The myth of the Ring of Gyges has transcended hundred of years, thusly making it a ‘tale as old as time’. Modern adaptations of this myth include JRR Tolkien’s, “Lord of the Ring” series as an example. Through this legend and others, like the myth of metals, Plato is able to demonstrate what one ought to do if one is set owner of the infamous Ring of Gyges, ergo the argumentation of why one ought to act justly. If I had a magic ring such as the Ring of Gyges I would be inclined to act mischievously, but would wind up acting as though I did not have the ring. To fully understand my position, if I had a magic ring, can only be fully comprehended once the purpose of the ring, pertaining to morality is understood. I feel as though the Socrates of The Apology and of The Republic would answer in a consistent way. Namely, that regardless of possession of the ring or not, one should act justly.
In Plato’s Apology it seems that overall Socrates did an effective job using the 3 acts of the mind. The three acts of the mind are: Understanding, Judgment, and Reasoning. These acts are stragically used to rebut the charges made against him during trial. The two charges that are formed against Socrates are corrupting the youth and not believing in the gods. The first act of the mind that we will be looking at is, understanding. The question that needs to be asked is what does corruption mean? The accuser believe that Socrates in corrupting the minds of the children by introducing new concepts. Socrates is trying to teach and involve the minds of the youth by getting them to ask question. It is very important that people are always asking questions about why things are. The next question that needs to be address is what does not believe in the gods mean? Socrates believes in God but that is one god that rules the world, not multiple gods who together rule. They are mad that he has “created” his own god.
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.
...everything in Athens improves the youth except for Socrates. This statement by Melatus illustrates that Melatus doesn’t have any knowledge on how to help the youth and that his main intention is to get Socrates sentenced to death.
In Plato’s Apology, the story of Socrates was portrayed. He was known as an extremely wise man who felt knowledge was power. Socrates lived his life by trying to do what was right and being a virtuous person. However, not everyone saw him this way. Socrates had many enemies and was not well liked in the city of Athens. Eventually, these enemies put Socrates on trial. As Socrates believed in the person he was and knew he had done nothing wrong he chose not to flee Athens. Instead, he went to court and defended himself. Throughout the trial Socrates told the truthful story from the Oracle of Delphi and how he tried to disprove it, he had many accusations against him, and he believed that the unexamined life was not worth living.
...ed the jurors then he did not persuade them to the fullest. On the other hand, Socrates has a reputation of being ‘wise’ and a seeker for answers, they automatically have a predisposition of who he is and nothing will convince the jurors because if they do set him free then that would make them look bad. Socrates is neither ‘irreligious’ nor ‘impious’ because even though Meletus wrongly accused him of being an atheist that does not justify Socrates philosophical way of thinking. Socrates is highly astute and his foes beget fables because they believe that he is doing something bad and persuading the people of Athens to believe in other ideological beliefs. He is too astute and sage beyond their comprehension and they believe he is breaking the standard norms of Athena when he was actually improving the city/state of Athens he was a free thinker and open minded.
In the opening of The Apology, Socrates informed the jurors how he intends to address them, what they should pay attention to in his remarks, and what he sees as his greatest obstacle in gaining an acquittal. How does he intend to address the jury? Socrates’ approach towards addressing the jury is way different than what you would see a normal defendant doing. Socrates does not stand in front of the jury and beg that he doesn’t get charged. Instead, Socrates believes that you shouldn’t have to cry and beg for the right to live in court if the defendant has done nothing wrong. The first thing that he says when speaking to the jury was to basically hear him out, and listen to even if he started to talk in his language of habit. He then said they should excuse that because he is seventy years old and has never appeared in court. “I must beg of you to grant me one favor, If you hear me using the same words in my defense which I have been in habit of using, and which most of you may have heard in the agora, and at the table of the money-changers, or anywhere else, I would ask you to not be surprised at this, and bot to interrupt me (Dover p. 19).”
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.
