Pros And Cons Of Socrates

In Gorgias, Socrates was having a conversation with Polus and through this dialogue Socrates reached to establishing a hierarchy of wrongs. Socrates classified that doing injustice is much worse than suffering injustice. Another idea Socrates states is that doing wrong act and escaping punishment is much worse than being punished on that act since punishment can remove the evil from a person’s soul. I am going to discuss these ideas as I think that doing injustice is not as bad as suffering injustice.

This could mean that Socrates had understood, or at least on the way to understanding what is the good and how to obtain it. This interpretation also explain Socrates´s behavior, as recounted by Alcibiades. Socrates spend most of his time either thinking(220D), or talking and philosophizing with others(221D, 222E).He seem to show extreme calmness and unrivaled self control( 221B). He does not desire physical beauty, money,power, or anything else that Alcibiades might be interested in(216E), and seem to only be concerned about giving speeches and

In all of Plato 's dialogues, Socrates ' main goal is to achieve happiness, although friends and foes alike present him pathways that could lead to pleasure, but not true happiness. Moreover, in Crito, Socrates pursues happiness by obediently following the Athenian law, whereas, Crito tries to lure him into committing an unjust action so that he can obtain the pleasure of having a friend and keeping a good reputation and so that Socrates can still have the pleasure of life on earth1. One can know that happiness and pleasure are different due to the fact that happiness is a state of being eternally fulfilled, but pleasure provides a person only an immediate and short-lived image of fulfillment.

Socrates started his life as an average Athen citizen. His parents worked, making an honest living. But as Socrates grew up, he began to realize that his mind questioned things and wondered how come no one else questioned the same things or at least think about the answers to the questions that were not answered. So, as his mind kept wandering, he began to acknowledge the questions that were not answered and sought for those answers. 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.

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. The state is responsible for taking care of its citizen, whether it is in the form of education, health or protection and in return the citizen should follow the laws set by the state. Socrates mentioned that “it is impious to bring violence to bear against your mother or father; it is much more so to use it against your country”(Plato 54). In addition, Socrates believes that even though an injustice has been done one cannot amend the wrongdoing with injustice. “That neither to do wrong nor to return a wrong is ever correct, nor is doing harm in return for harm done”(Plato

Socrates believes that justice benefits the just, but also benefits the city (other people) too. He is faced with a seemingly simple choice, escape Athens or remain in prison and be sentenced to death. Socrates’ central argument against escaping his circumstances is twofold. First, Socrates argues that “one must never do wrong.” (49b) In other words, one should never do an injustice. And likewise, “one should never do wrong in return, nor do any man harm, no matter what he may have done to you.”(49d) It is from this argument that Socrates outlines why he must not escape, for it would be to wrong the city that made him. No matter what the city may have done to him, he must never act against it in retaliation. Socrates bases this view of justice on the worth of living a good life. “And is life worth living for us with that part of us corrupted by unjust actions” (47e) If we corrupt our soul with injustice, our life would not be worth living, therefore one must never commit an injustice. “When one has come to an agreement that is just with someone, one should fulfill it.”(49e) It is this agreement with the Laws that Socrates would be violating, if he were to

Even though Socrates claims to be innocent of the charges brought against him, he is ultimately sentenced to death. After he hears the jury's decision, Socrates is sent to jail to await his execution. Crito arrives before Socrates is scheduled for execution and offers him a chance to escape. Crito believes the jury's decision was unjust. In Crito's eyes, Socrates is innocent and therefore has the right to escape. However, even though Crito believes Socrates has the right to escape, Socrates disagrees with him. He reminds Crito “no human being should do injustice in return, whatever he suffers from others”(Crito, 49c). Socrates argues even if the jury's decision was unjust, it is never permissible for him to do injustice in return and therefore he will not try to escape. In essence, even though Socrates is offered the opportunity to

I think that there is a fallacy of irrelevance. In the book, Socrates sets out to defend the idea that it is always in one’s best interest to be just and to act justly and he suggests that the just person as one who has a balanced soul will lead one to act justly or why mental health amounts to justice. I feel that justice includes actions in relation to others, it includes considerations of other people’s good, and includes strong motivations not to act unjustly. I believe that Socrates’ defense of justice does not include constraining reasons to think that a person with a balanced soul will refrain from acts that are commonly thought to be unjust like theft, murder, and adultery. Thus, Plato presents Socrates defending mental health rather than

