Socrates's Argument Analysis

1031 Words5 Pages
Socrates does not make sound arguments because although his premises are logical, they sometimes have nothing to do with the original argument. In Plato’s Euthyphro, the Euthyphro dilemma argument states whether the Gods love the pious because it is pious or it is pious because the Gods love it. In order to support this distinction, Socrates’ first premise in supporting this conclusion is the example of being carried. Socrates claims that there is a difference between something that is already in the state of being carried because it is carried or if something is carried because it is in the state of being carried. Similarly, there is a difference between something being in the state of being loved because it is loved and something being loved…show more content…
Socrates’ first premise is that when Socrates meets poets, politicians, artists and artisans, they claim to be wise and because of that claim they are not wise. Socrates’ second premise is that Sophists go around teaching how to make arguments only to win and not to prove anything one way or another, hence making them not…show more content…
For example, politicians often think that they can handle all of the political debates with no problem at all, however they are ignorant and do not realize that they too have flaws that could affect their argument. Once poets receive positive feedback they believe that they are invincible and do not have any flaws because they are the best at what they do, which often is not true. Moreover, Sophists could also be unaware of their own flaws and they could just be teaching what they know which is not everything. Therefore, making them not wise. All in all, in order for one to be considered wise according to Socrates’ definition of wisdom, one must be aware of his or her own
Open Document