Socrates: The Corruption Of Athenian Democracy

Later in his argument, he asks the jury to excuse his ordinary language and rather to “consecrate your attention on whether what I say is just or not, for the excellence of a judge lies in this, as that of a speaker lies in telling the truth” (Plato 18a). By demonstrating that he does not speak with eloquence or enticement, Socrates proves to speak with honesty and plainness, which shows that he considers truth a virtue. Here he also reveals why it is so important for both a speaker and a judge to focus on the truth; in a court, both are under an oath: the speaker to be honest, and the judge to be just based on the speaker’s actions. By asking the jury to ignore the eloquence of words he uses and focus on the truthfulness of what he is saying, Socrates shows that he is confident that the facts and correctness of his argument will lead the jury to see his innocence and the slander of his accuser’s claim. However, the jury do not seem to adhere to Socrates’ plea and gives its verdict of guilty, and Meletus asks for the death penalty.

In Plato's Gorgias, it is apparent that Socrates has no desire to be a good statesman as it is defined in the eyes of the Athenians. His calculation is that Athenian rhetoricians place no reliance on facts or truth, nor are these their aim. Instead, they rely on the illusion of knowledge, and this morally weakens both themselves and their audiences. It is clear however, that if he wishes, Socrates is able to match most or all of the other statesmen in Athens, as is clearly indicated by his very eloquent speech which ends the dialogue. Additionally, under his own definition of a good statesman, it is evident that Socrates is more than qualified.

In the 4th and 5th century in Athens, Greece a new form of government arose. It was called a democracy. The word democracy derives from the words, demos meaning entire citizen body, and kratos which means rule. Compared to the other forms of government during this time it was very different. Instead of being ruled my emperors or the upper class, the democracy allowed all male citizens to have equal political rights, freedom of speech, and the opportunity to participate in their government.

The first concept that I noticed shared by Russell and Socrates was the concept that one had to remove themselves before serious philosophical contemplation could take place. In Russell 's case, he refers to the "Self" and the "Not-Self". With Socrates, as seen in the Apology, confronting his accuser about the corruption of youth, his accuser is silent because he had not given the matter any thought. Socrates awareness of his own ignorance frees him from what Russell would refer to as "Self". I mention this because it serves as a common theme even as both philosophers differ in their messages.

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.

What this suggests is that Socrates would be supporting the wrong-doing of his adversaries in following through with their commands. But Socrates argues that laws are just and one should never do wrong. No matter how much one thinks the act was just. He explained that he could not break the law, just because he believed the reason he was being punished was unjust. He was a man that lived his whole life following the Law of the Athenians.

This scene is set inside a mall after a shoplifter is escorted out for stealing clothes. Socrates sparks up a debate with a mall cop named Gregory. The dialog remains on the matter of law and punishable actions. Socrates: What makes a deed or action worth punishment by the law?

Socrates implication in Plato’s Apology that the jury was knowledgeable to an extent of Athenian writings expands upon the idea of a literate jury. In his questioning of Meletus, he attacks him on the grounds that he is accusing the jury of being “so unversed in letters as to not know” the works of Anaxagoras. This particular passage raises many questions, and it is possible that Socrates may have been making a subtle jab himself at the jury, as he refers the jury to a book rather than rely on their social memory, a technique expected of someone addressing an older audience . However, the particular works he was referring to were at this time no longer in the direct memory of the jury (Anaxagoras died in 428BC, 29 years prior to this case) and it was likely the reference was indeed to aid his audience in identifying the works

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).

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

Socrates was a greek philosopher who found himself in trouble with his fellow citizens and court for standing his grounds on his new found beliefs from his studies about philosophical virtue, justice, and truth. In “Apology” written by Plato, Socrates defended himself in trial, not with the goal of escaping the death sentence, but with the goal of doing the right thing and standing for his beliefs. With this mindset, Socrates had no intention of kissing up to the Athenians to save his life. Many will argue that Socrates’ speech was not very effective because he did not fight for his life, he just accepted the death sentence that he was punished with. In his speech he said, “But now it’s time to leave, time for me to die and for you to live.”

Socrates bases this view of justice on the worth of living a good life. “And is life worth living for us with that part of us corrupted by unjust actions” (47e) If we corrupt our soul with injustice, our life would not be worth living, therefore one must never commit an injustice. “When one has come to an agreement that is just with someone, one should fulfill it.”(49e) It is this agreement with the Laws that Socrates would be violating, if he were to

He uses the example of ruling a city, where a government would change the rules and laws to best suit them, and as the rules are followed by those who act justly, the just would be acting in the favour of the stronger. Socrates objects to this and claims that humans will make mistake, as that is part of being human, and may

He reminds Crito “no human being should do injustice in return, whatever he suffers from others”(Crito, 49c). Socrates argues even if the jury's decision was unjust, it is never permissible for him to do injustice in return and therefore he will not try to escape. In essence, even though Socrates is offered the opportunity to

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.