Socrates was a true believer that true pleasure only comes when individuals live a moral life. He believed that an individual’s inner life, or the soul, is the most important part of life. Each person must keep his or her soul healthy, by seeking truth, self-knowledge, justice, and goodness. Socrates believed that any soul in search of fame, wealth, and power becomes ignorant, sickly, and weak (Claudia, 270). He was concerned with strengthening his inner self by examining and criticizing it. He was not concerned with finding what people would seek since this could only lead to a weak, sick, and ignorant soul. Therefore, Socrates remained committed to his guns and never told the court what it wanted to hear.

In Plato's Gorgias, it is apparent that Socrates has no desire to be a good statesman as it is defined in the eyes of the Athenians. His calculation is that Athenian rhetoricians place no reliance on facts or truth, nor are these their aim. Instead, they rely on the illusion of knowledge, and this morally weakens both themselves and their audiences. It is clear however, that if he wishes, Socrates is able to match most or all of the other statesmen in Athens, as is clearly indicated by his very eloquent speech which ends the dialogue. Additionally, under his own definition of a good statesman, it is evident that Socrates is more than qualified. Through discussion, he is able to conclude that a statesman should be concerned solely with truth

Socrates believes that one's focus should be on what is morally right and wrong, which should be independent of what society thinks. Socrates articulates that moral right and wrong depends on our own intuition on whether we believe that our actions is inflicting evil on others. Furthermore if he escapes prison he has inflicted evil on his government because of his obligation to keep the laws of the government. Socrates continues to say that like his parents, the government deserves his obedience. I agree with Socrates that it all boils down to our morality and our own reason to what constitutes to civil disobedience.

In premise one, Socrates could be talking about two different kinds of desires: first order desires and second order desires. First order desires consist of a desire for something specific. For example, you could desire to eat healthy. Second order desires consist of desires about your state of desire. In this case, it is not the healthy food itself that you

In Plato’s Gorgias, Callicles is attempting the explain how to live the best life to Socrates. Callicles says, “…the man who’ll live correctly ought to allow his own appetites to get as large as possible and not to restrain them. And when they are as large as possible, he ought to be competent to devote himself to them…” (492a). However, not all men are able to live this indulgent lifestyle of fulfilling their pleasures; Callicles also says that the weak majority, those who are unable to satisfy their own pleasures because they lack the courage to fulfill their own, praise temperance and justice because they want to “conceal their impotence” (492a). Since they are incompetent at satisfying

Today virtually every child grows up learning that the Earth orbits the Sun, but four centuries ago the heliocentric solar system, where the Earth orbits the Sun, was so controversial that the Catholic Church classified it as a crime of heresy (UCLA). In the age of early philosophy, Socrates’ is well known. Between the Socratic method and his line of successful students, Socrates’ makes the history books. Galileo Galilei turned astronomers on their heads when he discovered moons around Jupiter. Giordano Bruno didn’t back down from any of his brilliant and different ideas. There are so many amazing and philosophical minds, their lives ruined all too soon, leaving minds to wonder, “What would have become of the world if these men could have had a couple more years of freedom?” From religious tyranny, to a constant debate about church vs state, and then the confusing world of astronomical debates, we are given many prime reasons for the persecution of philosophers.

In thinking of Socrates we must recognize that what we have is four secondhand sources depicting him. That of Plato, Xenophanes, Aristophanes, and Aristotle. All having radically different accounts on Socrates and his views. Out of all them we consider Plato’s to be the most possible account, even though we face a problem of different versions of Socrates. The existence and continual study of Socrates’ philosophy regardless of differing accounts is astonishing in itself since it survived not through the specific philosopher, but through other people. Which is a testament of the impact that a man, such as Socrates, can make. When we think of Plato, who is regarded as a father of western philosophy, we are quick to think of his major work The Republic, his student Aristotle, and his writing on Socrates. (We think of his writings on Socrates as mere footnotes in philosophical thought without examining them.) “Nothing comes from nothing,” Parmenides proudly claimed, and this philosophical doctrine applies to Plato’s thought.