The Differences Of Socrates And Callicles

In Plato’s Gorgias, Socrates and Callicles engage in a debate about what it means to be happy and to live a flourishing life. According to Callicles, a person is happy and flourishing when he or she is living as ambitiously as he or she possibly can. Living the good life includes chasing one satisfaction after another and having a constant influx of pleasure. In contrast, Socrates emphasizes on the idea of eudaimonia, according to which a happy and flourishing person is one that lives an orderly life, in which the person maintains discipline and control over oneself.
The present account will discuss Socrates’ responses to Callicles’ position on what it is that makes a person’s life good. First, I will provide a reconstruction of the two arguments made by Socrates. Secondly, I will give a critique on the arguments. The first response given by …show more content…
Overall, I think the ‘mixed sensations’ and the ‘equal pleasures’ arguments are noble responses from Socrates to Callicles. Both of these arguments illuminate Callicles’ problematic reasoning. The mixed sensations argument points out that if pleasure and pain are always intertwined with each other, then one cannot simply be a person that is only doing well or only doing poorly. However, Callicles could take a stand against this by claiming that a person can be doing well while experiencing both pleasure and pain if the pleasure overwhelmingly outweighs the pain – for example, if the person is experiencing the greatest pleasure possible and only a minor pain he or she would still experience a net amount pleasure. Though, this will change the first premise of the argument since it will no longer be an either-or case. As for the ‘equal sensations’ argument, it does not make sense that the brave person is better than the cowardly if they experience the same pleasures and pains. This indicates that goodness is not as simple as having some balance of pleasures and