However, we can find in his next objections aspects that may be controversial. Socrates begins saying that whether a just man would act to overcome another just man. Both had the same opinion that just man may consider it right to overcome an unjust man. Proceeding, what the unjust man will do is overcome and benefit from everyone and anyone. In this situation, Socrates would relate the unjust/just men with the craftsmen.
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.
The passage written by Plato goes in to great detail of how Socrates defends his position and how Glaucon defends his position as well but then leaves the reader to formulate his own opinion. With both Socrates’ position and as well as Glaucons, it is clear to see that Glaucon has the more rational reasoning within the debate of who’s happier, the just or unjust person. In Plato’s writing, The Republic, Glaucon challenge Socrates to describe justice and to give reasoning to why acting justly should be believed to be in anyone's self-interest. Glaucon claims that all goods can be distributed into three classes:
“But if these envious people are among my friends, I’d rather not know who they are, because then I’d be forced to hate them,” (Dumas 26). Three ‘friends’ framed Dantes. Danglars, who was the purser of the Pharaon, wanted to become captain. Dantes was going to get
Throughout the article ethos, pathos, and logos is shown. Upon reading the article, readers can find ethos by the author being a follower instead of a leader. The title of this article is very obvious to others because Socrates was the main character of the article. Logos is used to make an argument,
Q: If Rainsford from “The Most Dangerous Game” went home and admitted to his involvement in the story and was put on trial for General Zaroff’s, what do you think would be the outcome? Rainsford murdered a human, everyone has their own opinions on whether it was right or wrong. Rainsford was helped off the island and Rainsford felt guilty so Rainsford confessed to killing General Zaroff. Rainsford was put on trial for General Zaroff’s murder, If the judge sees what Rainsford did as a homicide then Rainsford will be put in jail but if the judge see it as surviving then the judge might feel differently. But I do not think Rainsford will get away with no punishment because either way he murdered a human being.
When Jones realizes what is happening, he is immediately offended and takes matters into his own hands. His reaction to the situation that he is put in is to shoot the auctioneer; therefore, wasting yet another precious bullet. In the end, Jones wastes every bullet, even his lucky silver bullet. Because he was a liar, cheater, and scammer, the people that he deceived to gain the title of Emperor created a coup.
So I asked myself if it was really so dangerous for the citizen of Ancient Athens to have divinities of your own. And the brief paper of John A. Scott “Why Meletus Demanded the Death Penalty for Socrates” where he investigates the same issue helped me to clear it out. In his work, he has a sentance from Professor Wheeler’ Alexander the Great:” Religion simply was the state, and the state was religion. Impiety was treason, and all treason involved impiety…” So in what way Socrates did not comply with the state’s gods he was supposed to believe in?
All that he said is true, our incarceration system is just not working, its also putting innocent people into jail with no hope of ever getting out. Imagine the families! They would either be heartbroken that their family went to jail wrongfully or would go on the rest of their lives believing their family had done a crime and (sometimes) had paid the ultimate price, death. Some of the people who were wrongfully accused were mentioned in my essay. They were Claude Jones, Carlos de Luna, and Leo Jones.
Polus is saying that Socrates continues explaining that doing injustice “happens to be the greatest of evils” (469b5). Polus brings power into the conversion because power is something he desires and comprehends. Socrates then portrays a scene of brutal murder that is clearly wrong to illustrate that “having great power is not this: to do what seems good to oneself” (469e7). Finally, Socrates ends this section by claiming “that when someone does those things justly, it is better, but when unjustly worse” (470c). Throughout this section, Socrates makes small individual points that build together to form his main claim that it is better to suffer injustice than commit injustice acts.
In the Apology, drafted by Plato, contained within the First Year Seminar anthology, the main character Socrates was convicted of several offenses. One was that “Socrates was guilty of wrongdoing in that he busied himself studying things in the sky and below the earth; he made the worse into the stronger argument, and he taught these same things to others” (Belmont University, 2016). Socrates countered with the one defense that he gained this slander because he possessed a unique kind of wisdom that others envied. In essence, who were jealous of Socrates desired to drag his name through the mud.