As a result of his reflection however, he places more value on the opinion of “he who understands justice and injustice”( (Plato, The Crito, §48a). Through his questioning and encouragement of examination, the defendant does not attempt to undermine the majority, but rather believes that the opinions of examined men carry more weight than those of a simple majority. This does not, however, prove Socrates’ innocence completely. As I see it, the greatest display of the defendant’s commitment to upholding the democracy and the majority rule is his strict adherence to the laws of Athens. In the aforementioned case of the ten generals, Socrates opposed the majority in court advocating for the legal cause, but when a verdict was reached he accepted it.
The explanation that Socrates suddenly comes up with the idea of a teacher of virtue is that he said, "It would be reasonable to send him to those who practice the craft rather than those who do not." 1 Based on his reply, it is understandable, and logical that it is factual. There has to be a connoisseur who truthfully recognizes what virtue is. Nevertheless, at the end of Meno (89e-96c), Anytus explains that there are no teachers and learners of virtue. As Meno mentions earlier in the text, there are many dissim... ... middle of paper ... ...elief changes.
He, being as humble as he is, could not take the Oracle’s answer for granted and went about questioning Athenians he felt surpassed his intelligence. However, in questioning politicians, poets, and artisans, he found that they claimed to know of matters they did not know about. Socrates considered this to be a serious flaw, and, as Bill S. Preston, Esq. put it: that “true wisdom consists in knowing that you know nothing.” Socrates acknowledges the fact that he knows nothing, at least in areas which he is unlearned in. By knowing this, he has obtained true wisdom, according to the above maxim.
Socrates on the other hand, was self thought and believed that he was wise enough to know that he could be ignorant at times. Unlike the sophists, he was not rich and did not ask for fines to teach people of this wisdom he had learnt. He was an orator, a great orator at that but according to the dialogue in Plato’s Apology (1.17c) he was not the kind of man who would talk in a formal tone as he was used to talking in common places. Socrates also saw himself as a god sent to open the eyes of the people to see what they had not learned. In Plato’s apology, Socrates is seen defending himself from two brad accusations that he was someone who neglected the gods and secondly that he misled the youth.
Therefore, it is not necessary to look for it since you do not know it. When they conclude their conversation, they still do not know what the virtue is or it is teachable for sure. Socrates’ reasons for knowledge give Meno a good lesson that knowledge is more important than true belief. Of course true belief as important as knowledge, but they are mistaken to recollection theory. Therefore, for Socrates knowledge is ultimately better than true belief.
Cephalus says tha... ... middle of paper ... ... reminds Thrasymachus that he had earlier admitted that justice is an excellence of character. Thus, is must follow that the just person is the happy person. Socrates then sums up his statements. Injustice is never more profitable than justice, no matter how you argue Thrasymachus. Although Socrates realizes he has refuted Thrasymachus, he also realizes his argument is incomplete.
Socrates’ elenchus is useful bec... ... middle of paper ... ... ignorance. Once people become aware of their own ignorance, they may try to conduct an elenchus on their own. By conducting their own elenchus’, people would most likely begin to develop the critical thinking skills. Ultimately, the elenchus would be useful and justified because it does help complete Socrates’ divine mission. In conclusion, although Socrates did not benefit the people that he cross-examined, his actions were still useful and justified.
Building on a statement by Sophocles, Cephalus concludes, "he who is of a calm and happy nature will hardly feel the pressure of age." Socrates' inquiry as to whether Cephalus' happiness owes to the comfort of wealth demands a qualification of this position? That while a man's nature ultimately determines his peace of mind in old age; wealth is also an undeniably important factor. The passage concerning justice illustrates Socrates' dexterous intellect and his dogged skepticism. Playful and humorous at times, the conversation ends, at several points, in absurd--and apparently inexorable--conclusions such as that the just man is a thief.
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.
Euthypro also shares his thoughts, but only with Socrates. He could be considered being guilty of corruption in the dialogue, but his sharing is private. Euthypro tells Socra... ... middle of paper ... ... different culture altogether, and that would be complete corruption. Neither Socrates nor Jesus denied their intentions, however unlike Jesus; Socrates was an older man with a family. One would think even for his sons’ sake, he would bargain for a lesser punishment than death.