As we have seen, some of the Sophists preached epistemological relativism: the view that there can be no universal, objective knowledge of reality because all knowledge is relative to either the individual or his or her culture. As we have also seen, Plato opposed the Sophists and embraced epistemological objectivism. For this essay, you may either (1) argue for relativism and against Plato or (2) argue for objectivism and against the Sophists. Whichever position you choose, your essay will need to show knowledge of what objectivism and relativism are, of Plato’s “Theory of Forms,” and of what Lawhead calls “The Standard Criticism of Relativism.” For example, you might use the Standard Criticism and the Theory of Forms to argue against relativism (certainly Plato used them this way); on the other hand, you might attack these things as part of your defense of relativism. You may use other philosophers we have studied, too, to support your argument, whichever position you take; Nietzsche or Berkeley, for example, might come in handy against objectivism. However you proceed, make your argumentative thesis clear to the reader, and make sure that your essay addresses Plato’s Theory of Forms and his Standard Criticism of Relativism—whether to attack them or to defend them! And remember that you are making an argument: you are trying to convince the reader to agree with your view by giving him or her reasons for thinking that your view is right and the opposing view is wrong. Whatever position you adopt, your instructor will try to read the paper from the point of view of the contrary position—so try to be as convincing as you can for someone who does not share your view!
Must be 3-5 pages and has to use outside resources with correct citations. I know this is posted really late but I need a lot of help!!!!
