Think our place in life from philosophy

We must confess it: life wouldn't be possible without all of a gear of appreciations and appearances, and if deleted the "apatente world", with all the indignation that certain philosophers put upon him assuming that this is possible, there'd be nothing neither of our "truth". Nietzsche, beyond good and evil, 34

Juan David Acosta Gonzlez Introduction The exercise of this philosophy subscribed to a kind of thinking that satisfies a certain time or historical era. We understand that, according to various positions and conditions do fiolosofico of Athens does not correspond to a posterior and however the discussion between different areas of production of thought is woven as a bridge, the timeless dialogue between authors being possible. This unique item allows ancient figures as Socrates's engage in dialogue and be the center of discussions that until today take day place in the exercise of thinking philosophy. The main reference on which will be a construction of the image of Socrates is undoubtedly his Apologia presented by Plato, because this is a clear sign of the influence that a character made for his time as eningmatico and controversial until today allowing space for rethinking the essential condition of the philosopher. The intention that encompasses this reflection is in contrast with Nietzscheana posture, your reading and judgment about the option for live or die before the inivitable clash of the fate facing a life marked by philosophy. Without more, this attempt to show the construction of an antagonistic Socrates warns input the urgency to set aside all thought of thinkers such as Plato or Nietszhe; It is the impression that has left its exercise as a life, framed from the public and the private option, where truth as last condition comes in discussion and debate about the nature and experience mediated by the body in someone interested in philosophy. Die by the polis Along the apology a tension between the accusers of Socrates and this same by determining the validity or denial of two accusations that configiuran can be seen and they bear witness to the nature of the character. This first case makes a belief by the polis to Socrates and fight against "shadow" effect of absence body to refer to a trial. The second arises in the midst of a feud dating back between Socrates and Anytus (exposed in the Meno dialogue) questioning the making of the first in the city. Our character is in the midst of a dispute by the truth, shows how the Supreme reference of wisdom, his punishment is the result of a task legitimized by the Oracle at

Delphi and is due to which at any other. The search for the truth has led to the discrediting politicians, poets and craftsmen, making visible the ignorance immersed in Athens. It is a wisdom of men and the service of these because its end does not seek to establish hierarchies of knowledge more or less, simply justified in recognition for "not knowing" worthy of the philosopher. A denial by life would say Nietzsche, if the wisdom in search of the philosophers is in favour of the truth as the ultimate guarantor of the reason. These decadents that give value on life to their judgments could not be more than drivel. To assert knowledge through a denial (ignorance), we face an illness as a single output to our current thinking.(2001, 38) CFR. Socrates responds to the question of death and a previous target of judgment, with the certainty of not having any fear because it understands that seeking knowledge about the unknown is not typical of his work (Plato, 1981, 29a) Cfr. even after reaffirming its character as a thinker in the service of the polis through philosophy, gives to understand the city that if you decide to leave it alive but under the condition of no exercise more your profession, the would opt for die as often as necessary.
But if someone claims that I say other things, is it not telling truth. I would add to this: < < Athenians, do case or not to Anytus, let me or not in freedom, in the idea that I am not going to do anything else, though it would have died many times. > > (Plato, 1981, 30a)

It is necessary to discuss this point, because the place presented to us on the philosophy found in a voltage by the life and death: from Socrates is a way that reaffirms a preparation for death and assumed a more field there in which, in the wisdom maximum could claim a lifetime in the service of making fiolosofo. The reading of Nietzsche approaches of the ancient philosophers and especially its reading Socrates, input is a problem highlighted in the development and production of thought in reference to life. Although his stance shows us the particular notion of a criminal, strong factions and traits of ugliness, from its context is an accusation and a rebuke by the way in which I am presenting to the Greek polis faculties of the filosofar. It is a denial that which does not fit some justification in the name of reason.
Debauchery and lawlessness confessed's instincts are not only a sign of decadence in Socrates: so are the superfetation of logical and that evil of stunted of distinguishes it. Not those acoustic hallucinations nor forget have been that, with the name of < < demon of Socrates > >, a religious interpretation. (Nietzsche, 2001, 39)

