Was Socrates Wise? Webster defines wise as: (1) having or showing good judgment; (2) informed; (3) learned; (4) shrewd or cunning. In my opinion, Socrates was wise in all aspects of the word. If I were placed in his position and were to make the same decisions, I would not consider myself wise. I would consider myself to be a great fool, but given the circumstances and the parties involved I believe that Socrates made proper decisions in his defense. Socrates knew that the jury was prejudiced against him from the start and addressed it immediately. In his opening statement, of the prosecutors he stated, "but of their many falsehoods, the one which astonished me most was when they said that I was a clever speaker, and that you must be careful not to let me mislead you."(15) That is an effective statement to taint a rebuttal before it can be presented. Also, Socrates addressed the fact that he has been accused of this treachery for years. These accusations are more formidable because they were first introduced to the jury when they were young and impressionable, but more importantly because Socrates has been unable to defend himself. He could not defend his position because the accusations have been informal and the accusers remain anonymous. "He investigates things in the air and under the earth, and that he teaches people to disbelieve in the gods, and to make the weaker argument appear stronger."(19) These are the stock accusations given to all philosophers. Socrates was no fool and knew that he would not be able to change these ingrained beliefs in a few hours, but was able to provide some justification as to why he had lived his life in search of wisdom. Chaerephon, a life-long friend of Socrates, aske... ... middle of paper ... ... an opportunity to escape his unjust conviction. He tells his would be saviors what we call today a social contract. A social contract states, simply, that you must obey all laws, no matter if they cause you an injustice because it is the same laws that protect the citizens. There would be no point of laws if people could ignore the ones that they felt were unjust or inconvenient. Socrates was a wise man and died as a result of his beliefs. The opposition would argue that Socrates was not wise because he could have saved his own life and he could have done more good. Also, he could have been prosperous by accepting money and by not stepping on everybody's toes. This could never happen because it was against Socrates' beliefs. He believed that truth was paramount and that by living an honest life, he was more successful and powerful than all of Greece.
Socrates defense at his trial was not strong enough to convince the Athenians to set him free of all charges. He was not prepared properly for his defense; yet, he managed to convince a large majority of the judges to find him not guilty of charges, but not enough to send him free.
If Socrates were put on trial today it would be much like his trial in Athens, most likely put on trial for the same reason of some citizens resenting him for his deeds of making them seem foolish. Upon living within our society, he would have had a grasp of what we value and want from life. Knowing about what his view of our society would most likely be, I believe that Socrates would defend himself and make a statement to our society by explain to us, are we only resent him due to our arrogance as found in the Apology and The Allegory of the Cave, how we must change our ways as a society by properly prioritizing our efforts to seek wisdom as seen in his conversation with Meno, and will refute how any punishment we could give him will not
In fact, it’s I who can call what I think is a sufficient witness that I’m telling the truth, my poverty.” (Plato 661) Socrates also states “if I really do corrupt the young or have corrupted them in the past, surely if any of them had recognized when they became older that I’d given them bad advice at some point in their youth, they’d now have come forward themselves to accuse me and seek redress. Or else, if they weren’t willing to come themselves, some of their family members…would remember it now and seek redress.” (Plato 663) There was no one in the audience who stepped forward to speak on behalf of his accusers. Socrates consistently proved by words, how the accusations against him were false. In the end, he was accused of all of these things and put to death. This goes to show how much they truly hated Socrates and that no matter what they were told, it wouldn’t have mattered, they would have found a way to punish him in the
Socrates starts by speaking of his first accusers. He speaks of the men that they talked to about his impiety and says that those that they persuaded in that Socrates is impious, that they themselves do not believe in gods (18c2). He tells the court of how long they have been accusing him of impiety. He states that they spoke to others when they were at an impressionable age (18c5). These two reasons alone should have been good enough to refute the first accusers of how they were wrong about him but Socrates went on. He leaves the first accusers alone because since they accused him a long time ago it was not relevant in the current case and began to refute the second accusers. Socrates vindicates his innocence by stating that the many have heard what he has taught in public and that many of those that he taught were present in the court that day.
