People are often averse to the truth. Plato wrote “The Apology” in order illuminate the hostility towards real truth because he believed he had an obligation to reveal how easily thought could be manipulated. Plato documents Socrates’s final address to the jury before he is due for execution. Socrates had been accused of using such embellished language throughout his explanations that he had caused a severe confusion to the people and then an eventual embarrassment; thus, allowing the people to reject what Socrates had been trying to preach. This creates a dismissal of Socrates’ ideas throughout the people and generates an even greater divide of thought.
So when asking whether or not his claim is plausible, we can see from the Apology and Crito that his enemies would say no, while his friends would say yes. In this paper, I argue that Socrates had lived a life no
Abigail and John both counter their religious expectations through their individualism due to Abby’s desire of vengeance and power and John’s contradicting actions in society. In the Puritan religion, males are seen as the role models of society that both women and children are supposed to follow and respect. However, John did not uphold this image. The religious expectation of males as described by source C is that they (the male) are to honor the Lord’s day and attend church, be a good role model to their family, and respect the court.
The eyes of many, Socrates argued, were of no importance because one should shadow the wise, and pay little importance to public opinion. Socrates states “if the many could do the greatest evil; for then they would also be able to do the greatest good--and what a fine thing this would be! But in reality they can do neither; for they cannot make a man either wise or foolish; and whatever they do is the result of chance” (Plato). I believe that this statement forces Crito to look at the bigger picture. To realize what is just and unjust to get a bigger picture of who we might gather opinions from.
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 the Apology, Socrates stated, “my present request seems a just one, for you to pay no attention to my manner of speech-
If the opportunity arose, where no consequences were given for someone’s actions, do you think that individual will still commit an unfavorable action such as killing for his own personal need? In “The Ring of Gyges” the disposition of justice is called into question. As humans continue to live we must contemplate the true driving force for our morality. A discussion between Socrates and Glaucon is one main focal point into explaining the differences in how humans truly established their morality. Glaucon believes humans are restrained by consequences and human’s happiness comes from being an unjust person rather than Socrates’ belief of being just truly leads to happiness.
Knowledge is both good and clever, and per Socrates, because both knowledge and justice are the same in one regard they are the same in being both good and clever. Though Socrates and Thrasymachus agree to this it can be stated that the division fallacy and the no-sequitur fallacies were made. By closing that what’s right about one part of Socrates argument, it must be applied to all that are of the like. Moreover, though its agreed that both the premises are true, the conclusion does not necessarily follow. Applying these formal logic, it is affirmed that Socrates’ argument for justice being wiser than injustice is
Rather than that, it merely makes people seem oblivious to the actual truth due to lack of their education of their surroundings. This is much like the prisoner who was freed because at first, he had the exact same beliefs as his acquaintances, but later he learned the real truth about the world. After reading Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, one can be lead to believe that Plato was trying to teach that uneducated people are “imprisoned” by their own ignorance. This statement is supported when the prisoners in his allegory don’t believe the freed prisoner.
This is a decision that overlooks the difference between moral and legal. As a matter of fact, Socrates at a certain instance admits to breaking the laws of the city and is not willing to apologize. He instead says that he is only willing to obey God not man. With all that said, Socrates made the right call by refusing to run to exile to save his life. This is because running to exile would have meant that all that he had done in almost his whole life was useless.
This passage further illustrates that censored stories will only be used in the education of the guardian class to cultivate in them morality and perfection. Socrates does not care if the general populace exhibits these specific traits, only that the guardians do, thus making the oppressive tactic of censorship only necessary for a small portion of the populace. Later on, in Book III, Socrates further expresses that this censorship is only for the guardians in stating
In Plato’s Apology, Socrates defended his charges of corrupting the youth by saying he was only providing service to the god that acknowledged him of being wiser than anyone else. However, Socrates was eventually sentenced to death and his thoughts regarding death soon followed. He argues that death is not a bad thing – it is either relocation to a pleasant afterlife or the end of existence. One could easily reason that relocation to any form of heaven is considered good. On the other hand, it would be very reasonable to assume that death being the complete end of existence is an extremely bad thing.
[He said] it [didn’t] bother Perry a bit” (Capote 255). Dick is honestly trying to make Perry look very guilty instead of him. Even though Perry killed all four of the Clutters, Capote was still against the death penalty for Perry. Capote was also biased throughout the story because of his “relationship” with Perry. An example of Capote’s bias is when he wrote that “Dewey, a believer in capital punishment, its purported deterrent effects, and its justice, witnessed the hangings” but he could not watch Perry’s hanging.
Equally, even with the Old Testament narratives, God often gave the Israelites opportunities to repent and He forgave them. Did Ananias sin deserve death, which did not really allow for repentance or was this a fable by Luke copied from Achan’s story in order to deter members of the community from deception and financial fraud? Troeltsch points out that historical study renders only judgments of probability, of very different grades of probability, from the most likely to the least likely, and that with regards to anything that has been passed on from the past the first task is to measure the degree of probability that is appropriate to it. In doing that, the attitude we take to information given to us by memory and tradition is fundamentally changed.
The source of Socrates’ suspicion of democracy stems from the argument that the general public is ignorant and therefore lacks the knowledge or reason to make the best decision for government and electing officials. The foundation of democracy is based on majority rule, however because the majority is unaware of what truly is good for them, by virtue of their ignorance, the masses are not capable of electing a leaders fit to run the state or government. Socrates contends that due to the general public’s ignorance, the majority will vote in favor of what and who panders to their desires and wants rather than what is logical and better for their souls (459b). Because the general public is ignorant, those who have the knack of oratory pander to the desires of the masses and therefore the consequence of democracy is inherent corruption in the governing structure. Socrates contends that the art of
The trial of Socrates, in the time period in which it occurred, in my opinion, was a fairly conducted trial. Socrates was put on trial mostly by Anytus, a powerful politician. Socrates was believed to have corrupted the youth, as well as not recognizing the gods and goddesses in which the city honored and worshiped. I believe that Socrates’s trial was fair, within their time period because Socrates went against the strict and conventional religion, opened his pupils to question Athenian life, and he created his own, new deities. One reason that made me consider the fact that Socrates’s trial was fair is due to the matter that he went in opposition of the society’s primary religion.