While reading the first part of the book, it becomes clear that the most philosophical ideas were professionally interpreted to the relatively unprofessional audience so that the described concepts might be easily analyzed and implemented in real-world philosophy. In the first part of the book, the author tried to explain the main concepts developed by the Greek school of philosophy that might be considered the most fundamental for today’s society. With such a significant background, Roman philosophy has outperformed the Greek one in terms of the written texts and the number of branches in the new-world philosophy.
Firstly, Socrates was demonstrated as one of the most’ enigmatic’ philosophers of all time that has fundamentally influenced the modern vector of philosophical thought development. He was mostly regarded as a non-traditional philosopher since he did not write anything in his life, instead, he was always discussing his ideas on the streets with people from different social classes. The most interesting thing about Socrates might be the fact that he was not providing lectures or lessons but interviewing his interlocutors. As a result, once, he stated one of the most untrivial ideas in philosophy: “wisest is she who knows she does not know” (34). This idea emphasizes the significance of critical thinking and avoiding the ‘blind’ perception of facts or interpretations.
Secondly, the author demonstrated Plato mainly as Socrates’ most successful follower since he wrote and critically analyzed all of the most significant thoughts stated by his teacher. The readers might interpret Plato as Socrates’ persona ‘manager’ since he was the first who established an educational entity named ‘Academy,’ where philosophers who were the most significant social class, based on Socrates’ opinion, might begin their careers.
Thirdly, based on the author’s opinion, Aristotle represents one of the ‘widest’ philosophers in the whole Greek school of thought. Being the first person who intentionally discussed economical issues regarding effective household management, he also presented many paradox questions that cannot be fully resolved even in the contemporary world. For instance, in the book, Aristotle questioned Sophia: “What came first—the chicken or the “idea” chicken?” (58). This question represents the modified concept of the ‘mutual kinship’ where the two objects might both be precepted as initial ones.
Fourthly, Democritus was depicted more from the scientific perspective due to the volume of his ‘atomic’ theory representation. Democritus introduced the term ‘atom’ as something indivisible and not tiny, as many people might understand. Based on the atom theory, the author questioned Sophia: “Why is Lego the most ingenious toy in the world?” (26). The possible approach to the explanation might be for readers to understand the specific characteristics of this toy, such as absolute compatibility within different shapes and the possibility to re-build the toy many times. As a result, approximate in their attributes to atoms, Lego toys also help to build other objects by using relatively small and various types of shapes.
Finally, the authors described different vectors of Greek school development. One of the new streams was a Roman ‘Stoic’ idea. More specifically, this formation followed strict humanistic rules, notably represented by Seneca. The core idea of being stoic was for a person to remain indifferent in any situation since life prepares the challenges to humankind to make people stronger in their struggles. These ideas were considered innovative since stoics were the first who tried to face the problems instead of avoiding them and creating a ‘utopistic’ world.