Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
the difference between right or wrong and good or evil
apeerence of good and evil
the legal system and ethics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
"The great masquerade of evil has played havoc with all our ethical concepts. For evil to appear disguised as light, charity, historical necessity, or social justice is quite bewildering to anyone brought up on our traditional ethical concepts". Evil should not have a place in the name or eyes of the law other than for the law to bring justice onto the evil which as been committed. The law is there to protect and provide equality and justice to all. People are equal. Each and every person has the ability to make their own decisions which ever way they choose to. Some people make grand decisions and some make poor ones. The majority of the time people are good and they strive to help each other. They generally realize that what they do will have an affect on others. Sometimes however, people's judgment, morals, and how they judge others can become warped. This is when crazy things can start to take place.
Socrates believes that in order to have a fair and just trial everyone involved must be considered equal. He states that he is very unpopular with many people because of the slanders that had been brought against him. The fact that he had become "unpopular" with many people hints that his trial would have been an unjust one considering the jury may have already based their opinion of him. In the same way that Socrates was slandered the Jewish people were also slandered against, making them unpopular and disliked. Both Socrates and the Jewish people because of the slander done to them had started out on the lesser side of equal in the eyes of the law. When evil judgment corrupts the ones doing the judging it begins to weave a troublesome web.
Some people make the decision to be good people, and some people make the decision to be bad people. There are different levels of each of course, but the principle of each is the same- good and evil. The law is good (supposedly) and the people of the law are supposed to be good. They are the ones who bring peace and justice to the countries and communities. If the leaders of the law are corrupt the communities and countries will become corrupt, the barrier between right and wrong will become smaller and smaller, until chaos breaks loose.
Throughout all the years, he never could find anyone as wise as himself, and all he did was make enemies searching. These enemies are now his accusers, and they accuse him of spreading evil doctrines, corrupting the youth, and not believing in the Gods. Throughout the speech, Socrates continues to shoot down every accuser and it is evident that he has done no wrong. Eventually, one of his accusers states that he must be doing something strange and that he wouldnt be that famous if he were like other men. Socrates did not live a very public life unlike most people at that time. His thoughts of being virteous had more to do with examining yourself and becoming a better person and in that way, you benifit society. He did not believe Athens to be virtuos at all, and that they relied on materail things and reputation rather than finding happiness by searching for it deep within
Many judges and civilians questioned the intentions of Socrates. They believed he was corrupting their youth and making them go against the beliefs they had been taught by the law, their state and their parents. The intent of questioning and cross-examination, which Socrates often did, was not to make people feel inferior but to make them understand the shallowness of their knowledge. Being skilled in one area, Socrates believed, does not make you wise in all tings. You must be willing to explore and desire a deeper understanding of all things. Socrates wanted Meletus to understand that he was not trying to corrupt the youth or make them deny the gods of the state, but rather, “believe in divine and spiritual agencies” that encourage virtue and doing good to all men. Socrates believed that one should not fear death and punishment if they are doing what they believe to be good, and a person cannot make themselves better by accusing, punishing, or killing a person who questions their knowledge and beliefs. They only way to improve ourselves is by taking what our accusers say about us and digging into the meaning of it. By doing this we can search for understanding and try to make ourselves better. As Socrates says, “the life which is unexamined is not worth living.”
