Distinction Between Plato And Socrates

Socrates was a Western Ancient Athenian Greek philosopher who lived from 469 BCE until his death in 399 BCE. He was a student to another philosopher, Sophists, Socrates was different from most Greek philosophers he wanted to get at the truth and find out how one can truly be ‘good’ and moral in life. “To Socrates the soul is identified with the mind; it is the seat of reason and capable of finding the ethical truths, which will restore meaning and value of life” (ADD IN-TEXT CITATION SEMINAR). We continue to use many of Socrates teachings today, such as, ‘The Socratic method’, which is known as asking a question and within these questions you lead it to the answer you wanted to hear, many uses this as a teaching technique and is shown to be highly effective. A great number of Athenians looked up to Socrates and considered him the wise man of Athens, he had many followers whom would ask questions and seek answers. As popularity and following of Socrates grew so did accusations. The charges laid on Socrates by the Athenians were unjust and therefore his death was highly wrong in the eyes of true democracy that Athens was apparently known for. In this paper, I will discuss how Socrates was wrongfully convicted for the corruption of the youth despite having many young followers, introducing new Gods while still being considered an Atheist, and the main reason he was seen as a threat to Athens was that he brought change to the city.

Kenneth C. Blanchard, Jr. “The Enemies of Socrates: Piety and Sophism in the Socratic Drama.” The Review of Politics. 62.3 (2003): 421-449. Print.

Socrates was a man who spent most of his time talking to people. He would ask them hypothetical questions, and make them think for themselves about the true answer they believed in, by serving as a guide for the conversation. Many people, including the accusers, believed that while Socrates did this, he was serving as a Sophist. A Sophist is a person who talks to people, and teaches them how to argue a point, whether the point is right or wrong. A Sophist would collect money for this lesson, and go on with their teachings (Xenophon 42). This accusation is inaccurate because Socrates did not collect any money for his conversations with people. Instead, Socrates was a very poor man, who happened to have rich friends. Talking to these people was a way for Socrates to try to spread his way of life to the Athenian's. He enjoyed conversing with people about ethical issues, and moral beliefs. In his argument, Socrates refutes Meletus' charge that he corrupts the young. One crucial point deals with the idea of Socrates as a paid teacher. This would imply that Socrates was actively seeking students and teaching "corrupting" ideas. This plays a part in the argument, by Meletus, that Socrates has deliberately corrupted the youth. Socrates says that, "the young men who follow me around of their own free will, those who have most leisure, the sons

But between the Sophists and Socrates there was a fundamental difference. The Sophists showed that equally good arguments could be advanced on either side of any issue; they were skeptics who doubted that there could be any certain or reliable knowledge. On the other hand, Socrates was committed to the pursuit of truth and considered it his mission to seek out certain knowledge. Unlike philosophers before them, Sophists claimed to be wise enough to teach whatever you might want to know as long as you were willing to pay them the required fees. Sophists traveled more than ordinary Greeks and they learned that there is a real variety of correct ways to do things depending upon ones perspective. They believed there was no universally appropriate way of doing anything. Therefore there can be no absolutes of any kind. Appearances are reality, at least the only reality any of us can know. They were extremely doubtful about the possibility of discovering anything that was really true. Instead, they taught their followers how to get along in the world, without certain knowledge. They taught their followers how to win disputes, how to speak well and convincingly how to succeed. Their underlying theory developed from two remarks of two of the leading Sophists. Protagoras, perhaps the greatest of the Sophists, said Main is the measure of all things and Gorgias, another great sophist, proclaimed, Nothing exists, and if it did, no one could know it, and if they

When Socrates discussed the idea that sophists would be the most likely teachers of virtue among the community, Anytus strongly declares that, while he has never met a sophist, he adamantly opposes them and their teachings. Even though sophists were considered the “experts” on virtue at the time and taught countless young men and nobles, Anytus believes that they are essentially scamming the youth and teaching false ideas for a profit. Though Anytus himself is not an expert himself on the topic of virtue, he believes that his opinion is correct and that sophists are essentially a negative influence on their society. However, he does put his faith in other experts of the community and those with “beneficial knowledge.” This is not much different

Socrates put one’s quest for wisdom and the instruction of others above everything else in life. A simple man both in the way he talked and the wealth he owned, he believed that simplicity in whatever one did was the best way of acquiring knowledge and passing it unto others. He is famous for saying that “the unexplained life is not worth living.” He endeavored therefore to break down the arguments of those who talked with a flowery language and boasted of being experts in given subjects (Rhees 30). His aim was to show that the person making a claim on wisdom and knowledge was in fact a confused one whose clarity about a given subject was far from what they claimed. Socrates, in all his simplicity never advanced any theories of his own

Plato encouraged in his writings that the view that sophists were concerned with was “the manipulative aspects of how humans acquire knowledge.” (Lecture) Sophists believed that only provisional or probable knowledge was available to humans but both Plato and Isocrates did not agree with a lot of what the Sophists had to say. They both believed in wisdom and having a connection with rhetoric but vary in defining wisdom in itself. Wisdom for Socrates and Plato is having an understanding of speech, knowledge of truth and being able to question the speaker in order to seek and reveal truth. Isocrates defined wisdom as having a sense of integrity and character along with the ambition and ability to speak well with others.

