Why did the Greek philosophers not judge the question of right and wrong?

The ancient Greek philosophers paid more attention to the relationship between people and things, and this evolved science, which does not talk about right and wrong, but only about right and wrong.

Chinese philosophers attach importance to the relationship between people, which has evolved into ethical and moral feudal etiquette, so Chinese always like to make moral evaluations in everything and pay attention to right and wrong.

Different angles get different results, and many yes and no questions are not math problems, and there are no absolute answers.

Because they only judge the "existence" of things, and do not care about the "right and wrong" of the things themselves.

Because it was the mainstream behavior of Greek philosophers not to judge questions of right and wrong. Besides, the focus of their pursuit is not on what is right and what is wrong, but on the meaning of the existence of things.

What do you mean by that? What's your reasoning?

Are you saying they don't talk about moral philosophy?

Or do they not talk about what is right and wrong?

Moral philosophy after Socrates they all talked

Right and wrong"It's a very vague word, so let's make it clearer

Shall we go back to Greek mythology? There are many tragic heroes in there, and perhaps from our point of view, even if it is a tragedy, we should reject it, but the hero has his incredible beauty, which makes people know that it is not a good result, and they can't bear to refuse. If so, what is there to criticize?

This may be the difference between agriculture and maritime civilization, and Azuchi sees what we want.

Thales – The source of all things is water.

HERACLITUS – The world is a raging fire.

Socrates, Plato, Protagore.

Greek philosophers.

But it is believed that nothing and infinity are lower than existence and finiteness. In Chinese philosophy, the opposite is true. The reason why there is such a difference is why.

There is a difference between being and finite, and there is no difference between noneness and infinity. Philosophers who start from the concept of hypothesis prefer to make distinctions.

Philosophers who proceed from the value of intuition prefer the undifferentiated.

Text: Summer PalacePleasure boats and boats glide slowly across the lake. What else can you replace with a sliding word and why.

Pythagoras, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle.

Diophantus, Pythagoras, Paps, Archimedes, Euclid, Toqinmi, Hypatia, Eno, Apronias, Thales, Socrates, it seems.

Thinking for yourself is more important than me giving you the answer! You don't need to know whether your thoughts are right or wrong in my case, this is what you should verify yourself, don't give up the answer you came up with because I said it was wrong! People who can think for themselves, philosophy, is not a problem

It seems that it does not involve any simple or not simple questions, but it is essentially a question of how to choose and practice, and which practice is more realistic and credible, so it does not need an answer.

It is a very simple question, but it is rich in connotation and tells people a very profound philosophical truth. There is only one way to get rid of weeds in the wilderness, and that is to plant crops on them. In the same way, the only way to make the soul free of distractions is to occupy it with virtue. We hope that there will be more positive energy in the society!