I suppose that there is some truth to that statement but how much truth is the question. To be certain we must first familiarize ourselves with the individuals and subsequently examine the similarities between the two as well as the differences. In The Apology, Plato recounts the important speech that Socrates made during his trial. Socrates essentially explained how a prophecy declared him the wisest men of all. However, he concluded that he was wise because he knew that he did not know anything.
While addressing the jury Socrates ... ... middle of paper ... .... Then appeals to the jury in their sense of values comparing it with his. Although, even though I believe he did a great job defending himself, it could have been this attitude that was his downfall. In the Crito, Socrates does make some valid arguments, but comparing the Apology to the Crito there are some inconsistencies In conclusion “It has been said that the true purpose of philosophy is not to answer questions but rather to question the answers that have been given”. This is exactly what Socrates does in his dialogues. In my opinion he does fully address the issue in some of the arguments Cirto says to Socrates.
These people were not satisfied with having someone prove them wrong and they needed to be right about everything. Socrates belief system proved to be working since he was drawing so many enemies along the way. He states, “ I found that the men in repute were all but the most foolish; and that others less esteemed were really wiser and better” (Plato 64). For Socrates to have made that conclusion he spoke with all kinds of people; the poor, rich, smart, uneducated and so on. The smart people in his eyes were not very smart, just very foolish; whereas the humble people who worked every day of their lives and understood the value of a dollar were the wisest to him.
Socrates claimed that he was on the mission given by the God at Delphi, and it would be ridiculous to say that he should be charged of atheism or impiety. And I think his defense was successful and persuasive. And therefore he was not being civil disobedient on the court. What about his past? For the two cases in the past, Socrates was either rejected the government as a whole, or the majority excluding him was being unlawful.
Socrates pondered over the Oracle’s proclamation that he was the wisest person (The Apology 21a). Socrates attempted to find someone who was wiser than himself but he could not. Socrates realized that he was the wisest person because he was the only person who was aware of his own ignorance (The Apology 23b). Socrates took this as being a sign that the gods had a mission for him. Socrates thought that the gods wanted him to make other people aware of their ignorance.
Socrates was a man that was in search of the truth about wisdom. However, it became more than just a simple search, rather it tuned into a complex assignment where the answer of true wisdom leads Socrates to be brought up on charges of corrupting society. As a philosopher Socrates is known to take every angle of an argument and to never put belief into one idea. Therefore Socrates was known to perplex even simple ideas and to frustrate his opponent. People who have experienced this accuse Socrates of making his own truths about the natural and unnatural world when in actuality he his still in search of a better meaning.
He hoped to find a man wiser than him to prove the oracles prediction was false, even Socrates failed to believe he was the wisest man. He first went to a man that seemed wise. After he spoke with him Plato quotes "I came to see that, though many persons, and chiefly himself, thought that he was wise, yet he was not wise. "(77) With his certainty that Socrates was wiser, the man was insulted and hated Socrates for derailing his intelligence. Socrates then goes to another wise man, but is again let down.
Socrates also utilizes the vanity of Athenians that only the few intelligent people such as themselves know about law and education. Second, Socrates claims that if he had corrupted the youth, he would have done it unintentionally, out of ignorance, because all men want to be surround by wise people. Therefore Socrates deserves instruction rather than punishment. The first charge is: “Socrates does injustice by not believing in the God by whom the city believes, but in other dimonia that are novel” (Apology 34c). To respond, Socrates allures Meletus to charge him against the most serious charge of impiety.
Euthypro is a text of dialogue between Socrates, an outspoken philosopher in ancient Athens, and Euthypro, preceding Socrates trial of corrupting the youth and creating his own gods. Apology is another text having the same author of Euthypro, in Plato, which gives an account of Socrates making his defense at his own trial. Based on the evidence presented in these texts, Socrates is not guilty of corrupting the youth or of creating his own gods. In his dialogue with Socrates, Euthypro begins with agreeing with Socrates explanation of his accusations. Euthypro early in the conversation even compares himself as being likewise in thought with Socrates.
Socrates did a poor job in defending his own life in court, so why should we use his tools and devices to this day in our persuasive arguments? It seems clear that Socrates did nearly everything in his power to have himself executed. Going through his arguments there are many glaring issues, had contemporary individuals been his jury, his fate would not likely change. While some argue, he had no intention of getting