Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sara_khan
AoA all,
As m quite junior here despite i'd dare say that the precis seems quite ordinary and does'nt require us to be philosophers but masters at english..Here's my feeble attempt at it...
"The dynamism of Greek Philosophers"
The Greek philosophers preferred more practising than preaching.They believed in the dynamism of the subject of philosophy and its value in the betterment of humanity.They therefore incessantly continued their research into the subject till it was given final shape by Aristotle.
For example, if the Parmenides vaguely wondered over knowledge and its attributes, the pre-socratics introduced obeservation and experimentation as key to it.If Democritus contended baseless beliefs of his predecessors, Thales defended the philosophy's advancement as a subject against all odds.If Anaxagoras introduced philosophy into politics, Socrates revolutionized politics.If Plato sought to base philosophy on love as basic human instinct and illogically bulit ideal states and subjects, Aristotle logically founded it on wisdom and immensely helped humanity in all spheres of knowledge.
Its 125 words i guess...I wd b extrmly grateful for some learned comments..
Allah haafiz
|
Well, your attempt is very interesting. You have tried to show that expertise of English alone could be sufficient to solve this technical paragraph.
If I evaluate your precis in two different capacities i.e. first in the capacity of an English examiner and second in the capacity of a philosopher, my results would be following:
First -- In the capacity of English Examiner:
Honestly speaking, any English exam should not try to check technical knowledge related to whole different fields. So if I do not go in the technical details of philosophical facts which are mentioned in the paragrapgh, your attempt is really superb. The sequence of paragraph does not reveal for instance, that Parmenides also was one of the pre-Socratics or that what paragraph informs is not that Democritus contended some baseless beliefs of his predecessors. Actually Democritus has been contrased with not his predecessors but is contrasted with those people who were to come about 1400-1500 years after the death of Democritus. Sequence of English sentences however does not reveal this fact at all. Sequence of sentences alone really gives the sense that Parmenides was not among the class of pre-Socratics or that Democritus has been contrasted with his predecessors.
So English alone gives more or less same sense as you have depicted in your attempt. So honestly, you must be awarded good marks in English precis exam.
Second -- In the capacity of Philosopher (This was my optional subject):
Had this paragraph come in philosophy exam, then I would evaluate your attempt whole differently:
Then I would not tolerate following philosophical mistakes in your attempt:
1- Your attempt gives the sense that pre-Socratics introduced observation and experimentation as 'key to finding attributes of knowledge'. In other words, your attempt gives this sense that objective before pre-Socratics, just like Parmenides, was also to find the attributes of 'knowledge' but unlike Parmenides who 'pondered' for this purpose, those pre-Socratics applied the method of observation and experimentation.
Following philosophical facts should be kept in mind in this respect:
a)- Parmenides was also one of pre-Soctarics. (this fact is not clearly expressed in paragraph)
b)- Parmenides used the method of dialectics in order to find mysteries of 'knowledge'. (this is clearly mentioned in paragraph)
c)- Other pre-Socratics resorted to the method of 'observation and experience' with not any such purpose as to find the mystries of 'knowlege' but with such purposes as to 'ferrot out the secrets of material world'. (note that 'knowledge' is taken as a technical term and it has been contrasted with 'secrets of material world'. 'knowledge' and 'secrets of material world' have not been presented in this paragraph as akin to one another. 'knowlege' means the attibutes of 'knowledge' itself --- which is different from knowing the attributes of materail world.)
2- Your point that Democritus contended the beliefs of his predecessors is technically wrong. In this paragraph, Democritus has not been contrasted with his predecessors but has been contrasted with Christian 'Scholastics' who were yet to come in the world about 1400-1500 years after the death of Democritus.
3- Paragraph says that Plato based philosophy on Epistemology and this basis was akin to preliminaries of love. Crucial thing is 'epistemology'; not 'love'. "Epistemology' means same 'attributes of knowledge' over which Parmenides already had pondered.
4- You said Plato illogically built 'ideal states' whereas paragraph says that he built those 'ideal states' in his "more specious moments --- i.e. when he experienced some broader vision of reality" ... So building of 'ideal states' was not illogical because those buildings were constructed during the "more precious moments of Plato's life". Actually this paragraph, as a whole disregards any kind of epistemological activity and praises only non-epistemological activities.
----------------------
So this paragraph was not 'general' at all. Only expertise of English could not sort out the technicalities involved in it. It was logically wrong to ask to make precis of such a technical paragraph in English precis exam.
FPSC, while marking this exam, should adopt 'first method' which I have mentioned in my this post.
And may you get good marks in precis exam...
Thanks!