The version of Socrates presented in both The Apology, Crito, and The Republic could very well be two different versions of Socrates as presented by Plato. However, both versions of Socrates have one thing in common: they both value the importance of philosophy and they both defend philosophy as something that is important to humanity. The Apology is Socrates defending not only himself, but also philosophy as an area of study that could be useful to the city of Athens. Socrates is trying to defend himself and his study and he tries to distance himself from the sophists in that they charge for money. (20c) Socrates mentions that it was human wisdom and nothing more that has allowed himself to know what he knows. (20d) Socrates even mentions …show more content…
In the beginning of book VI, Socrates makes a point by saying that philosophers have always been able to see things as they are versus people who see things as they vary and so he asks, who should rule? (484b) Socrates then launches into how philosophers are the ones who love the truth and want nothing and will not stand for anything, but the truth. (485c) It is because of that they should rule and so Socrates is asking for a philosopher-king who will seek nothing but the truth through knowledge and wisdom. This is the most important and boldest claim Plato makes in the defense of philosophy. Comparing Socrates words in the Republic for the philosopher to rule to the words of the Apology where philosophy is viewed as something that is punishable by death, this is where the defense or importance of philosophy is realized. For if the philosophers were the ones to rule, nobody would question whether or not what they were doing was right or wrong because the philosopher-kings make the rules through wisdom and knowledge. Plato wants to paint a portrait of the philosopher as not only something the city should want to have, but also as someone who would be fit to rule above all others. This contrasts, again, to the points made by the jurors to Socrates in the Apology for they saw Socrates as someone who brings the city
With the Apology, and the Crito, Socrates comes to delve into his many teachings and finds himself put to death with the words of wisdom that have been passed down generation after generation. Socrates for many in this present day is a man of many words and great teachings, but anyone but Socrates thought differently, in Athens people thought of him as an annoyance rather than an integral part of society. As Socrates stood in front of the counsel of judges, he stood for what he thought was right and never changed opinion of himself or of his words. That’s why Socrates is still talked about in classrooms everywhere today.
The Story of Crito by Plato is essentially a dialogue conversation between Crito and Socrates. Socrates is awaiting execution at the hands of the state. Crito has an elaborate plan in place to free Socrates from execution. Crito has paid the prison guard off so that Socrates can escape and has other loyalist to Socrates ready to help him escape and live his life in exile. Socrates is nearly 70 years old at the time and somewhat feels like his life is essentially already over.
He begins by arguing that the opinion of the majority shouldn’t matter; that only the opinions of experts should be considered. He uses an example of a person in training; that such a person should not listen to the general public, but to his trainer for they are the expert in that subject. Listening to other opinions could harm our body. Using this analogy, he extends it to what is the right way to act; implying that listening to the majority instead of experts, could be harmful to the soul. Socrates says the most important thing is not living, but living a good life, so that listening to a majority is not as important if it means giving up something that is important for living a good life.
In Apology, Socrates faces possible execution as he stands trial in front of his fellow Athenian men. This jury of men must decide whether Socrates has acted impiously against the gods and if he has corrupted the youth of Athens. Socrates claims in his defense that he wants to live a private life, away from public affairs and teachings in Athens. He instead wants to focus on self-examination and learning truths from those in Athens through inquiry. Socrates argues that "a [man] who really fights for justice must lead a private, not a public, life if [he] is to survive for even a short time" (32a).
In this play the Socrates here doesn't sound like the Socrates from the Apology or the real life Socrates. The real Socrates doesn't actually teach per say, he teaches in a way that makes you yourself use your brain. He makes you question everything and understand things based on your own perception. The writer of this play clearly felt as if Socrates was a major problem in his society for allowing people to actually try to think outside of the box and ask questions. He most likely enjoyed the fact that everyone were robots and all thought alike and believed in the same thing because it brought no need to bring out discussion.
I think that it is a little ironic that Socrates, the man who was all about intellect, had an intellectual error. Socrates was a man who focused on the truth, and unfortunately he failed to realize that the truth might not be what everyone else was focused on. In relation to what I stated earlier here is some in text evidence; Socrates said “to disregard the manner of my speech- it doesn't matter how it compares- and to consider and concentrate your attention upon this one question, whether my claims are
Apology: Socrates Assignment In Apology, Socrates intent was not to apologize for his ideas and beliefs to the people of Athens, his purpose was to defend his practices by confronting his accusers, which put him on trial. Socrates charges consisted of inventing new deities, not recognizing the states Gods, and corrupting Athens youth minds. Socrates began his trial by speaking of his old accusers and the famous book The Cloud, acknowledging that people disagreed with him in his teachings. He then continued by turning from his old accusers to the current ones, more specifically Meletus.
In this second quote, Socrates is saying that he possesses a certain wisdom given to him by the god to spread his philosophy and belief in the city of Athens. Here is a third piece of evidence to support my point from “ The Apology”. “Afterwards I went to talk to one person after another, sensing how odious I had become to them. I was sad and fearful; but I felt it was necessary to make the god’s work my highest priority.” (Lines 56-58)
Philosophy Thesis: In Crito, Socrates justifies the idea of the social contract to Crito, his strongest advice being that one should not return injustice to anyone, despite their outgoing treatments on others or on yourself, however, Socrates is hypocritical in saying that one should live freely and rightly so, but he himself chooses to die because it is just. We are introduced into the story by the disputive dialogue between Socrates and Crito regarding Socrates' escape and the opportunity for himself to be freed. Crito, a wealthy and great friend of Socrates, believes that Socrates should escape prison, and return to his home due to the misconceptions of higher authority that were proposed on Socrates based on his actions
Introduction The Apology was written by Plato, and relates Socrates’ defense at his trial on charges of corrupting the youth and impiety. Socrates argues that he is innocent of both charges. Plato reports the contents of three speeches delivered by Socrates in his own protection in court which has been arranged over him by the Athenian democrats and has terminated in the death sentence to the great philosopher. The word "apology" in a literal translation means "justification". Plato's purpose when writing "Apology" was to acquit posthumously Socrates from false accusation.
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
In the reading of “Plato Apology”, Socrates’ vindicates what he values and beliefs to a jury to prove his innocence. Indeed, Miletus a poet, Anytus a craftsmen and Lycon a politician brought an oral charges against Socrates’ attested him of impiety and corrupting youth, required him to appear before the King Archon the legal
Making enemies and becoming the topic of conversation, the Athenians began to view Socrates as a threat to their beliefs and way of life and sought to end it. In order to end this, Socrates was accused of blasphemy (Mod1SlideC7). Socrates’s accusers took him to court and after Socrates did not play their game by asking to be sent into exile, and in the end, he was sentenced to death. After reading the textbook and Plato’s writing influenced by Socrates, I realized that in the period of his life Socrates was indeed truly a threat to the Athens society, because he looked for answers that no one else bothered to find which challenged their culture.
The importance of “The Apology” and Socrates is that he served as a symbol towards the fundamental question of the “why” in life. Socrates argues that in a society like Athens where the ability to ask these types of questions are denied, the overall happiness of its citizens will eventually perish. The reason being that material objects can only satisfy the soul for so long. This is why Socrates felt that it was his duty to remind the leaders of Athens of the importance of their humility. He chose to seek wisdom within himself
Knowledge is integrated within philosophy, as it is based on facts and truthfulness. Theorists use these distinctions as a means to determine the ethics of life. Additionally, Socrates argues that philosophers are wise; they have lived a life full of complexities, and have gained the knowledge to rule a just city effectively. He asserts his view using the analogy of the cave.