A fool can be satisfied but he will not see all the aspects that Socrates will see. Thus making him ignorant to the reasons for Socrates dissatisfaction. Although Socrates claims to be ignorant himself, he is one of most respected and studied philosophers in history. This shows that he was clearly onto something with his ideals. Socrates might say that the fool’s satisfaction is not the kind that he would want, he would want a much more fulfilling satisfaction than one who seeks common wants such as wealth, fame etc… Would Socrates be satisfied if he knew the answer to every question he or someone else asked?
He also makes it clear that citizens should always do what is considered to be “just”. Crito, along with others, believe that Socrates would be morally wrong for not trying to escape. Crito attempts to persuade Socrates that he should escape out of prison and not doing so is “unjust” because it means he will be leaving his children behind and siding with the unjust people who have put him in jail. Socrates then proceeds to justify his reasons for not escaping by stating that it would be breaking the Laws, which he considers to be an “unjust” thing to do. Therefore, Socrates would rather abide by the Laws than go against the people and escape.
Socrates by his words wanted to affect the jury and gain the mercy for not putting him to a death and change a penalty instead. However, Socrates asking for the mercy was not because he had no other choice, but to put impudence on the court decision. Socrates was able to win the case if he had practiced Sophistry, but he chosen to tell a truth instead of saying shameful things that other people say it during a trail to avoid a penalty. Moreover, Socrates prophesied that there will be others people to take his position after his death anyway. After all, it is not the particular person who created an issue, but the activity of Philosophy itself was
I will provide a brief opening statement. Socrates was accused for corrupting the youth, teaching out of the charge and not believing in gods. These accusation were brought by Melatus, Anytus, Lycon and citizens of Athens. Below I will try to prove that Socrates was not guilty for corrupting young people neither willingly nor unwillingly, he was not a sophist, and also
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
In Plato’s Apology, Socrates is put into trial because he is accused of corrupting the youth with his teachings that deviate from the established beliefs of the Greek society. Although he justifies that he is only doing what he believes is his duty, he reasons that even if he is given a death penalty, death is nothing to be feared. He raises multiple strong and effective arguments that explain to his audience that it is illogical to fear death. All of these arguments revolves around the central idea that death is not evil and that “no evil can happen to a good man, either in life or after death” (Apology, 41c). The first argument that Socrates presents during his trial is the idea that death is not the most important thing to worry about in
In this essay, I will present an argument that shows that Plato will convince Socrates to reconsider his decision to receive the death sentence. Plato would show Socrates that his three reasons for staying to receive his sentence is unjust because his action is fuelled by injustice. I will also show that Socrates will agree with Plato about the unjust consequences that his actions may bring after Plato reasons why Socrates is doing an injustice. Finally, Plato would then proceed to show Socrates that his decision to stay cannot result in happiness and justice which in turn will cause Socrates to re-evaluate accepting his death sentence according to his own ideals of a happy and just life. The first reason Socrates gives for accepting his death sentence is the fact that Athens has provided him with education.
Macbeth deeply regrets his murder of Duncan because he realizes that Banqos stratagem is so superior that he will have to make no sacrifices to ensure his son’s kingship, while Macbeth had to endure so much pain only to gain an unfruitful kingship. Macbeth was forced to go against his moral code, suffering so much from regret to gain his short kingship, but because of his fear of Banqo’s abilities, he is worried that Banqo’s son will be able to easily attain the throne. He remarks on Banqo’s abilities that he “hath the wisdom that doth guide his valor to act in safety.” (58-59) Macbeth knows that Banqo is not so irrational and risky as Macbeth, and that his logical and rational thinking will lead him to not take so many risks while also ensuring his sons kingship. Macbeth risked imprisonment
But Hamlet give up the good opportunity of killing Claudius because he hopes that his revenge for his father for a moral sake, not committing an impulsive revenge. Due to himself being too idealistic and restrained, he does not take decisive actions even after using the planned play to test the Claudius's conscience that could possibly expose himself and left himself in unfavorable circumstances. Hamlet’s inability to act is caused by his overanalysis of the situations that further render him from not carrying out actions in response. If Hamlet is not indecisive, he would not be uncertain about the evidence regarding to his uncle’s crime, he would not be delaying his revenge, he would not be having emotional breakdowns and become a tragic figure. Hamlet’s personality ‘borns’ and develops under his royal position and the growing
The first defence was against the claim that he had corrupted the youth, “[I]t’s Meletus who is guilty of playing around with serious matters, of lightly bringing people to trial, and of professing to be seriously concerned about things he has never cared about at all” (Plato, Apology, 24c). By saying this is, Socrates addresses his opinion on Meletus, that Meletus is somebody who knows nothing about a situation, yet brings people to trial and pretends to be concerned about things, when in reality- he never cared. The second defence was against the claim that he philosophized cosmology. Meaning, he studied the earth, emphasizing that he never believed in a God, which made him look as if he lacked impiety. Socrates defence against this was, “You aren’t all convincing, Meletus, not even, it seems to me, to yourself.
Heartbreak, loss of a loved one, loneliness, etc. are all “harms” that we can admit to feeling. Socrates disregards this with his assumption of only physical harm being possible; therefore a complete end of existence would be harmless. He also states that nothing can harm a good man either in life or after death, and his fortunes are not a matter of indifference to the gods. However, in this world harms happen to good and bad alike.
Yet perhaps he will not take his own life, for that, they say, is not right. As he said this, Socrates put his feet on the ground and remained in this position during the rest of the conversation. Then Cebes asked: “How do you mean Socrates that it is not right to do oneself violence, yet that the philosopher will be willing to follow one who is dying?” Socrates begins to describe his first opinion of death: suicide. In these lines, he questions whether Evenus is a philosopher. He then goes on to say that a true philosopher should not be able to take his own life.
Alai also demonstrates, through his refusal, that he doesn’t possess the same compliance with inflicting pain on others despite being Bernard’s best friend. This exhibits the grandness of their humanity for they both sacrifice their own selves to prevent the boy they just met from getting hurt. “ He hadn’t meant to kill the Giant. This was supposed to be a game. Not a choice between his own grisly death and an even worse murder.