Book Report on Apology
In the “Apology”, Socrates tackles his accusers against certain accusations made
against him in the Court of Law of Athens, Greece. The nature of the accusation that has
caused him to stand trial is such that “Socrates is an evil-doer, and a curious person, who
searches into things under the earth and in heaven, and he makes the worse appear the
better cause; and he teaches the aforesaid doctrines to others” (Plato. The Republic and
other plays. pg-449. Doubleday publishing; New York- 1989). Socrates begins with first
identifying the type of accusers he has, which consist of those who are in direct
contention with him, the primary accusers, since they are the ones who contrived the
accusations. Then there are those who accuse simply because they believe in the
accusations, which in form of rumors, have been festering into their minds for so long
that no longer do they let their rationale decide the authenticity of the accusations. The
later kind is the one Socrates feels sorry for, because they did not bother look into the
nature of the accusations themselves and have blindly accepted them to be true. These
secondary accusers also consist of those who are holding grudges against Socrates on old
matters. Thus the gist of “Apology” is the battle of good and evil, of truth and lies, where
Socrates is hoping that the people of Athens will recognize his bona fide intention to do
good.
The primary accusers are namely Meletus, who has a quarrel with Socrates on
behalf of the poets; Anytus, on behalf of the craftsmen, and Lycon, on behalf of the
rhetoricians. Socrates does away with each of them by revealing the false nature of each
accusation. One of the accusations is that Socrates is an ...
... middle of paper ...
...
believed in was true and right. Based on the same worldview as the author’s worlview, I
specifically found the following quote energizing and uplifting instantly and recognized it
since William Wallace utters similar words in the movie Brave Heart, “and I would
rather die having spoken after my manner, than speak in your manner and live. For
neither in war nor yet at law ought any man to use every way of escaping death. For often
in battle there is no doubt that if a man will throw away his arms, and fall on his knees
before his pursuers, he may escape death; and in other dangers there are other ways of
escaping death, if a man is willing to say and do anything. The difficulty, my friends, is
not in avoiding death, but in avoiding unrighteousness; for that runs faster than death”
(Plato, pg-467).
Bibliography:
"Republic and other works", Plato
This form of accusing holds zero form of justice. The accusers weren’t even able to explain what happened themselves, so instead of worrying about t...
Throughout all the years, he never could find anyone as wise as himself, and all he did was make enemies searching. These enemies are now his accusers, and they accuse him of spreading evil doctrines, corrupting the youth, and not believing in the Gods. Throughout the speech, Socrates continues to shoot down every accuser and it is evident that he has done no wrong. Eventually, one of his accusers states that he must be doing something strange and that he wouldnt be that famous if he were like other men. Socrates did not live a very public life unlike most people at that time. His thoughts of being virteous had more to do with examining yourself and becoming a better person and in that way, you benifit society. He did not believe Athens to be virtuos at all, and that they relied on materail things and reputation rather than finding happiness by searching for it deep within
Many people have gone through their lives conforming their beliefs and practices for the sake of fitting in or for the happiness of others, but Socrates was not one of these people. In “The Apology” Plato shows Socrates unwillingness to conform through a speech given by Socrates while on trial for supposedly corrupting the youth of Athens and believing in false gods. Although the title of the dialogue was labeled “The Apology,” Socrates’ speech was anything but that, it was a defense of himself and his content along his philosophical journey. At no time during the trial was Socrates willing to change his ways in order to avoid punishment, two reasons being his loyalty to his God and his philosophical way of life.
For these two articles that we read in Crito and Apology by Plato, we could know Socrates is an enduring person with imagination, because he presents us with a mass of contradictions: Most eloquent men, yet he never wrote a word; ugliest yet most profoundly attractive; ignorant yet wise; wrongfully convicted, yet unwilling to avoid his unjust execution. Behind these conundrums is a contradiction less often explored: Socrates is at once the most Athenian, most local, citizenly, and patriotic of philosophers; and yet the most self-regarding of Athenians. Exploring that contradiction, between Socrates the loyal Athenian citizen and Socrates the philosophical critic of Athenian society, will help to position Plato's Socrates in an Athenian legal and historical context; it allows us to reunite Socrates the literary character and Athens the democratic city that tried and executed him. Moreover, those help us to understand Plato¡¦s presentation of the strange legal and ethical drama.
After reading “The Apology of Socrates”, I feel very strongly that Socrates was innocent in the allegations against him. “The Apology of Socrates” was written by Plato, Socrates most trusted pupil, who in fact wrote everything for Socrates. Numerous times in his defense, Socrates points out ways that what he is being accused of is false. The point of this paper is to show how Socrates did this, and to explain how he proved his innocence by using these quotes. He uses a lot of questions to the accusers to prove his points and is very skilled in speech and knowledge. This essay’s purpose is to explain why I think Socrates was innocent, and how he proves that in his speech.
Socrates asks the questions he does during his court case because he feels that it is his calling from the gods; questioning the world around him is his focus. However, this idea of following and obeying the gods contradicts Plato’s thoughts in The Republic. To Plato, the justice system in Greece was built upon the ability to not only willingly follow the gods, but also to act in complete reflection with the gods and their unchanging
Socrates was indicted to a court of law on the charges of impiety, and the corruption of the youth of Athens. Three different men brought these charges upon Socrates. These men represented those that Socrates examined in his search to find out if the Delphic Mission was true. In that search he found that none of the men that promoted what they believed that they knew was true was in fact completely false. This made those men so angry that they band together and indicted Socrates on the charges of impiety and the corruption of the youth. Socrates then went to court and did what he could to refute the charges that were brought against him.
In conclusion, Plato’s dialogues the Apology gives readers an idea of Socrates character from the viewpoint of someone who dearly admired him. Each person will have a different opinion about the truth value this dialogue shows about Socrates true personality. The
There are several main argument in The Apology by Greek Philosopher Plato, such as Socrates were that he argues the physical over metaphysical, he argued the weaker claim over the stronger claim, he went against the gods, and he was corrupting the youth. These are the allegations brought against Socrates amid his trail. But Socrates dependability presents drearily ordered number of cases to give legitimate and sound contentions to demonstrate that he is guiltless of the energizes conveyed against him to the court.
Though Socrates has been unjustly incarcerated, he refuses to escape due to his implied agreement with the Athenian legal system. This paper serves to argue that Socrates’ line of reasoning to Crito does not properly address actions committed under an unjust legal system.
faced with his own demise, grasps at any concept of freedom and safety to help him cope
Socrates reaches a conclusion that defies a common-sense understanding of justice. Nothing about his death sentence “seems” just, but after further consideration, we find that his escape would be as fruitless as his death, and that in some sense, Socrates owes his obedience to whatever orders Athens gives him since he has benefited from his citizenship.
Thirdly, because Socrates practiced making weak arguments strong (Sophist). Socrates was a traveling teacher and talked and challenged everyone he met. Socrates taught the art of persuasive speaking. He did not charge people money like most of the other Sophists did, but he did have similar beliefs as the Sophists. Sophists think that our minds are cut off from reality and that we are stuck in our own opinions of what the world is like.
The charges against Socrates were brought upon him by a man names Meletus. Meletus was a young man that Socrates did not know very well. These charges brought on by Meletus caused the indictment of Socrates. One of the charges in the affidavit written by Meletus against Socrates is that he is "corrupting the youth." Another charge that is brought upon Socrates is that of he is making up new Gods and disregarding the old Gods the Athenians believe in. These were the charges brought on Socrates.
When Socrates was brought to trial for the corruption of the city’s youth he knew he had done nothing wrong. He had lived his life as it should be lead, and did what he ne...