Socrates is the farthest thing you can get from being a sophist; he neither recruited his students nor wanted payment for his knowledge. Socrates believed that knowledge was to be shared and that everyone who wanted his knowledge should have it, even if they did not have money.

Additionally, this work includes “The Allegory of the Cave” in which Socrates discusses that facing truth can be painful but proves far better than entertaining false notions. The entire work defines and discusses Socrates’ method of being a “gadfly” and questioning and pushing others to examine themselves and find wisdom. The Republic provides great insight to the Socratic method and how effective it is when put into

I am now going to define some terms that pertain to the argument between Thrasymachus and Socrates. The Sophists were a presocratic group that earned a living by teaching young Greek men lessons in excellence and to speak intelligently and persuasively. Sophists, like Thrasymachus, believed in subjective truth. Subjective truths are truths that in some way depend on us. How we think or feel on a matter is a

Plato was an Ancient Greek philosopher who lived between 428-432 B.C. He wrote mainly in dialogues, to stay true to how Socrates communicated philosophy. Plato displayed what is considered Socrates’ philosophy throughout the dialogue The Apology. In The Republic, Socrates is mainly used as a mouthpiece to communicate Plato’s philosophy. Socrates follows a philosophy best explained as “I do not know”, whereas Plato tries to find the ultimate solution to philosophical problems. In this essay, I will argue how Socrates has the best philosophical approach compared to that of Plato.

     Socrates was wise in respect to the fact that he never accepted a “truth” that was told to him, without getting incontestable evidence to back it up. He made the realization that people believed in things without even knowing where their ideas came from. In ancient Athens, citizens believed in many gods and myths associated with them.

Socrates is accused of being a sophist. A sophist is someone who teaches people to be cleaver speakers, sophist’s charge money. Socrates claims that he is not wise enough to be a sophist, he merely speaks out about his thoughts and beliefs and if the youth of Athens listen and are intrigued, it is not his fault. In fact, Socrates mocks sophists saying that they almost brain wash young men, “to leave the company of their fellow citizens, with any of whom they can associate for nothing, attach themselves to him, pay money for the privilege, and be grateful into the bargain" (19e-20a) Socrates thinks that it is intriguing that

A sophist would speak, a sophist would teach, a sophist would use language and words to manipulate a situation to fit his point. A sophist would engulf you in his words and make the impossible seem possible. A sophist would share his views on the world, life, and the future with you; he would make you see the light of day even if it was night. A sophist was a wise man who had the gift of gab, the ability to influence, the ability to sway, the ability to teach the young how to be better speakers. All of the qualities that Socrates claimed he did not possess. Socrates was depicted as a clever man, yet one who never taught, never persuaded, never tried to make his thoughts shared by others. He was not a sophist, not a teacher, not a "wise man". "A wise man knows that he knows nothing". Socrates always spoke of the fact that he was not a sophist because he was only out for the truth. He never wanted you to believe his words just because they came out of his mouth, he only asked the questions that were necessary to draw out the map to the truth buried down below the layers of rhetoric.

In ancient Greece, being a philosopher carried various implications, several of which were unfavorable. In a time when natural philosophers were accused for being non-believers in the traditional deities and sophists were defamed for selling their intellectual services for money, Socrates fit in neither category. Nonetheless, the moment Socrates decided to become an enquirer, or a philosopher of human nature, he was chastised. His enemies, men he had either insulted or embarrassed, sought vengeance and in their process to do so, tried to define him. Accused of being an atheist and a corruptor of the youth, Socrates was viewed harshly by the society he lived in, but, despite this, his true nature revealed itself through his words and Plato’s dialogues. His prosecutors aimed to vilify his name and profession, and ultimately sentence him to death, a goal they eventually completed, but the accusations were not definitive of who he was. Socrates was a philosopher, first and foremost, attempting to find the reasons for various phenomenon, but he was also a self-professed prophet, indirectly given a prophecy from the gods, determined to use dialectic to bring about self-awareness in his fellow citizens. His ideologies, thus, became the building blocks for the philosophers of the generations succeeding him.