1. Why was Socrates sentenced to death?
To the public, it was widely told
that Socrates was accused of two charges—"one that he did not believe in
the gods recognized by the State, the other that he had corrupted the Athenian youth
by his teachings" (How Socrates died, 10) However,
these charges were placed on Socrates by people whose reputation were
challenged by Socrates. As Socrates kept searching for the truth and knowledge,
he had conversation with a variety of "wise" men, who claimed
themselves to be wisest. However, when he examined and questioned those
politicians, poets, and artists, he found that they just fancied themselves to
be wise. Politician could answer Socrates 's question and even contradict
themselves; Poets "say many fine things, but they understand nothing that
they say"; artist, who "excelled in the
practice of his art, thought that
he was very wise in other most important matters, and this mistake of theirs
obscured the wisdom that they really possessed' (How Socrates died, 42). When
these "wise" people found themselves "have been detected
pretending to possess knowledge," Socrates became odious to them(How
Socrates died, 42). Young
people started to follow Socrates with the real wisdom and examine those
"wise" people. Realized that their reputation was in danger, those
"wise" people blamed Socrates on corrupting the youth. Even though
Socrates insisted on search for the truth, his wisdom was distorted by "wise"
people who actually knew nothing. Socrates 's wisdom enlightened some people,
but, at the same time, put himself to death.
2. Why is there a conflict (for
some) between science and religion?
The reason that there was a
conflict between science and religion for some people was that in their
mindset, anything that violated or went against their belief is blasphemous.
However, back in that time, religion spread from people to people by words. To
a great extend, what people learned about their religion depended heavily on
the sources that they received. But the problem is that those "wise"
people who were looked up to by ordinary Athenians did not really know about
the truth and science, but merely relying on their own senses. Euthyphro
regarded himself as a wise man who did the right thing accusing his own father
of murdering. But when he was questioned by Socrates of "what is piety,
and what is impiety," what he said can all boil down to his own assumption
that the god was pleased with what he did, and therefore, it was pious (How
Socrates died, 42). At the end, after Socrates pointed out the contradictory
statement he made, he finally realized that he did not really know what is
piety and impiety. Therefore, it revealed the fact that many "wise"
people equaled things that challenged their own thoughts to things that were
against the religion. Apparently, because of their ignorance, on the way of
searching for truth and exploring science, there would be a lot of things that
differ from what they thought. Therefore, they would think science is in
conflict with religion. Also, people regarded themselves to be holy and supreme.
As it was mentioned in the book of The Great Mystery, when " Francis Crick
say as that consciousness is just a bundle of neurons or when Patricia
Churchland indicates we are just three pounds of meat," people
tended to resisted this idea. They did not want to bring themselves down to the
same level as other creatures. Instead of learning about the science, people
would stick to their belief and put their religion above science. Therefore,
this also caused the conflict between science and religion.
Extra credit:
2. Science and religion both are, at best, a cluster of theories to almost prove that something almost did this which almost started this and this and so on and so forth. Neither one gives us the answers to our questions. And, even when we take science classes and go to church and gain more knowledge about the respective topic, we seem to have even more questions. As said in "The Limits of Science" clip, "the limits of our skull limits our understanding." We can't possibly know everything because we are just not made that way and I think this also ties into the concept the more you know, the less you know. I also think science is being made the villain when some people blame it for reducing us into cells, atoms, molecules, or matter. We want to believe that we are special or transcendent and get insulted by the notion of being just matter. However, we fail to realize that being called matter can be just as special and amazing as being called to have holiness or purity. Matter is so intricate and so complex that baffles us. We are not just matter. "Even if we forego religion and spirituality and opt for a purely materialistic understanding of what surrounds us, we are still touching moment to moment a mystery that transcends our ability to understand it" (The Great Mystery, p.13).
Response:
I found this a very interesting
opinion and it mentioned a few points that I failed to bring up in my essay, so
I would like to talk about my opinions regarding this post. First, I think
neither science nor religion proved the way nature or universe exactly work.
Both of them are just the assumptions that we made that will fit our
interpretation of how the nature and science work. In other words, they are the
imagery of our thoughts. They can and will always change as we learn more about
the universe and when our view changes. That also links to my second point. I
agree with your opinion that the more you know, the less you know. I believe
human's understanding of the world is still at the elementary level. As we find
out more and compare them to what we thought, we will realize there will be a
even longer way towards the complete understanding. However, that does not
necessarily mean we cannot possibly know everything. I mean as a individual, I
agree. But as a combination of human intelligence, there is no limit of our
understanding. It might be a very long period of time, and it will probably
extend to infinity. But as I said, that does not give a boundary of our
knowledge. Third, I absolutely agree that "matter can be just as special
and amazing as being called to have holiness or purity". As we explore
more about the cells that we are made up of, we discover that the cell itself
is an incredible art, which can be as complicated as the universe. This is
holy. This is pious. Not even to mention that how amazing it is that all our thoughts
come from these
so-called matter . But to the end, I admitted that there will still be a
conflict between science and religion as they reflect our thoughts based on
different mind sets, though there exists only one truth.
