The Apology: Socrates's Views Of The Life

1016 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Socrates lessons in the apology

Socrates was one of the wisest people to walk the earth, and he didn’t even know it. His questioning, reasoning, and expertise in the Apology convey the amount of wisdom he endowed. Through his statements, Socrates sounds like he contradicted himself, but rather, both statements made about obeying law and breaking the law are correct. Socrates said that he would obey the commands of the city, only if the commands were just. He should not be on trial, because he did nothing to invoke injustice upon himself. He committed no crime; therefore, he will continue practicing philosophy no matter what the consequence.
Socrates sounds contradictory in his statements, but the case is quite the opposite. He believes each statement as truth, but doesn’t …show more content…

Meletus responds by saying the judges, councilors, and members of the Assembly had a major influence on the youth. They possessed expertise and knowledge about the law. Socrates reasons with Meletus by commenting that the Assembly is open to all men of the city. Since he is the only man being put on trial for corrupting the youth, Meletus assumes everyone else benefits the city. Socrates doesn’t believe this and supports his argument with this statement. This whole scenario supports Socrates claim to continue practicing philosophy, while completely disregarding the law. Socrates is honored that the law has been good to him, but he believes he is being treated unjustly according to the law because he is not the only one responsible for corrupting the youth. Once injustice is enacted upon him, he knows that he cannot follow the law anymore. The law is compromised. Socrates tells Crito, “We should not thing so much of what the majority will say about us, but what the person who understands justice and injustice will say” (Crito 5). In this situation at the trial, Socrates believes that the person who understands justice and injustice will agree with him about disobeying the trial’s outcome. He concludes he is not being treated fairly according to the law, compared to other men, and will continue practicing philosophy until he …show more content…

To clarify his point, he refers to the education of the youth compared to the training of a horse. If a trainer is the only qualified person to train a horse, and not the rest of the population, shouldn’t there be only a few people “trainers” that can teach the youth? If this is true, Socrates makes the point that many other people should be tried alongside him, because he is not in this alone. Socrates concludes his argument comparing the definition of a truly wicked person to a person who breaks a rule unknowingly. Socrates agrees that the wicked person has knowledge of what they are doing wrong. Since they understand, they need to face the consequences of their actions through trial and punishment. On the other hand, the rule breaker who committed a crime unknowingly did not have the knowledge that the wicked person had. Since they did not break this willingly, they should not be punished, but counseled on how to correct their actions. This helps prove Socrates point that the correct action is not being taken against him for “corrupting the youth.” Rather, injustice is being ordained upon him. Through this injustice, he can take action to disobey any consequence that stems from this, or more specifically, practicing philosophy in the face of many people who do not agree with his

Show More
Related

  • Who Is Pericles Wise

    813 Words  | 2 Pages

    I believe that Socrates's arguments are a rebuttal to Pericles's Funeral Oration, and although they are both wise, only

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Plato's Crito

    1301 Words  | 3 Pages

    "Do we say that one must never in any way do wrong willingly, or must one do wrong in one way and not in another?"3 Socrates tries to help people understand that mistakes are human nature, however to do wrongful things on purpose should not be tolerated. Crito agrees with Socrates statement, "So one must never do wrong."4 Crito believes in what Socrates is expressing, yet he wants Socrates to perform an unreasonable action and escape from prison. A big thing for Socrates is trust and being loyal to his family and city. "When one has come to an agreement that is just with someone, should one fulfill it or cheat on it?" Crito believes one should fulfill it. Which Socrates then states "If we leave here without the city's permission, are we harming people whom we should least do harm to? Are we sticking to a just agreement, or not?" Socrates thinks that if you commit to something you need to be a man of your word and follow through. If you make an agreement with someone, you should keep your word to the fullest extent. Socrates thinks he needs to adhere to the agreement of being in prison. He believes he shouldn’t leave unless someone tells him otherwise and to the just thing by upholding the decision. Again, Socrates doesn’t want to offend anyone or show disrespect, which shows his strong desire to always to the right

    Read More

  • Truth Be Told: Socrates' Examinations of Life

    521 Words  | 2 Pages

    Socrates once said, “The unexamined life is not worth living.” He questioned the very nature of why things were the way they were, while never settling for simple, mundane answers. Socrates would rather die searching for the truth than live accepting what he considered a blatant lie. I like to think of myself the same way. I too would rather examine the wonders of life rather than accept what I am just told. The truth is some can’t handle the truth. I on the other hand welcome it with earnest anticipation and fervent enthusiasm.

    Read More

  • Socrates and His Innocence

    907 Words  | 2 Pages

    Socrates starts by speaking of his first accusers. He speaks of the men that they talked to about his impiety and says that those that they persuaded in that Socrates is impious, that they themselves do not believe in gods (18c2). He tells the court of how long they have been accusing him of impiety. He states that they spoke to others when they were at an impressionable age (18c5). These two reasons alone should have been good enough to refute the first accusers of how they were wrong about him but Socrates went on. He leaves the first accusers alone because since they accused him a long time ago it was not relevant in the current case and began to refute the second accusers. Socrates vindicates his innocence by stating that the many have heard what he has taught in public and that many of those that he taught were present in the court that day.

