1.The Unexamined Life is Not Worth Living. As stated in Plato's apology, Socrates most famously stated during his trial,"The unexamined life is not worth living." Socrates is correct when uttered this infamous quote. He was correct due to the fact living a mundane life not seeking both wisdom and knowledge, to me is a waste in the sense that, whether or not you believe in a higher power, someone or something put you here on earth and to not try and understand why that is, to me is a squander of time. As for Socrates, when speaking of his beliefs of a higher power, or God, there simply is no evidence that he believes in God. Further more using the term "God" with a capital G is also wrong in the sense that God is referring to the god …show more content…
Was Socrates Guilty? Socrates was found guilty of both corrupting the youth and impiety. Was Socrates Guilty? I believe he was not guilty. He certainly did not deserve to die for what he did. Socrates was not guilty because he did nothing that was punishable by death. Also he was not guilty because it is very challenging to define the word "Piety" or what it means to be pius. It is very hard to believe that the people who charged Socrates of these "Crimes" more than likely did not even understand what Socrates was talking about. So to think that they were considered to be in a place well above Socrates socially and able to sentence him to death should discredit their claims. During the trial Socrates often notes how you cannot define Piety. The charge of "Impiety" coming from Ancient Greece does make sense in the fact that the Greek people believed to be protected by the gods and they did not want to do anything to disrupt that. However the point that times are different today is valid in the sense that back then, the purpose of democracy was to serve to the good of all common people, however I still feel he was doing nothing "harmful" enough to be sentenced to death. I do believe he was used as an example to demonstrate the message of not challenging the status quo or this will
This quote can be used to argue what kind things he would say to our society by providing an example of what his beliefs are. He is saying that once we can only become philosophers we will be able to stop indulging ourselves with our senses and only use them when necessary. Socrates point view of philosophy is when one wants to acquire prudence and irrefutable truth, which was discussed in a classroom community among classmates, simply when wants continuously want to learn and can never be satisfied with what they know. By learning, what Socrates means is our soul 's recollecting knowledge that body hinders the soul from remembering. This is seen in Meno where Socrates shows Meno how a boy figuring out the answers to a question is actually recollecting the knowledge instead of learning something new. He would make a statement about our education system and what we currently see as knowledge what was we should see as knowledge. The way we should learn by his definition would be to have classroom discussions sessions as agreed upon by critical think by my classmates and myself in a philosophy course. Socrates would tell us how we would need to focus on recollecting and focus on feeding our soul instead of our bodies, how we would need to make major changes such as our use of technology for only necessary uses and not merely for mindless entertainment much like how we all use laptops, phones, and the
point. As Socrates points out, it is impossible for him to be both atheistic and
Socrates was accused of bringing false gods into the polis and corrupting the youth. The only false god was himself. For he might have presented himself in such a way to his many followers. These followers were mostly, as he says, wealthy young men with not much to do. This I could imagine is where a good deal of his conceitedness comes from, being almost worshipped be others. These men followed all of his teachings and practices, including the condescending cross-examinations, which were probably the worst of his acts.
Through books and essays about Socrates, research, and analysis it shows that he was truly guilty of his crimes and accepted them willingly although he believed he was innocent.
that it is because of the gods that things are as they seem to be. "Do you
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.
