Miletus Vs Socrates

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

Early in the Apology, Socrates argues that the charges of Meletus are not only false, but have led to the rise of prejudice against him, and he demonstrates this through what he considers his own reflection on the charges against him. Socrates suggests the indictment against him should read: “Socrates is guilty of engaging in inquiries into things beneath the earth and in the heaven, of making the weaker argument appear the stronger, and of teaching others the same things”. Socrates suggests that the breadth of the indictment against him could encompass the premises supported by many men, and that it is only through the prejudice against him, the belief in his wisdom purported by some, and the sense that Socrates has influenced men that has resulted in the charges, not through the true belief that Socrates has taken actions against the State.

In this reading Plato tells the story of Socrates and his trial which ultimately lead to his death sentence. Socrates was a 70 year old man at peace with his own mortality yet willing to face his accusers with an almost definite possibility of death to maintain his own integrity and beliefs and morality. He fully understood from the beginning of his trial what the sentence handed down would be yet on a level of honor and courage not seen in abundance in modern society he maintained his stance and delivered a compelling and convincing argument. He openly stated that he knew his actions had offended Meletus and

The charges against Socrates were brought upon him by a man names Meletus. Meletus was a young man that Socrates did not know very well. These charges brought on by Meletus caused the indictment of Socrates. One of the charges in the affidavit written by Meletus against Socrates is that he is "corrupting the youth." