Allegory And Virtue In Voltaire's 'The Apology'

Socrates responds to this and admits that his exuberance is invaluable if it is used in support of what is right, but if used in support of what is wrong it leads to an even greater evil. He showed

Socrates believes that one's focus should be on what is morally right and wrong, which should be independent of what society thinks. Socrates articulates that moral right and wrong depends on our own intuition on whether we believe that our actions is inflicting evil on others. Furthermore if he escapes prison he has inflicted evil on his government because of his obligation to keep the laws of the government. Socrates continues to say that like his parents, the government deserves his obedience. I agree with Socrates that it all boils down to our morality and our own reason to what constitutes to civil disobedience.

Examining one’s life can bring many joys. There are many things that give people the idea that their lives are meaningful. These ideas could be the pursuit of pleasure and happiness, entertainment, sports, power and money, possessions and security, being famous and success, meeting other people, knowledge and every other thing that can give the smallest amount of happiness to the person. In the apology Plato describes Socrates’ venture to question people would were wise and content with their wisdom, but when they asked a series of questions to test their wisdom they were revealed not to be wise and were now upset. The flaw in that was that these people did not examine what had happened to them and did not learn from it.

Since the day of the judgment between Athens and Socrates in 399 year B.C. many historians, philosophers, and students wonder to know whether Socrates was Guilty. Philosopher was accused in corrupting the youth, not believing in the recognized gods and introducing new divinities and in the rejection of civic life in democratic society. It is very difficult to answer on this question, may be even impossible. In my opinion, there are three types of people: 1.

This could mean that Socrates had understood, or at least on the way to understanding what is the good and how to obtain it. This interpretation also explain Socrates´s behavior, as recounted by Alcibiades. Socrates spend most of his time either thinking(220D), or talking and philosophizing with others(221D, 222E).He seem to show extreme calmness and unrivaled self control( 221B). He does not desire physical beauty, money,power, or anything else that Alcibiades might be interested in(216E), and seem to only be concerned about giving speeches and

In “The Apology,” Socrates talks of his journey to find and discern what wisdom really is. Socrates had an unconventional idea of what wisdom was, compared to today’s definition of wisdom. Socrates also had different views of knowledge than what society believes today. Throughout his journey in “The Apology,” Socrates comes to the conclusion that wisdom is realizing that one knows nothing.

I think that there is a fallacy of irrelevance. In the book, Socrates sets out to defend the idea that it is always in one’s best interest to be just and to act justly and he suggests that the just person as one who has a balanced soul will lead one to act justly or why mental health amounts to justice. I feel that justice includes actions in relation to others, it includes considerations of other people’s good, and includes strong motivations not to act unjustly. I believe that Socrates’ defense of justice does not include constraining reasons to think that a person with a balanced soul will refrain from acts that are commonly thought to be unjust like theft, murder, and adultery.

Socrates is quoted as stating, “An unexamined life is a life not worth living” (38 a). Socrates was a founding figure of western philosophy, and a stable for many ideas. He lived in Athens, Greece teaching his students, like Plato, questioning politics, ethical choices, and many other things in Greek society. In the Trial and death of Socrates: Four Dialogues by Plato, it explores the abstract questioning Socrates had towards many of the normal social properties, which led to his trial, resulting in his death. The most important aspects discussed in the dialogues is the questioning of what is pious and impious, what it means to be wise, and good life.

In this paper I will examine why Socrates did not attempt to appease the jury in his Apology. Socrates is put on trial for corrupting the youth and believing in gods other than the gods of the city. I believe he chose not to appease the jury for three reasons: he is a man of pride, he does not fear death and additionally finds it shameful to fear death. Socrates is a man of pride.

Socrates was put on trial for his intentions that were good. Society thought them out to be bad, but all socrates was trying to do was to improve society as whole. To improve society socrates would question citizens of Athens and make them think about their reality. During Socrates trial they accused him of corrupting the youth. Socrates would never willingly corrupt the youth because he saw the youth as the future.

His goal was to make the court understand his beliefs prove which type of knowledge is worth knowing. When talking about the wise man he examined, Socrates said, “Neither of us actually knows what Beauty and Goodness are, but he thinks he knows, even though he doesn’t; whereas I neither know nor think I know.” This shows that Socrates proved he was more wise than the titled wise man because instead of faking the knowledge, that wasn’t too important, he accepted that he did not know which would result in him then seeking for

Socrates and Voltaire shared several beliefs and ideas about philosophy and the pursuit of knowledge. Although they lived over 2000 years apart, had they been able to sit down and discuss ideas together they certainly would have agreed on many things. While we were given much more reading material on Socrates than Voltaire, I will attempt to share my interpretations of the material we were given. Socrates had a strong belief that virtue is what man should strive for in life, and should be held above all things, including life. By virtue Socrates was referring to righteousness, truth, knowledge and all things related to reason and logic.

In order to prove where evil comes from Socrates wanted to make himself more knowledgeable. Good and evil are balanced, without good you wouldn’t be able to recognize evil. What Socrates was doing was not human evil that came from human ignorance, what he was attempting to do was to understand the meaning of the unexamined life. There was a big problem of evil and that was it was apart of the unexamined life and that no one really understands where it comes from. The big question to ask yourself people of the jury is, “If God is all good and powerful, then where does evil come from.

Philosophical thinking uses three acts of the mind: understanding, judgement, and reason. In order to have a sound argument all of the concepts must be applied. Socrates didn’t want to please the people by saying or doing what they wanted him to say or do. Socrates thought it was not important to seek wealth or fame; he was concerned with truth and virtue. He wanted to create an impact on humanity by relying on the truth and shining a light in people’s lives, even if they put him on trial.

The two philosophers believed strongly in the concept of eudaimonia, which is basic human well-being and goodness (Mastin, 2008). Much of Socrates’ ethics was built around this concept, which led to his ethical code becoming basically objective. Socrates’ ethics were based on something of a knowledge/ignorance dichotomy. He believed that people act immorally but they do not act this way intentionally. Like all animals, Socrates believed that we act in and seek out what is in our best interests.