It takes one person to begin expanding a thought, eventually dilating over a city, gaining power through perceived power. This is why Socrates would be able to eventually benefit everyone, those indifferent to philosophy, criminals, and even those who do not like him. Socrates, through his knowledge of self, was able to understand others. He was emotionally intelligent, and this enabled him to live as a “gadfly,” speaking out of curiosity and asking honest questions. For someone who possesses this emotional intelligence, a conversation with Socrates should not have been an issue-people such as Crito, Nicostratus, and Plato who he calls out during his speech. (37) The problem is that many of the citizens of Athens who wanted Socrates dead, lacked that emotional intelligence and thought highly of themselves. So of course they become defensive when Socrates sheds light on the idea that they may be wrong. As someone who cared most about the improvement of the soul, Socrates would have made a constructive role model to the criminals of Athens, as he would go on saying, “virtue is not given by money, but that from virtue comes money and every other good of man…”(35) Socrates was able to benefit everyone alike as he had human wisdom- something that all the Athenians could relate
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
It is largely understood that laws are put in place for the good of the communities which they govern. Laws are meant to reflect the wishes of the people and the general consensus is that as a result, these laws should be followed without question. In reality this is not always the case. There are often laws worth questioning whether it be for convenience, personal gain, or deep personal or moral reasons. A historical connection to the latter would be the protection of Jews from the Nazis during WWII and the Holocaust. Hitler created a document outlining a death penalty for any and all persons who were caught aiding Jews in any way, small or large. Despite this law being enforced with dire consequences for infraction, there were still
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,
In every society around the world, the law is affecting everyone since it shapes the behavior and sense of right and wrong for every citizen in society. Laws are meant to control a society’s behavior by outlining the accepted forms of conduct. The law is designed as a neutral aspect existent to solve society’s problems, a system specially designed to provide people with peace and order. The legal system runs more efficiently when people understand the laws they are intended to follow along with their legal rights and responsibilities.
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.
Socrates was indicted to a court of law on the charges of impiety, and the corruption of the youth of Athens. Three different men brought these charges upon Socrates. These men represented those that Socrates examined in his search to find out if the Delphic Mission was true. In that search he found that none of the men that promoted what they believed that they knew was true was in fact completely false. This made those men so angry that they band together and indicted Socrates on the charges of impiety and the corruption of the youth. Socrates then went to court and did what he could to refute the charges that were brought against him.
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.
The trial of Socrates and the trial of Jesus are related due to the fact that there is little real evidence in either trial. Socrates is accused by Meletus, Anytus, and Lycon for being an evil-doer who corrupts young people and does not believe in G-d (Plato, Apology 563). In spite of how serious these charges sound, Socrates explains that these men hold grudges against him and are only antagonizing him in order to seek revenge. Elaborating on this point, Socrates states, “Meletus…has a quarrel with me on behalf of the poets; Anytus, on behalf of the craftsmen and politicians; Lycon, on behalf of the rhetoricians…Hence has arisen the prejudice against me” (Plato, Apology 563). It is clear from this statement that Socrates has offended these people and that they do not view him in a positive light. It is also true that the witnesses selected t...
To understand evil we must first understand the concept that good and evil are term or words referring to what one given individuals believes to be the right and wrong thing to do. Good, many times symbolized as god or light, is usually associated with an action that many individual see as helping one or many people. This definitions is again very hard to define due to it bias and opinionated nature. But many and most people will agree that good, is what helps not only the common people become a stronger as a community but also become stronger as in...
Socrates questions Thrasymachus on why he adds the detail of the stronger to his definition of justice. Socrates than asks, if it is just for everyone to follow the laws that the ruler has made, if the ruler has made unjust laws. His argument is that people, even rulers make mistakes. This meaning that if a ruler makes mistakes on the law does that still make it just. It is a very conflicting argument to think about, if the rules are not just then why should they be followed but the rules were also put in place by someone who is supposed to know the difference between just and unjust and choose correctly. This relates to what Socrates says during his trial portrayed in the Apology. Socrates claims
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...
Law is one of the most important elements that transform humans from mere beasts into intelligent and special beings. Law tells us what is right and wrong and how we, humans, should act to achieve a peaceful society while enjoying individual freedoms. The key to a successful nation is a firm, strong, and fair code of high laws that provides equal and just freedom to all citizens of the country. A strong government is as important as a firm code of law as a government is a backbone of a country and of the laws. A government is a system that executes and determines its laws. As much as fair laws are important, a capable government that will not go corrupt and provide fair services holds a vital role in building and maintaining a strong country.