Socrates And Plato's Moral Ethics

Despite the title of this historical piece of work, this speech, made by Socrates at his trial, was anything but an apology. Plato, who wrote Apology, was a student of Socrates and this is his account of the trial. Even though he was present at the trial, the colloquy may have been adjusted by Plato to reflect what he thought Socrates should have said or what he thought Socrates meant to say. Plato was very fond of Socrates, therefore the way he may present him can be bias. Socrates attempted to persuade the men of Athens of his innocence by presenting himself as a good man and an authority of knowledge, as declared by the Delphic oracle.

Regrettably, he could not find a man wiser, so he believed that he was the wisest of men. Socrates’ goal at the time was to analyze those who thought they were full of wisdom. “Socrates searched the world, obedient to God, investigating the knowledge of others. If they are not wise, then by the oracle, he would show them that they are not wise” (Plato 23b). Socrates could admit that he was ignorant and in doing so, he could search for truth.

Socrates pretty much has all of Athens against him and yet he continues on and sends a strong message to his followers. Socrates considers that to carry on with a just life is superior to simply live. Socrates is not saying that living is not essential and that he ought to simply discard his life, he

In spite of this claim, Socrates was truly only showing the court that he really did not know much more than his name. He was proving this because throughout his speech, he made it seem like the idea of knowing the truth and having real knowledge about a subject wasn’t needed in order to achieve the goal of persuasion. In Socrates’ speech he stated, “...if I say that the unexamined life is not worth living, you’ll believe me even less...you think I’ve been convicted for lack of arguments that would have persuaded you…” Socrates never specified or went into details about his beliefs that he was presenting to the court which, revealed to them that he did not know anything. He wasn’t able to strengthen his claims by providing evidence meaning his use of logos was faulty. However, Socrates’ goal was not to gather evidence to make it seem as if he was putting all his efforts in saving his life.

Plato lists a few ideas from Socrates’ education that a multitude can do neither good nor harm with actions being irrational and man regarding opinions of intelligible men. Plato states Socrates’ view why he should not escape the prison. Plato’s first idea he has in mind is a multitude of people can

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

(Modus Ponens) Socrates is like Jesus: both of them did not believe in gods of that time and both were just speaking to society, but in those speeches were hidden the great idea. Like Jesus, Socrates chose to die for his idea, not surrender norms of the society. Both men had their students, who recorded their words during their life or after death. (Analogy) Rejection of civic life in democratic

His definition equivocates knowledge and courage itself, rather than saying knowledge is necessary for courage. However, knowledge is not the only necessary condition for courage in his definition. Thus, the particulars of fearful and hopeful become problematic for Socrates. As Socrates points out through further questioning if one were to have such knowledge as stated by Nicias - one would have knowledge of all virtues, “of practically all goods and evils put together” (199d1). The elenctic method draws out contradictions in Nicias beliefs, leading again to a conflicted answer.

They have been living uninformed and sluggish lives and he was sent to awaken them. This alone shows that Socrates believes in God and God’s plan. In The Apology Socrates later states, “the unexamined life is not worth living for man…” In the story Socrates chose to answer the question of why he could not just live a quiet life in exile with that answer. He encourages everyone to

Socrates was a great Athenian philosopher known for his sayings about “knowing nothing” and the “unexamined life is not worth living”. Socrates was a man that was in search of the truth about wisdom. However, the answer of true wisdom leads Socrates to be brought up on charges on corrupting society. Socrates was formerly accused of corrupting the youth and impiety. These charges were brought against him by Meletus and Anytus at the time Socrates was 70 years old and had become a recognize citizen of Athens.

Lastly, towards the end of the Apology, Socrates says that “the unexamined life is not worth living”. These phrase has had a great amount of interpretations over the years due to Socrates never fully explaining what he was trying to say. My interpretation of this phrase is, that life is valuable and short that you never know when it can be taken away from you. Due to this you have to explore life, ask questions, never have a question unanswered, and lastly live life to the fullest with no regrets. Being able to live these kind of life you will have examined life and have had a great life full of knowledge and

Socrates’s official new charge “asserts that Socrates does injustice by corrupting the young, and by not believing in the gods in whom the city believes, but in other daimonia that are novel” (24b, p. 73). By looking deeper into the dialogue of The Apology and Euthyphro, one can see how passionately Socrates strives to express to the Athenian people his innocence in teaching the youth and worshiping of the gods. Socrates maintains his innocence in teaching the youth for three reasons. Primarily, there is no proof or evidence from past examples in which Socrates has taught the youth because no one has come out and said so. Socrates brings up a valid point that his so-called ‘teachings’ haven’t changed over time and therefore if he is accused

From both these readings one can conclude that both of these men had great intentions. In my humble opinion one can’t contrast the conclusions, as the conclusion in both these scenarios is justice, there’s no denying that. But the reader can contrast the way both MLK and Socrates used just obedience to arrive at the conclusion of justice. Socrates seems to be more of an individualistic character, as he had no one group behind him that he was fighting for. He uses his words and his honesty to achieve his justice, he takes every advantage of this one true opportunity he has before the council to voice his opinion.

They stat that “after having considered moderation, courage, and prudence, this is what’s left over in the city, justice” (Bloom 111; 433c). Also through the conversation he had with Glaucon and Adeimantus, they both accept Socrates’ assumptions about the nature and aids of justice at the end of Book IV. Which this turn meant they never responded to the argument and ignore they cue to refute Socrates’ claim on justice which can cause the argument to be misleading because of their absence in questioning his argument. Their failure to questions Socrates’ assumption may have contain some drawback to their search of such justice. Socrates’ attempts to define the word justice it meet with a roadblock because they it is not possible to obtain through such needs.

Socrates, one of the greatest minds go Ancient Greece’s was no exception. As a sophist, Socrates was considered a teacher of the noble. Sophist of Greed taught young men ‘arete’: excellence or virtue for a price. However, Socrates wasn 't a regular sophist, he never accepted any monetary rawer for his ‘teachings” (b316,p813) and he never actually taught anything but rather trained minds to think. Socrates states at the trail that he doesn 't have any true knowledge and he believed that in order to have any true knowledge one must be able to produce a single, clear definition of a subject without any exclusions to the rule, something that he was never able believed that he couldn 't do .Rather than use he own opinions to teach his pupils what to think , Socrates used “systematic questioning” (b136p813) to help clear their own minds and reach their own conclusions just by thinking.