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.
The combination of these arguments should have cleared Socrates of the charge of heresy. The second charge brought against Socrates was that of corrupting minors. Socrates battled this charge through the use of the same arguments. The argument that he did not consider himself a teacher, the fact that he never accepted any money for talking or listening to people, and the fact that he believes in gods are what Socrates used to defend himself. By confronting the accusation that he was corrupting the minors, Socrates tried to clear himself by manipulating his arguments so that Meletus, Anytus, and Lycon (the men who brought both charges against Socrates) had to answer questions about these charges.
He truly believed he was meant to live a philosophical li... ... middle of paper ... ...t of Socrates charges were due to Meletus accusing Socrates of his various crimes. A second reason to support the issue of Socrates corrupting the minds of young men was the influence of Meletus and his hand in the trail. Socrates had a sour view of Meletus; he was ignorant, arrogant, and unrestrained thus impious. Likewise Socrates wanted believed Meletus destroyed any possibility of genuine education with sophist relativism. Socrates even says before the judges,” They know very well Meletus is lying, and claims speaking the truth”(pg.
Socrates does not respect Euthyphro, he proves this by continuing to defend himself with the truth, calling his accusers “all those who persuaded you by means of envy and slander,” therefore he would not respect Dionysus either (Plato, Apology, 18d). This parallel between Euthyphro and Dionysus is also shown through their inability to recognize their own ignorance. Euthyphro claims he “would be in no way different from other men, if [he] did not have exact knowledge about all such things” in reference to divine law and holiness (Plato, Euthyphro, 4e). Dionysus, through his actions, is claiming to know all and does not acknowledge any ignorance he may have. As a god, he inclines he is entitled to his actions.
The Apology is Socrates' defense at his trial. As the dialogue begins, Socrates notes that his accusers have cautioned the jury against Socrates' eloquence, according to Socrates, the difference between him and his accusers is that Socrates speaks the truth. Socrates distinguished two groups of accusers: the earlier and the later accusers. The earlier group is the hardest to defend against, since they do not appear in court. He is all so accused of being a Sophist: that he is a teacher and takes money for his teaching.
For what Socrates did on the court, I do not think they should be accounted toward civil disobedience. Because all he did is to defend himself in a lawful manner. He was actually defending against the ideas that he was being unlawful (impiety and atheism). Because, as we all know, Athens’s law required its citizens to be pious of what they believe. 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.
In “Crito” by Plato, Socrates and Crito are having an intimate conversation about reasons why Socrates should escape. Socrates is charged on corrupting the minds of the youth in Athens. Crito, who is Socrates student and close friend, tries to persuade him to escape because he did not believe Socrates committed any actual crime. Socrates believes that if the government is punishing him because he broke a commandment; then he did perhaps break a law. Socrates saw the law being a general father figure for society.
Sometimes the questions that philosophers ask upset many people. After Socrates explains to others why he is wiser than they are, Socrates knows that he is “hateful both to him and to many others. After this, then, I kept going to one after another, all the while perceiving with pain and fear that I was becoming hated” (Plato, 21e). Socrates knew that the questions he was asking were angering others, but philosophers must try to obtain knowledge at all costs. In Socrates’ real life, the Athenians get fed up with him and put him on trial, but in Aristophanes’ Clouds, Strepsiades gets so angry at Socrates for turning his son against him, he lights the thinkery on fire, yelling, “Someone bring me a torch!
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
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. This becomes a key factor in the "Apology" where Socrates is brought up on charges for corrupting the mind of the youths and the people that attended to his lectures. His best defence comes about when he tells the Athenian jury about his account of a confrontation of his friend Chairephon and the Oracle of Delphi. Socrates friend from youth, Chairephon, ventured to the land of Delphi to ask the Oracle that presided there if there was a man that contained more wisdom than Socrates. The Oracle responded that there was no man wiser than he.