The value of truth The value of truth justifies the work of Socrates. Although we declare in favour of the polis but not in the public sphere, it is made of his life an offering to the same service; It gives to philosophy a place on the streets of the polis from private, but in public, without asking any remuneration. For Socrates, ignorance is throughout his life, this has the basis to

assert that he knows nothing and a path of questions his interlocutor is immersed in the incabado always sudden philosophy. In the midst of this discussion, opens us the question by trying to clarify who owns ultimate reason. Already in the Euthyphro, Socrates shows us that the way forward lies through the question, but the marked path comes from the hand of the Oracle at Delphi where the Word takes a special figure and if you want to think, "oblique". Not knowing that Socrates exposes, opts for an inclination to skeptical in contradiction with what asserted, own of the Sophists. This way, warns us that firstly the scope of truth occurs through the soul and the knowledge of the limits that are on the search for excellence: "care of itself". The tension between life and truth found in the depths of the Socratic action, has seen highlight consistency by which these two come together and complement each other. A life that moves away from the political exercise for reasons "demonicas", puts limits on the exercise of the man between polis and the individuals who constitute it, between life and death, between philosophy and politics. This duality present in the philosophy of the West and the attempt to exalt the place of reason away more and more of the instincts and passions. It's a duality that puts us in the mythological tradition of ancient Greece between two figures being discussed by the two paths of rationality and passion: Apollo and Dionysus. Following the first of these roads, there is a representation of the Hellenic mediated by the reason equation = virtue = happiness. For Nietzsche this reading of the Greek world introduced by Socrates molded in the course of the dialectic in favour of the Plebs and the establishment of speech in favour of those who do not have other means to establish arguments.
To the dialectic choose it is only when you have no other means. It is known that mistrust is inspired with her, she persuado little. Nothing is easier to erase the effect of a dialectical [...] The dialectic can only be viewed as a forced speech, in the hands of quiens they don't have already other weapons. (Nietzsche, 2001, 40)

The fascination and death of Socrates Another point that I would like to highlight regarding the image of Socrates and the exercise of philosophy lies in relation to the feeling that his image as a philosopher of the polis Greek, produces even in their die-hard antagonistic as a charm. Without neglecting the path marked by the Oracle at Delphi and the Apollonian voice that is behind his interpretation, this, the path of the questions and riddles it is the task of the filodoso through the use of the dialectic, who in the words of Nietzsche argues in favour of the intellectual decline of his interlocutor. It is inevitable to see the reasons why late take Socrates to trial, and if its sanction by politicians, poets and craftsmen would have to do with the instability that produced his way of articulating arguments through questions in the polis, leading him to a plane much more politician in which private collides heavily with the public.

Plato (1981) gives us an example this reminding what was the role of public affairs Socrates in the city:
Indeed, that Government, even being so violent, I not scared to carry out an unjust act, but that, after leaving Tolo, the other four were at Salamis they brought to Leon and I went out and I went home. Cfr (32d)

And then reaffirms its not fear to lose their lives in connection with their exercise as a philosopher of the polis:
And maybe would have lost their lives by esti, if the regime had not been downed quickly [...] do you perhaps think that I would have come to live many years, if I had dealt with public affairs, and to occupy me of them as befits an honest man, I would have given helps the fair things and considering this the most important thing, as is due? (Plato, 1981, 32e) CFR.

Even for Nietzsche is a character that deserves to be recognized as the seductive essence of Western philosophy, who through education to young aristocrats of the society formed for the fight togonal came already preparing for Athens. His erotic sense towards the Greeks in decadence of his era, I interpret it and gave a unique twist to this anarchy of instincts, remplazandola for the reason.
When you have the need to reason a tyrant, as did Socrates, a no small danger that something different makes of tyrant is given by force. Then guessed that rationality was the Saviour, nor Socrates, nor their patients were free of being rational, rigor, was their last remedy. (Nietzsche, 2001, 42)

Finally, the decision of Athens on the life of Socrates arrives to find him guilty of the charges by wicked and not obedience to the laws of the city. It decides to impose either of three ways which shall have the right to choose. Pecuniary fine that their poverty can not answer; exile to which does not consider as option because your life is found within the boundaries of the polis; Finally death accessed on behalf of dictated by the polis. Option that Socrates ends up taking raises us big concerns, as why not life?, if given justice to his death was not largely argued. And more importantly, why accept this?, what is hidden behind? Remembering the Apollonian reason equation = virtue = happiness, Nietzsche shows us that Greek imitation of this character in the polis is seeking intelligence, calridad and lucides above all: any concession to the instincts to the unconscious, driving down havia (2001, 43). A fighter to the instincts and disease who lived in the polis, this reminds us by that we chose the path of reason, of the decadents. The role of the filosfoia is found as a war between life and death, but not both.
While the life ascends equals happiness instinct. Do I get to understand this, the most intelligent of all those who have been deceived if same? He finished by saying this, in the wisdom of its

value to death?...Socrates wanted to die; not Athens, he was the one who gave the cup of poison, the forced Athens to give it. (Nietzsche, 2001, 43)

Bibliography Nietzsche, f. (2001). The twilight of the idols. Trad. and notes Andrs Snchez Pascual. Madrid: Alianza Editorial. Nietzsche, f. (2001) beyond good and evil. Trad. and notes Andrs Snchez Pascual. Madrid: Alianza Editorial. Plato (1981). Apology, Crito, Euthyphro. In works i. Trad.de j. Calonge. Madrid: Gredos.