    Read More

  • Summary Of Plato's Crito

    1054 Words  | 3 Pages

    When the Laws are introduced in Crito they claim that none of the Laws should be disobeyed because to break one is to break them all. Instead of breaking the Laws in retaliation because they have acted or behaved unjustly, as stated at 51b, they can be persuaded to change, “although he agreed to obey us, he neither obeys nor persuades us if we do something ignobly, although we put forward an alternative to him and do not order him crudely to do whatever we bid, but permit either of two things—either to persuade us or to do it” (52a). Persuasion is the one option that allows for disobedience; however, whether or not Socrates must obey the law if he fails to persuade it is unclear. Socrates’ hypothetical disobedience in Apology to the court’s order to cease philosophizing is taken into account in Richard Kraut’s “Plato’s Apology and Crito: Two Recent Studies”. The article is a review of Gerasimo Santas’ Socrates and A.D. Woozley’s Law and Obedience: The Arguments of Plato’s Crito. In the article Kraut comments that Santas’ stance, which is that Socrates’ disobedience in the Apology does no harm to the city because he is willing to accept his punishment, is unreasonable: “but it is absurd to say that, whenever someone openly violates a law and accepts one’s punishment, no harm is done to the city” . Kraut does not go on to fully explain why no harm is done to the city, but I am compelled to disagree with him on Santas’ behalf. If harm were done to the city each time someone disobeys a court order or breaks a law, the state of Athens would have fallen apart long before Socrates’ trial because apparently punishing those responsible does nothing to repair the Laws. If this is the case, then what purpose does justice, in this case a court of law, serve if not to repair the damage done by criminals. If Socrates could not persuade the Laws of Athens not

    Read More

  • The Trail Of Socrates And The Apology Of Plato

    1011 Words  | 3 Pages

    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 ... ...

    Read More

  • Morality of Disobeying Laws

    1797 Words  | 4 Pages

    Overall, I think that Socrates and King see eye-to-eye on this issue, however their reasons for believing so are different. King, on one side, looks at Socrates’ imprisonment as an act to bring thought to this law. Whereas, Socrates sees it as just obeying as he should and being moral. After all, he had his chance to choose banishment, and said that he would rather die than be banished. I would like to conclude with a quote from Socrates, “It is never right to do a wrong or return a wrong or defend one’s self against injury by retaliation.”

    Read More

  • Plato's Apology

    807 Words  | 2 Pages

    In his defense, Socrates claims over and again that he is innocent and is not at all wise, “…for I know that I have no wisdom, small or great.” Throughout the rest of his oration he seems to act the opposite as if he is better than every man, and later he even claims that, “At any rate, the world has decided that Socrates is in some way superior to other men.” This seems to be his greatest mistake, claiming to be greater than even the jury.

    Read More

  • Socrates Was NOT Guilty

    1660 Words  | 4 Pages

    Socrates was not guilty as charged; he had done nothing wrong, as seen in the Apology. Not even a priest could tell Socrates what he had done wrong religiously, Euthyphro wasn’t even able to give Socrates a precise definition of piety. It is then questioned by Crito why Socrates would remain to face a penalty for a crime he did not commit. In the Crito, it is explained why, although innocent, Socrates must accept the penalties his peers have set upon him. It is his peers that will interpret and enforce the laws, not the law which will enforce it. Even if the enforcers don’t deserve attention and respect because they have no real knowledge to the situation, Socrates had put himself under their judgment by going to the trial. Therefore, Socrates must respect the decisions made by the masses because the decisions are made to represent the laws, which demand each citizen’s respect.

    Read More

  • Plato's Apology: The Argument For Corrupting The Youth Of Plato

    785 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Similarities Between Martin Luther King Jr And Socrates

    698 Words  | 2 Pages

    Socrates refuses to disobey the law. He believes in the correctness of the cities laws. He believes it is never right to act unjustly. He thinks that if you do not agree with the laws of the area that you are living at, then to leave and go somewhere else. He argues that the government could be seen as “his parents, also those who brought him up,” (Crito, 51e), since he has lived there his entire life and when you live somewhere for so long you should “persuade us or to do what we say,” (Crito, 52a) or leave. Socrates tells Crito that

    Read More

  • An Apology From Socrates

    1717 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Socrates was a Wise and Harmless Man

    1122 Words  | 3 Pages

    Socrates believed that reason or nature could not tell us why the world is the way it appears.

    Read More

  • Thrasymachus Definition Of Justice Essay

    523 Words  | 2 Pages

    Socrates questions Thrasymachus on why he adds the detail of the stronger to his definition of justice. Socrates than asks, if it is just for everyone to follow the laws that the ruler has made, if the ruler has made unjust laws. His argument is that people, even rulers make mistakes. This meaning that if a ruler makes mistakes on the law does that still make it just. It is a very conflicting argument to think about, if the rules are not just then why should they be followed but the rules were also put in place by someone who is supposed to know the difference between just and unjust and choose correctly. This relates to what Socrates says during his trial portrayed in the Apology. Socrates claims

    Read More

  • Socrates' Pursuit of Wisdom

    1155 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...ns. Why would he do this if he did not see the laws of Athens as just? In order to fulfill the agreement he has made with Athenian law, Socrates must accept the punishment he is given, though he feels that his being punished is Athens wronging him. It would be wrong, by his view, to escape from prison, though he would not be pursued, because he would be breaking his agreement to obey Athenian law. Since he and Crito previously agreed that one must never do wrong, he simply must stay in jail until his death. This is merely one example of the way in which Socrates uses a method of logical dialogue in order to make his point. He appears to be unmatched in his skills of deduction and consistently demonstrates his love of knowledge and truth. Socrates exemplifies all that is philosophy, both as a student and a teacher, because of his constant, active pursuit of wisdom.

    Read More

More about The Apology: Socrates's Views Of The Life

Open Document