How would I begin organizing this research paper?

Question

I'm working on a research paper for philosopy and what I'm trying to prove is Socrates' "All I know is that I know nothing". The way I'm trying to prove this quote is like this: Socrates believed that knowlege is only "justified true belief". Beliefs stem from what we observe, and our observations come from perception and sense-data. Since all our perspectives can be different or even flawed (like how some view the glass as half empty, and others view the glass as half full) no one is "right" and therefore the things we call "facts" don't really exist, so we can never have accurate "knowledge" of anything. So..what would be a good thesis for this paper, and how would I go about organizing it?

Answer 1

doesnt that have to do with perception as well..

if i perceive i know better than everybody else about a certain thing.. then i would know best about it.. and some things may be right because they exist only because u have pondered over them right..

fine chuck that.. i was trying to contradict ur theory.. which is amazing btw.

could u trace the line from thought, observation, then the processing of it, and the conclusions we draw from it..
and how different it rele is from person to person..

u cld prob show a pic to a bunch of ppl n ask them what they believe the pic depicts.. it will vary , and they will all be certain it is something..

maybe something on those lines, have fun with ur project

Answer 2

You could tackle it in a very traditional way when approaching a research paper; begin with a literature review. Discuss what other Socrates scholars have had to say on the subject and then defend an opinion that is similar to your own.

It is always easier to stand on the shoulders of others, especially when they have PhD.'s. It will also help shed light how Socrates' message was lost on scholars because they argue over what he really meant. That's what you call comedic irony.

Or you could use the Bill and Ted approach:
"All we are is dust in the wind dude"

Answer 3

i might make a catalogue of expert and Con philisophers and a quick better half precis of their arguments. only tally the outcomes, talk some huge variations, and %. a winner. To me there is incredibly no very final valid argument against your assumption of subjectivity; and that's the reason the belief of justified real perception remains open for debate to at present time. i might further argue that subjective might desire to be the case by way of fact each and every of the arguments - professional or con - have not spoke back the question of "How do all of us be attentive to?" That leaves all nation-states of philosophy and technological understanding open ended. Can there be any reality till the question of epistemology is closed? I agree that each and every thing is subjective; yet I see no bar to acquiring reality from a subjectivity (actuality) shared via all. What we desire is a definition of subjectivity. Is objectivity incredibly the absence of subjectivity? possibly the two are labels for psychological states alongside a time line of assorted emotional resistance? replace into Socrates responding to his critics in humility; or replace into he doing a self verify on a bad hair day? that's a similar person that suggested, "be attentive to theyself."