The first main argument in support of the thesis is that it is society’s job to educate the youth and Socrates argues that it is impossible for just one man to corrupt the youth. This is the first mistake made by Meletus, as he makes the absurd overstatement that “every Athenian improves and elevates [the youth]; all with the exception of [Socrates],” who alone is their corrupter. Socrates goes on to defend himself by alluding to a horse analogy. Socrates argues that (P1) trainers improve horses, (P2) all others who simply ride horses, injure or corrupt horses, (P3) there are fewer trainers than riders, (P4) therefore, those who corrupt horses are in smaller number than those who ride horses and we can conclude that (C) people are corrupted by a majority rather than a minority. Socrates believes that this analogy to horses must be true of all animals and furthermore, for all people. Socrates utilizes this analogy to point out that Meletus’ overstatement is rather ironic, since according to Meletus all other beings except for the youth in the world are more likely to be corrupted by a majority rather than a minority. For this reason, it is more logical that the youth have been corrupted by a majority like the judges, senators, and the Athenians rather than one man, Socrates. Meletus’ overstatement and inability to defend himself reflects poorly on his character and further gives more authority to Socrates as it seems that Meletus is only arguing for the sake of argument and that he has no true evidence to prove that Socrates is guilty of corrupting the youth.
In the retelling of his trial by his associate, Plato, entitled “The Apology”; Socrates claims in his defense that he only wishes to do good for the polis. I believe that Socrates was innocent of the accusations that were made against him, but he possessed contempt for the court and displayed that in his conceitedness and these actions led to his death.
Plato's The Apology is an account of the speech. Socrates makes at the trial in which he is charged with not recognizing the gods recognized by the state, inventing new gods, and corrupting the youth of Athens. For the most part, Socrates speaks in a very plain, conversational manner. He explains that he has no experience with the law courts and that he will instead speak in the manner to which he is accustomed with honesty and directness. Socrates then proceeds to interrogate Meletus, the man primarily responsible for bringing Socrates before the jury. He strongly attacks Meletus for wasting the court¡¦s time on such absurd charges. He then argues that if he corrupted the young he did so unknowingly since Socrates believes that one never deliberately acts wrongly. If Socrates neither did not corrupt the young nor did so unknowingly, then in both cases he should not be brought to trial. The other charge is the charge of impiety. This is when Socrates finds an inconsistency in Meletus¡¦ belief that Socrates is impious. If he didn¡¦t believe in any gods then it would be inconsistent to say that he believed in spiritual things, as gods are a form of a spiritual thing. He continues to argue against the charges, often asking and answering his own questions as if he were speaking in a conversation with one of his friends. He says that once a man has found his passion in life it would be wrong of him to take into account the risk of life or death that such a passion might involve.
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 official charges that Socrates is charged with are corrupting the young, and not acknowledging the gods the city acknowledges, but new daimonic activities instead. Socrates responds cross-examining Meletus in which he says that Meletus does not actually care about these things. Then continues to explain the flaws in the charge of him corrupting the youth in a way of questioning Meletus to say who improves the youths. Meletus says basically everyone but Socrates improves the youths. So, the youth should be in a happy situation if only one person is corrupting them while everyone else is improving them. But if he is corrupting the youth, it is surely by accident and since it is by accident how can he be brought before the court because he
In any case of law, when considering truth and justice, one must first look at the validity of the court and the system itself. In Socrates' case, the situation is no different. One may be said to be guilty or innocent of any crime, but guilt or innocence is only as valid as the court it is subjected to. Therefore, in considering whether Socrates is guilty or not, it must be kept in mind the norms and standards of Athens at that time, and the validity of his accusers and the crimes he allegedly committed. Is Socrates guilty or innocent of his accusations?
Anytus, and Lycon. Socrates believed that these three accused him of corrupting the youth due to the fact that he found them to be less wise than he. Socrates approached these three individuals in their respective fields as they were said to be the wisest, but Socrates questioned their wisdom. Due to their knowledge in their respective fields they carried ignorance into other pursuit when they truly knew nothing. The accusations of the crime came from the following: Meletus on behalf of the poets, Anytus on behalf of the craftsman & politicians, and Lycon on behalf of the orators. Socrates deposes Meletus and questions his accusations on what seems to be logic. One statement being, how