In Socrates’ Apology, he is forced to argue charges made against him by a man named Meletus backed up by the Athenian government, claims such as, corrupting the youth, disbelief in the gods of the state, and attempting to spread ‘corrupt’ ideas about society. Socrates defends his claims by bringing out the prosecutors unreliability through asking questions focused on showing how each claim made by Meletus is in itself, contradictory. In this essay, I will assess each statement Socrates made when trying to discredit Meletus, as well as, the specific ways of which Socrates defends himself in front of the jury. Socrates’ core argument relies on his accusers lack of basis and evidence for accusations. First, I will address Socrates’ strategy for …show more content…
You obviously know, in the view of your concern. You say you have discovered the one who corrupts them, namely me...” (29) Essentially, Socrates believes that he can not be the only man in athens who is corrupting the youth. His only request was an explanation of who exactly is improving them. So, in response to Socrates’ inquiries about the youth, Meletus first responds that the laws improve the youth. Although, Socrates made it clear that he was not asking what improves the youth, but rather, who improves the youth. Meletus then responds by saying the jurymen improve the youth, of which Socrates is still not satisfied because he feels that it is not that the majority is improving the youth, instead it is a small group of people who have the knowledge to be beneficial to the youth. Meletus continues to verbalize his belief that the laws, jurymen, and the Councillors. At this point in the conversation, Socrates seemed to have the upper hand in the argument forcing Meletus reassess his …show more content…
Socrates said, “Tell me: does this also apply to horses, do you think? That all men improve them and one individual corrupts them? Or is quite the contrary true, one individual is able to improve them, or very few, namely, the horse breeders, whereas the majority, if they have horses and use them, corrupt them?” (29) In this quote, Socrates uses this analogy to bring the core of his discrediting argument to light, of which he states it cannot be that there is a single man or small group to be blamed for corrupting the youth, rather, he feels the majority is the culprit for the corruption of the youth in not only Athens, but all facets of life. I wholeheartedly agree with the basis of Socrates’ defense against Meletus, although I feel Socrates should have chosen a more direct comparison to Maletus and the jury because the horse analogy is hard to relate to a real life tense, especially for him given that his life relies heavily on the verdict of this conversation. Socrates pokes at the level of true concern that Meletus has for the youth when he points out how the current situation they are in in itself shows Maletus’ malicious intent to punish and possibly execute Socrates rather than to hep him and give him instruction. In my opinion, Socrates should have chosen a more relatable analogy to present
In spite of this, however, Socrates also uses two very obvious fallacies. Firstly, when addressing Meletus – who was among the individuals who accused him of impiety and corruption of the youth – Socrates misrepresents his argument to support his own position. He asks if Meletus is “not ashamed of [his] eagerness to possess as much wealth, reputation, and honours as possible, while [he does] not care for nor give thought to wisdom or truth, or the best possible state of [his] soul.” However, the two are not mutually exclusive. Caring about wealth, reputation, and honours do not necessarily entail not caring about wisdom and truth. This is quite a clear example of a straw man fallacy. In addition, Socrates uses appeal to emotion to attempt to manipulate the audience into thinking they are the ones doing wrong. He states that the people of Athens “will acquire the reputation and the guilt, in the eyes of those who want to denigrate the city, of having killed Socrates, a wise man. ” It is clear that by saying this, Socrates’ intention was merely to guilt-trip the audience. In contrast, neither of these fallacies are present in Riel’s speech; in fact, upon reading the transcript of said speech, no clear
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
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.
Plato’s "Apology" gives the substance of the defense made by Socrates to the Athenians at his trial. Meletus, Anytus and Lyncon brought Socrates to court on charges of corrupting the morals of the youth, leading the youth away from the principals of democracy, neglecting the Gods of the State and introducing new divinities.
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.
Judgment is very hard to use as valid reasoning. Everyone has their own judgments about everything. How does one know if what Socrates was doing was corrupting or improving the youth?... ... middle of paper ... ...
O men of Athens! After we have heard the accusers, whom said that Socrates corrupts the youth by criticising democracy and does not believe in gods, and makes the worse appear the better cause. (Apology, Plato) I beg you to grant me a favor, please listen to a few words from me before making this decision.
