Socrates: The Corruption Of Athenian Democracy

In Apology, Socrates intent was not to apologize for his ideas and beliefs to the people of Athens, his purpose was to defend his practices by confronting his accusers, which put him on trial. Socrates charges consisted of inventing new deities, not recognizing the states Gods, and corrupting Athens youth minds. Socrates began his trial by speaking of his old accusers and the famous book The Cloud, acknowledging that people disagreed with him in his teachings. He then continued by turning from his old accusers to the current ones, more specifically Meletus. When Socrates calls on to Meletus in order for him to make his claims and explain them to the assembly and the jury, Socrates makes different arguments

Socrates defended himself well during the trial. I do not think that Socrates was guilty for anything. He was accused by Meletus for "corrupting the young”. However, there was no evidence of this. Socrates mentioned that there was no youth to testify that they were corrupted by him. He also refuted Meletus’ claims that he didn’t believe in any god by questioning Meletus and leading him into a self-contradiction. It is clear to us that Meletus’ accusations are false. I believe that the sole reason Socrates was found guilty during the trial was because people hated him (Socrates even mentions this in the beginning of his speech), not because he did anything wrong.

Socrates was born in fairly turbulent times. Athens had been form in the wake of the Persian invasion and was in the process of becoming an empire of itself. When the Athenians executed their remaining leadership for failing to retrieve the bodies of their comrades in a using a trial against Athenian law. two mistakes were committed. First, was weakening of their military, which they would pay for later, and the second was the disregard of their own laws. Imagine the impression this would make to an individual like Socrates. I believe the root of his

While Plato presents a broad argument that emphasizes the importance of pursuing truth over eloquent words and oration, W.E.B. DuBois presents an argument specifically to African Americans, urging them to value a higher education that is centered around seeking truth in the face of civil dispute. However, their arguments for valuing truth are similar because they both urge their readers to seek truth over wealth and to not simply follow the opinion of the majority, especially when considering matters that affect the soul.

In Apology, Socrates faces possible execution as he stands trial in front of his fellow Athenian men. This jury of men must decide whether Socrates has acted impiously against the gods and if he has corrupted the youth of Athens. Socrates claims in his defense that he wants to live a private life, away from public affairs and teachings in Athens. He instead wants to focus on self-examination and learning truths from those in Athens through inquiry. Socrates argues that "a [man] who really fights for justice must lead a private, not a public, life if [he] is to survive for even a short time" (32a). He claims that this is how he has been able to live a long life in Athens and that he never meant any harm to the state. Socrates believes that for

Since the day of the judgment between Athens and Socrates in 399 year B.C. many historians, philosophers, and students wonder to know whether Socrates was Guilty. Philosopher was accused in corrupting the youth, not believing in the recognized gods and introducing new divinities and in the rejection of civic life in democratic society. It is very difficult to answer on this question, may be even impossible.

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

To be just or to be served an injustice and obey, this is the very basis of the philosophical dialogue between Socrates and Crito. The Crito begins as one of Socrates’ wealthy friends, Crito, offers Socrates a path to freedom—to escape from Athens. Through the ensuing dialogue, Socrates examines, as a man who is bound by principles of justice, whether an unjust verdict should be responded to with injustice. In the dialogue between Socrates and Crito, Socrates outlines his main arguments and principles that prevent him from escaping under such circumstances.

In the 4th and 5th century in Athens, Greece a new form of government arose. It was called a democracy. The word democracy derives from the words, demos meaning entire citizen body, and kratos which means rule. Compared to the other forms of government during this time it was very different. Instead of being ruled my emperors or the upper class, the democracy allowed all male citizens to have equal political rights, freedom of speech, and the opportunity to participate in their government. “The Athens’ political affairs were open to all citizens. Every citizen had the right and obligation to take part in state affairs and voice their opinions.” The changes that Athens put in place were so important that they impact us even until this day.

Socrates was a greek philosopher who found himself in trouble with his fellow citizens and court for standing his grounds on his new found beliefs from his studies about philosophical virtue, justice, and truth. In “Apology” written by Plato, Socrates defended himself in trial, not with the goal of escaping the death sentence, but with the goal of doing the right thing and standing for his beliefs. With this mindset, Socrates had no intention of kissing up to the Athenians to save his life. Many will argue that Socrates’ speech was not very effective because he did not fight for his life, he just accepted the death sentence that he was punished with. In his speech he said, “But now it’s time to leave, time for me to die and for you to live.”

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.

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.

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

Athenian law court speeches give great insight into the citizens who made up the jury. They were at the centre of Athenian democracy, yet all modern information concerning the jury and their preferences rely almost entirely on what we see in law courts. By examining which techniques were used regularly in law court speeches, a picture of what appealed to the jury and the type of people it was made up of can be constructed. While it is hard to assess certain techniques impressiveness to the jury as it is rare to know for certain which speeches are successful, their repetition across decades indicates they were popular techniques. The jury’s capacity to understand and remember the material presented, their role in the larger Athenian democracy

This scene is set inside a mall after a shoplifter is escorted out for stealing clothes. Socrates sparks up a debate with a mall cop named Gregory. The dialog remains on the matter of law and punishable actions.