Socrates uses reasoning and logic throughout his trial. I believe that Socrates is innocent because he defends himself truthfully with effect. He uses sound arguments and he is passionate about philosophy. Socrates did nothing to gain in life and did not want a high social standing. Socrates is fair and uses correct methods of arguments by uncovering the
Plato's “The Apology of Socrates” is a speech Socrates makes at the trial in which he is charged with not recognizing the gods recognized by the state, inventing new idols, and corrupting the youth of Athens. Socrates' speech, however, is by no means an "apology" in our modern understanding of the word; the name of the dialogue derives from the Greek "apologia," which translates as a defense, or a speech made in defense of the convicted. Thus, in this reading, Socrates attempts to defend himself and his conduct; certainly not to apologize for it. For the most part, Socrates speaks in a very plain, conversational manner towards all his charges that Meletus and Athens has filed against him. He explains that he has no experience with the law
For many centuries, many people continuously have two different stances in the Crito, which is one of the several Platonic dialogues. After pleading guilty in a trial and being sent to prison for the injustice of corrupting the youth’s mind, which he did not commit, Socrates is given the chance to decide whether to escape prison or not. Some believe that it was more righteous for Socrates to follow the Athenian laws and face his punishment. Others believe that he should not have suffered and have his last remaining moments unfairly taken from him. Despite the fact that Socrates accepted his penalty, he should have left with Crito because the trial was, overall, unfair.
From the Apology, Plato shows how Socrates was unyielding in his morals. Any sensible person would have taken the choice to evade death and accepted the ignorant life was the best. However, Socrates defies this by stating the conjecture to the court that to fall to the swift wickedness is worse than death. With this, Plato is defining the logic of Socrates soul is right rather than the evident fact of what the court laws describe. In his passage of Crito, Plato examines the thought of honor in following through one’s own promise.
He ended up believing and teaching things to other people, whether it went against the way the Athen government or not, he still continued his work. Making enemies and becoming the topic of conversation, the Athenians began to view Socrates as a threat to their beliefs and way of life and sought to end it. In order to end this, Socrates was accused of blasphemy (Mod1SlideC7). Socrates’s accusers took him to court and after Socrates did not play their game by asking to be sent into exile, and in the end, he was sentenced to death. After reading the textbook and Plato’s writing influenced by Socrates, I realized that in the period of his life Socrates was indeed truly a threat to the Athens society, because he looked for answers that no one else bothered to find which challenged their culture.
Aristotle on the other hand, claims that there is a different outlook on the model of ignorance. He believes that people do bad things due to the fact that they cannot control their evil sometimes. The two theories he defines state that either we do things "in ignorance" where we don 't know that we are missing out on information, or "by ignorance", where we chose to not know or not want to know the information. In order to fulfill the human function, each philosopher has created their own ideas of what humans should do in order to live a successful life. Socrates believes the most important role of a person is to care for one 's self (Plato, p.557).
Socrates 's arguments before are somehow acceptable and there 's no real for us to criticize them. However, we can find in his next objections aspects that may be controversial. Socrates begins saying that whether a just man would act to overcome another just man. Both had the same opinion that just man may consider it right to overcome an unjust man. Proceeding, what the unjust man will do is overcome and benefit from everyone and anyone.
The technique looks to address convictions in the expectations that it prompts one gathering to repudiate themselves, so they see the thought from different points of view. He connected the technique in different circumstances yet for the most part in ones that have practically nothing, if any a solid answer. The technique tested the ethical convictions drawing out the shortcomings and blames in their contentions. Additionally made renowned by Socrates was Socratic incongruity. This type of Irony saw Socrates putting on a show to be uninformed on the subject being examined in the expectations of bringing out unimportant
Even though, the good life caused Socrates an early death. Also, breaking the law may result in harming others and according to Socrates harming others can harm the soul. By harming others one is being unjust and unjust deeds harm the soul. So what is the point of breaking the law if I will be hurt in the end? Furthermore, Socrates would never rationalize breaking the law because it would be violating an agreement made between the citizen and the state.
He may not be willing to reject his own ideas and beliefs, or may have just thought that the time to leave the world had come. The crucial point of the talk between Socrates and Crito regarding whether Socrates ought to escape from jail is the views which Socrates put forward and those have been negotiate over the millennia and actually be deserving of being argued to figure out the world of Socrates. As a result of corrupting the youth and not believing in the god in which the city believed (27a), Socrates was taken in charge and waited for death penalty. During Socrates was in jail, Crito, his faithful friend, called to convince Socrates to run off from the jail. Nevertheless, he did not accept his proposal to get away from prison not to argue against his concept and to obey the rules.