(24b-8) I believe that Socrates is wholly innocent of the first accusation against him of corrupting the youth. Socrates responds to Meletus’ claims in a similar fashion to how he responds to each of the accusations. Socrates explains how firstly, that Meletus is indifferent towards the young people of Athens and therefore infers that he cannot have any idea on how Socrates positively or negatively affects the youth. (24d-25c) Socrates then says, “No, either I’m not corrupting the young or, if I am corrupting them, it’s unintentionally.” (25e6-26a) This, in my opinion confirms that Socrates is innocence. Socrates then debunks the two following claims in one statement. Socrates paraphrases Meletus’ argument in order to express the hypocrisy in his statement, “Socrates is guilty of not acknowledging gods but of acknowledging gods.” (27a4-27a5) This analysis by Socrates shows that you cannot indict some body of both not acknowledging gods but then acknowledging beings that are either akin to or children of the former. And that in order to not acknowledge the gods; one cannot acknowledge something that is related to the belief of the gods. (27b-27d) In my opinion, both of these statements show Socrates’ innocence as he is not corrupting the youth in a criminal manner as it is either unintentional or not at all, and the last two charges contradict themselves making them inherently both
When asked if there’s anyone in the world who would knowingly choose to be harmed, Meletus replies with “Of course not.”, yet he still insists that Socrates intentionally corrupts the youth (p. 56). Socrates knows that those who are wicked will not only cause harm to strangers, but also will cause harm to those who are close to them (p. 56). Socrates is close to those he teaches and does not want to bring harm to himself (p. 56). Therefore, Socrates would never intentionally corrupt the youth (p.56). Socrates goes on to argue that even if he was unwillingly corrupting the youth of Athens, Meletus’ charges would still hold no real value as it would be an involuntary misdemeanor (p. 56).When somebody unknowingly commits a crime they aren’t summoned to court, they are taken aside and made to see the error of their ways (p. 56). So why was Socrates dragged to court? If someone had tried to enlighten Socrates, and had helped him to see that what he was doing was wrong, then he would have stopped doing that which was unintentional (p. 56). Socrates concludes this part of his argument by stating that no one had tried to enlighten him and by once again questioning why he was brought to court, when court is intended for people who need to be punished, not for people who need to be enlightened (p.
In his examination of Meletus, Socrates makes three main points: 1) Meletus has accused Socrates of being the only corrupter, while everyone else improves the youth. Socrates then uses an analogy: a horse trainer is to horses as an improver is to the youth. The point is that there is only one improver, not many. 2) If Socrates corrupts the youth, either it is intentional or unintentional. No one would corrupt his neighbor intentionally, because he would harm himself in the process. If the corruption was unintentional, then the court is not the place to resolve the problem. The other possibility is that he does not corrupt them at all. 3) In frustration, Meletus accuses Socrates of being "a complete atheist," at the same time he claims Socrates teaches new gods. Thus, Meletus contradicts himself. Socrates argues that fear of death is foolish, because it is not known if death is a good or an evil, thus there is no reason to fear death.
The main argument in The Apology by famous ancient Greek philosopher Plato is whether, notorious speaker and philosopher Socrates is corrupting the youth by preaching ungodly theories and teaching them unlawful ideas that do harm to individuals and society. In his words Socrates quoted the prosecution’s accusation against him: “Socrates is guilty of corrupting the minds of the young, and of believing in supernatural things of his own invention instead of the gods recognized by the state.” 1 Further Socrates consistently introduces tediously compiled number of examples to provide valid and sound arguments to prove that he is innocent of the charges brought up against him to the court.
One of the reasons why Socrates was arrested was because he was being accused of corrupting the minds of the students he taught. I personally feel that it is almost impossible for one person to corrupt the thoughts and feelings of a whole group of people. Improvement comes form a minority and corruption comes from the majority. Socrates is one man (minority) therefore it is less likely the youth have been corrupted by Socrates than by some larger group of people (educators, council members, jurymen etc...).
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.
Socrates was a philosopher who set out to prove, to the gods, that he wasn't the wisest man. Since he could not afford a "good" Sophist teacher, surely a student of one had to be smarter than he. He decides to converse with the youth of Athens, but concludes that he actually is wiser than everyone he speaks with. He then realizes that their lack of intelligence is the fault of their teachers. Socrates understands that the practice of "sophism" leads to a lack of self-knowledge and moral values. Socrates was later accused of corrupting the youth of Athens and put on trial. In The Apology of Socrates he sta...
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...