It is true that his ideas may have seemed impious and dangerous during “a wave of religious fundamentalism,” but unless there was specific evidence of his impiety other than through the actions of others, this charge should have been invalid. The second reason for Socrates’ innocence is that he was not truly responsible for corrupting the youth. Socrates was accused of doing so by teaching them to be impious and detrimental to Athens. However, he makes a solid point when he says, “Either I do not corrupt the young or, if I do, it is unwillingly, and you are lying in either case. Now if I corrupt them unwillingly, the law does not require you to bring people to court for such unwilling wrongdoings, but … to instruct them and exhort them; for clearly, if I learn better, I shall cease to do what I am doing unwillingly” (Plato 26A). As mentioned earlier, the trial could have been avoided had Meletus spoken to Socrates privately, though he didn’t because he clearly had issues with the older man (Plato 25A). There’s also the concern that he corrupted his former “students” - like Alcibiades and Critias - to the point that they did wrong against Athens, but Socrates can’t be held liable
Socrates, according to Plato challenged the norms of society by questioning life and having others question it as well. He was labeled of “corrupting the youth” and for not believing in the Athenians gods. “Socrates is guilty of corrupting the young, and of not acknowledging the gods the city acknowledges, but new daimonic activities instead.” (The Apology, pp 654) Although, he was cast by being “corrupt”, Socrates had many followers that saw him as a wise man. Socrates trial was made up of thirty jurors, who were later known as “The Thirty.” The “Thirty” really wanted was to silence Socrates, rather than taking his life. However, Socrates did not want to disobey the laws, he did not want to be violated of his right to freedom of speech, nor did he did he want to be undermine his moral position. (The Apology, pp. 647) He stood against injustice acts several times while he was in counsel. “I was the sort...
Socrates was also put on trial for being an Atheist. In the argument Socrates has with Meletus, Socrates gets Meletus to admit that Socrates is Atheist and theist. Considering that both of these practices are totally incompatible, and Meletus admits to both of theses, maybe Meletus does not really understand what he is accusing Socrates of. I understand that back then; not believing in religion was considered a crime but to actually sentence someone to death for being different is totally uncalled for.
Around the time of 469 to 399 A.D. Socrates existed as a stone cutter who had a passion for philosophy. He taught many pupils, including the well-known philosopher Plato, and created a method of teaching called the Socratic Method. This new method of thinking encouraged people to question everything around them and invest in critical evaluation. One day Socrates was accused of corrupting the minds of the Athenian youth. Was Socrates wrongly convicted, or was what the Athenians did just? In the present day many people see that his conviction was unjust, but there are some people, including people who existed during the time of the trial, who believed his accusers were right to judge Socrates as such. People
Socrates did establish that he was doing a “service to the god” by challenging his city to break social norms and try to evolve their ways of thinking, but I do not think the people of the city appreciated his help. While he did do what he felt was his civil duty/duty to the god, those were still the things he was being charged for. He used his “service to the god” as a justification to his accusations as opposed to actually defending himself and denying the accusations (except in the AP by Plato during his cross of Meletus). Socrates should have realized that he was living in traditional Athens and they were not just going to drop their beliefs and become a more modern society due to the philosophy of just one man. I believe that the jury was correct to come to a guilty verdict for Socrates because in the end, his apology just was not good enough.
...nse and cross-examination of Meletus, he hits on contradictions in the affidavit that Meletus wrote. Over and over again Meletus is made out to look stupid and contradictory of himself. In no way would I believe any of Meletus' statements. Unlike Socrates, when questioned, Meletus could not come up with a swaying or even put together answer. Socrates answered the charges clearly; he gave precise arguments reasons why he is not guilty. Meletus could not even back up his charges. Throughout his argument Socrates shows his wisdom and intelligence. Socrates has not hurt anyone in his life; he has only gone on his way questioning people because that is what he does best. It was not his fault that people took an interest in what Socrates was doing; and it was not Socrates' fault that people started following his lead. Therefore, I would plan on voting not guilty.
Socrates is correct when he says the “the unexamined life is not worth living” In order to discuss why Socrates is correct, I would like to discuss these various points which consist of: the significance as well as the underlying meaning of his quote “the unexamined life is not worth living”, the difference between an unexamined life and an examined life, specific examples, the importance of a person living an examined life and lastly, whether or not I’m living an examined life.
Socrates was considered by many to be the wisest man in ancient Greece. While he was eventually condemned for his wisdom, his spoken words are still listened to and followed today. When, during his trial, Socrates stated that, “the unexamined life is not worth living” (Plato 45), people began to question his theory. They began to wonder what Socrates meant with his statement, why he would feel that a life would not be worth living. To them, life was above all else, and choosing to give up life would be out of the picture. They did not understand how one would choose not to live life just because he would be unable to examine it.
I think it’s important to first examine the circumstances of what was going on when Socrates stated “the unexamined life is not worth living.” To really get a sense of how critical the situation