Socrates A Good Statesman Analysis

Rhetoric is the art of effective or persuasive speaking or writing. In “A Speech in the Virginia Convention,” Patrick Henry tries to convince his fellow colonists to fight with Great Britain. Through his speech, he claims that the colonists shouldn’t be controlled by the Great Britain. According to Patrick Henry, the colonist need to fight back against Great Britain for their freedom. Patrick Henry uses appeals and rhetorical techniques to convince his fellow colonists to go to war with Great Britain.

In Euthyphro, Plato recites a conversation Socrates has with Euthyphro by “the Porch of the King” (Plato, 41). The Greek philosopher and his religious interlocutor Euthyphro mainly talk about the true meaning of piety, although it is less of a conversation and more of Socrates challenging Euthyphro, after the latter claimed that he knew everything about religious matters, and therefore piety. Socrates explains his need for Euthyphro to teach him by explaining that this would help him defend himself against the “indictment” he faces because of Meletus (Plato, 45).

There have been many problems in society over human history. Speeches have been one solution to these problems. Speakers attempt to have the audience reach a specific conclusion after hearing the speech. They do this by using rhetoric. “Rhetoric is the art of framing an argument so that it can be appreciated by an audience.” –Philip Johnson. Many speeches can be pointed at as an example of this, such as the famous “I Have a Dream” by Martin Luther King Jr. Another example that is not as well-known is John F. Kennedy’s “Civil Rights Address”.

Socrates should remain in prison after evaluating Critos arguments although Socrates’s were stronger. I’ll begin with Crito’s argument and what makes them strong, and what doesn’t. Next, I’ll focus on Socrates arguments and what makes them good and what makes them weak, mainly his focus that living with a bad soul isn’t worth living when you have a bad soul.

The version of Socrates presented in both The Apology, Crito, and The Republic could very well be two different versions of Socrates as presented by Plato. However, both versions of Socrates have one thing in common: they both value the importance of philosophy and they both defend philosophy as something that is important to humanity.

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.

Rhetoric is an incredibly powerful tool capable of seducing even the most obdurate of people. As one of the most illustrious playwrights ever, Shakespeare was no stranger to the power of rhetoric. Rhetoric served as the fountainhead of Shakespearian allure. We watch the dramatic works of Shakespeare because we enjoy having our emotions manipulated; we enjoy the catharsis and self-reflection that accompanies a trip to the theater. Shakespeare truly was a master manipulator, but his manipulation was generally beneficial. While Shakespeare uses rhetoric to create art, Iago uses it to cause destruction and pain. Shakespeare’s Othello can be used as a means of exploring the dangerous power of rhetoric and gaining insight into the ethical role it

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.

Throughout the course of history the written word has been very influential to the thought process of mankind. Through this time we have seen an innumerable amount of authors that have had large impacts on the thought process of society as a whole. Three authors that have impacted the thought process of mankind during their time have been Socrates and his thoughts on humanism, Heinrich Kramer and James Sprenger with their idea of gender roles, and lastly, Martin Luther King Jr. with his ideas on “the other” and racial equality. Each of these authors used methods in order to support the point that they wanted to convey. Although each author discusses different topics, they can all be tied together in one distinct way, which is the methods that they used to convince others of their beliefs.

In the tale Gorgias by Plato, Socrates debates with four colleagues on what is rhetoric. To be able to answer if rhetoric is based on nature or convention you must first ask the question, what is rhetoric? Rhetoric stated by Socrates is the skill of making speeches (448d). Gorgias states that rhetoricians have the power of persuasions (452e). Rhetoric is having the power to persuade people in changing their opinion threw the power of speeches. Socrates states that persuasion is produced from opinion, not knowledge (454b-455a). Socrates states that rhetoric is based off opinion because if persuasion was knowledge it would be true, but not all persuasion is true. If persuasion was the same thing as knowledge it would never be false because you

In Book 1 of the republic, by Plato, we are introduced to two central figures in the argument of justice, Socrates and Thrasymachus.

Plato's Republic is centered on one simple question: is it always better to be just than unjust? This is something that Socrates addresses both in terms of political communities and the individual person. Plato argues that being just is advantageous to the individual independent of any societal benefits that the individual may incur in virtue of being just. I feel as if Plato’s argument is problematic. There are not enough compelling reasons to make this argument. I believe that

According to Socrates perspective, the democracy of Athens was corrupt and even though they courts were made in such a way that everyone was judged fairly, it wasn’t such because there were no rules or principles set forth. When a person was brought to court in the Athenian court and the person spoke against the jurors or offended them, he or she could be prosecuted based on that. In summary, judgment was passed based on emotion rather than on justice.

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.

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.