Junias 'Response To Socrates'

Junias explains how the knowledge of what is fearsome and what is encouraging is courage. While Socrates continues Nicaraguas’ line of thinking by introducing animals into the conversation, if courage depends on knowledge then animals such as lions are not smart enough to know, and even so few humans are able to understand. In response to Socrates and to Laches further questioning as to whether he believes animals that are commonly seen as courageous are wiser than us, or if he contradicts everyone else by denying their courageous portrayal. slices confirms that courageous is not the word he would use to describe animals, and that only a few people possess it; ‘courageous actions are wise actions’. I lean towards agreeing with spoken word in
saying that he was a sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sacrificial sa By using Cisco’ definition of courage, only a select few could truly be dubbed courageous. Courageous would then be an attribute given to those that were seen as wise. Any animal, child, woman or man that would do something recklessly without understanding could instead be seen as ‘foolish’ or ‘reckless’. Describing an animal as courageous would be automatically disregarded as possible, as an animal in Nicaragua’s opinion is unwise and unable to think through its actions. Children also seem to be in the same category as animals as not being able to understand the dangers in front and thus acting unafraid continues forward. After cancelling out animals and children as capable of being courageous only men and women remain, and within this group, an even smaller bracket of people could be considered courageous. Nahuas now also mentions foresight along with courage, indicating that they go hand in hand. The way Nicias explains his views makes it seem like
I think that courage depends on knowledge and being able to be evaluative. Animals would not be courageous as they can not make decisions based on knowledge, I think that animals live more by instinct, and to call an animal courageous is just anthropomorphizing it. I believe that people and animals are different, and so are our mental capabilities. Some animals may be smarter than others, but still not able to be courageous. In terms of children I am unsure, as everyone develops differently and two children at the same age can have different mental ages. I could see courageousness not being dependent so much on age, and more so in an individual's own consciousness. In many stories throughout history, animals are used to give lessons such as the Aesop tales, but these books are written by people for people. Human characteristics have been depicted in animal form for the purpose of storytelling and it seems that during this process people have anthropomorphised the animals seen in real life. To me, being courageous would depend on evaluative knowledge. Being self conscious in one's life, reflecting on one’s own situation in life and making the best decision based on that knowledge is what would lead to a courageous life. While doing the opposite and being reckless would lead to an uncourageous life. ‘Courageous