In Apology and Crito the readers get to learn about the last couple moments of Socrates before he is given the death sentence. In Plato’s Apology, Socrates is brought to trial and accused of many crimes. In his defense, Socrates uses his usual technique of questioning people’s actions and at the end of the trail he gets convicted for corrupting the youth and not believing in the gods. In Plato’s Crito, Socrates is requested by Crito to run away from jail, and ultimately avoid his death. Instead, Socrates chooses to question Crito’s request and comes to the conclusion that it is best for him to stay. After reading Plato’s Apology and Crito, I can conclude that according to Socrates human virtue is knowledge (wisdom). In this paper I will present two disputes that’s Socrates uses to prove what human virtue is.
To begin, I will be discussing the authors and his thesis. Apology, Crito, and Phaedo was written by Socrates’ apprentice Plato. In these books, Plato is narrating the events leading up to Socrates’ death. He begins in Apology tells us the readers of the court proceedings and conviction of Socrates. In this first narrative Plato is in the words of Professor Jeff McEwen “acting as a court scribe.” Plato is writing down Socrates defense and the responses of his accusers. The question here is, why did Plato write Apology? Plato was one of Socrates’ followers he believed that Socrates was wise and he would turn this event into a testimony of the injustice done to Socrates and the wit of the man he had learned so much from. This book would show
Socrates was a man that was in search of the truth about wisdom. However, it became more then just a search when it brought him to trail of accusations. As a philosopher Socrates was known to overdrawn ideas and to frustrate anyone he was talking to. He is always in search of a better idea and for anyone who has experienced Socrates could assume he is making up his own actualities. This becomes evident in “ Apology” written by Plato, where Socrates was brought in charges for corrupting the minds of the youth and not believing in the Gods.
In The Clouds, by Aristophanes, and The Apology by Plato, Socrates is illustrated in distinctive ways. In The Clouds, Aristophanes tries to expose Socrates and his followers, the Sophists. In his play, Aristophanes shows that Socrates is contaminating the young men of Athens, and he uses mockery to magnify a lot of the lessons delivered by Socrates. Plato, who was a devoted advocate of Socrates, portrayed his advisor in a positive way. Even though majority of The Apology is literally a speech narrated by Socrates, we can guess that Plato was intrigued by the story enough to twist it in a way that would highlight Socrates, and the picture was thoroughly diverse from that of Aristophanes. Between the two works there is without A doubt great controversy and moments attempting to prove the character and moral integrity of Socrates.
In Apology Socrates finds himself in court defending himself for the crime of corrupting the youth of Athens. Socrates has many points that he brings up during the hearing in order to prove himself innocent of the claims. In order to prove himself he decides to have a conversation with the lead accuser Meletus. Socrates first tried to understand what the charges mean in reference to himself by asking who betters the children. “How do you mean, Meletus? Are these able to educate the young and improve them? – Certainly” (24e-25a). after this question Meletus answers with everyone in Athens benefits the children except Socrates. Socrates then explains that it would be nice if only one person corrupted the youth, implying that if he did corrupt
In Plato’s dialogue Apology, Socrates is standing trial for two crimes; impiety and corrupting the youth. During the three speeches Socrates delivers during his trial he discusses why he is fearless when faced with many of the things humans fear most, including being hated, accused of serious crimes, being threatened with punishment, and being put to death.
In “The Apology,” Socrates talks of his journey to find and discern what wisdom really is. Socrates had an unconventional idea of what wisdom was, compared to today’s definition of wisdom. Socrates also had different views of knowledge than what society believes today. Throughout his journey in “The Apology,” Socrates comes to the conclusion that wisdom is realizing that one knows nothing.
In the Apology, drafted by Plato, contained within the First Year Seminar anthology, the main character Socrates was convicted of several offenses. One was that “Socrates was guilty of wrongdoing in that he busied himself studying things in the sky and below the earth; he made the worse into the stronger argument, and he taught these same things to others” (Belmont University, 2016). Socrates countered with the one defense that he gained this slander because he possessed a unique kind of wisdom that others envied. In essence, who were jealous of Socrates desired to drag his name through the mud.
Through many of Plato’s works, such as the Republic, the Gorgias, and the Apology, the person that Socrates was and his personality shine through in his dialogue. Socrates was a man who asked many questions and always pushed not only his students but the whole city of Athens to look for more than just physical things. Many people claim, that Socrates went about teaching in the wrong way and that he is an arrogant fool and not an extremely wise person. However, I disagree with this claim. I believe that Socrates was a man who looked beyond the physical world and strived to gain as much knowledge as he could through asking questions and continuing to learn from others and in turn teach others, thus making him wise and striving to live the best life.
Plato’s work reads like an offbeat conversation between curious minds. The questions he poses are deeply profound, often leaving his converser lost for rebuttal as the meaning behind his statements can be, at first, difficult to decipher. A comparison can be drawn between the topics Plato discusses and the way in which he discusses them; just as it can be sometimes arduous to understand the connotation behind the assertions Plato makes in order to bolster his arguments for or against a certain issue, it can be just as (or even more so) difficult to understand the issue
The ‘Apology’ is a form of dialectic philosophy. It illustrates the charges brought upon Socrates and the self-defense he demonstrates during the trial. Socrates is accused of ‘corruption of the youth’ and ‘impiety’. Socrates is found guilty of having faith in the wrong Gods and Meletus accuses him of not acknowledging the sun and moon as gods but as masses of stone. Socrates is accused of studying things in heaven and below the earth. He is accused of provoking the young citizens to stop trusting the politicians blindly and think for themselves. It is said that he makes the weak argument strong and vice-versa.
Ironically, Socrates by no means puts forth an “Apology” with respect to the current definition of the word, in fact, he elucidates that he is not sorry for his actions. The title “Apology” refers to the Greek word “apologia” which translates roughly to “a defense of a belief”. To effectively analyze this Plato’s version of Socrates’ unrehearsed speech, it is important to recognize its three main parts. First, Socrates defends himself against the accusations, “there are two classes of my accusers-one those who have just brought their accusation, the others those who, brought it long ago”. Second, Socrates responds to the verdict and proposes a punishment. Finally, Socrates responds to the punishment put before him. (Need to throw something
The Apology consists of Socrates making a speech while he 's on trial for multiple conviction; including corrupting the youth of Athens and not believing in the Gods. Throughout the short story we also read that the Oracle of Delphi tells Socrates that he 's the wisest man in all Greece, making Socrates question what they are implying and then tries to prove them inaccurate. Lastly, Socrates ends his speech by saying that "the unexamined life is not worth living". Socrates never fully explains what we was implying with this phase, however I believe he was expressing to "leave no stone unturned" and to live life to its fullest.
Accused of misleading and deceiving my fellow classmates for two years, I face a trial in the local school. Among the accusers I find an individual double my age, a former politician with ruined career, and one of those personae non gratae we encounter on a daily basis. Alongside is his wolf pack of associates willing to witness my fall. According to them, I resemble a pawn in a chess game – vulnerable and unworthy, thus easy to defeat. Instead of three chief accusers I stand among 31 in whom I detect familiar faces. The erstwhile followers of mine expect me to collapse after all intensely conducted inquiries I underwent, yet I honor them with the opening scene. Let Plato’s Apology be witnessed firsthand.