For every teacher one may have, there is always a wiser teacher. Socrates is the wisest teacher in the city-state of Athens. A man who has been teaching his wise ways of questioning to students for over 25 years in the Agora is Socrates. Having been known as an adept to questioning, many adolescents and adults sought direction by Socrates. However, people have created accusations against Socrates such as not believing in the gods. Why put Socrates on trial now? At Socrates's trial, both the defense and prosecution have provided strong evidence, but the prosecution was not as strong as the defense. From the defense side, you'd hear from Plato, who is Socrates's most notable student, Crito, who is a lifelong friend of Socrates, and finally Aristophanes,
sacrifices in his honor. He sought to describe his power and wanted to teach the rest of the
In his defense, Socrates claims over and again that he is innocent and is not at all wise, “…for I know that I have no wisdom, small or great.” Throughout the rest of his oration he seems to act the opposite as if he is better than every man, and later he even claims that, “At any rate, the world has decided that Socrates is in some way superior to other men.” This seems to be his greatest mistake, claiming to be greater than even the jury.
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).”
Living in a democracy, everyone is exposed through television and other various forms of media everyday to numerous trials by jury. Usually they are rarely given a second thought, but every once in a while along comes a specific trial which captures the attention of the entire country. This goes the same for trials throughout centuries in our past. Although they did not have the same forms of media as in this, modern era, there were still specific trials in which everyone knew about. One trial that stands out is the one against the great philosopher Socrates. Accused of corrupting the youth, being an atheist, and believing in other gods, Socrates faced trial by jury. The early forms of democracy were not as sophisticated and complex as they are now. The outcome of the trial was that Socrates was found guilty and sentenced to be put to death by hemlock poisoning. The question is whether Socrates was truly guilty or just another person fallen to the early form of democracy of a people who were possibly jealous and afraid of Socrates. However, by understanding Socrates intentions, it is clear that he was in fact innocent of the above charges, and was wrongly accused and executed.
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?
Socrates and the Apology Some of the best sources of information about Socrates' philosophical views are the early dialogues of his student Plato, who tried to provide a faithful picture of the methods and teachings of the great master. The Apology is one of the many recorded dialogues about Socrates. It is about how Socrates was arrested and charged with corrupting the youth, believing in no god(s) (Atheism) and for being a Sophist. He attended his trial and put up a good argument. I believe that Socrates was wrongfully accused and should not have been sentenced to death.
Socrates starts his defense by addressing the jury and telling them that his accusers had a prepared speech, while Socrates' speech will be completely improvised. Socrates continued to further disassociate himself from the opponents by telling the jury to forgive him for his conversational tone in his speech, for that's how he best speaks. He also asks the jury to keep an open mind and not concentrate on how his defense is delivered, but the substance of his defense. Socrates tells the jury that he is not a sophist. Sophists were known for charging fees for their work, and Socrates does not charge a fee for his words. His next decides to cross-examine Meletus. Basically Socrates turns the tables on his accuser and accuses Meletus of "dealing frivolously with serious matters." Socrates says that the youth he supposedly corrupts follows him around on their own free will, because the young men enjoy hearing people and things being questioned. In this line of questioning of Meletus, Socrates makes him look very contradictory to his statements in his affidavit. Socrates then moves on to the second part of his defense. Moving on to the second charge that he does not believe in the Gods accepted ...
Socrates was a philosopher who set out to prove, to the gods, that he wasn't the wisest man. Since he could not afford a "good" Sophist teacher, surely a student of one had to be smarter than he. He decides to converse with the youth of Athens, but concludes that he actually is wiser than everyone he speaks with. He then realizes that their lack of intelligence is the fault of their teachers. Socrates understands that the practice of "sophism" leads to a lack of self-knowledge and moral values. Socrates was later accused of corrupting the youth of Athens and put on trial. In The Apology of Socrates he sta...
wise for he was always in the pursuit of knowledge. Unfortunately, Socrates was put to death late in his
Philosophy can be defined as the pursuit of wisdom or the love of knowledge. Socrates, as one of the most well-known of the early philosophers, epitomizes the idea of a pursuer of wisdom as he travels about Athens searching for the true meaning of the word. Throughout Plato’s early writings, he and Socrates search for meanings of previously undefined concepts, such as truth, wisdom, and beauty. As Socrates is often used as a mouthpiece for Plato’s ideas about the world, one cannot be sure that they had the same agenda, but it seems as though they would both agree that dialogue was the best way to go about obtaining the definitions they sought. If two people begin on common ground in a conversation, as Socrates often tries to do, they are far more likely to be able to civilly come to a conclusion about a particular topic, or at least further their original concept.