rules of Cross-examination and Four Masters of Antiquity, two Greek (Socrates and Aristotle) and two Latin (Cicero and Quintilian).

When two bad ants desert from their colony, they experience a dangerous adventure that convinces them to return to their former safety.

Although &"the Socratic method&" is commonly understood as a style of pedagogy involving cross-questioning between teacher and student, there has long been debate among scholars of ancient philosophy about how this method as attributed to Socrates should be defined or, indeed, whether Socrates can be said to have used any single, uniform method at all distinctive to his way of philosophizing. This volume brings together essays by classicists and philosophers examining this controversy anew. The point of departure for many of those engaged in the debate has been the identification of Socratic method with &"the elenchus&" as a technique of logical argumentation aimed at refuting an interlocutor, which Gregory Vlastos highlighted in an influential article in 1983. The essays in this volume look again at many of the issues to which Vlastos drew attention but also seek to broaden the discussion well beyond the limits of his formulation. Some contributors question the suitability of the elenchus as a general description of how Socrates engages his interlocutors; others trace the historical origins of the kinds of argumentation Socrates employs; others explore methods in addition to the elenchus that Socrates uses; several propose new ways of thinking about Socratic practices. Eight essays focus on specific dialogues, each examining why Plato has Socrates use the particular methods he does in the context defined by the dialogue. Overall, representing a wide range of approaches in Platonic scholarship, the volume aims to enliven and reorient the debate over Socratic method so as to set a new agenda for future research. Contributors are Hayden W. Ausland, Hugh H. Benson, Thomas C. Brickhouse, Michelle Carpenter, John M. Carvalho, Lloyd P. Gerson, Francisco J. Gonzalez, James H. Lesher, Mark McPherran, Ronald M. Polansky, Gerald A. Press, Fran&çois Renaud, and W. Thomas Schmid, Nicholas D. Smith, P. Christopher Smith, Harold Tarrant, Joanne B. Waugh, and Charles M. Young.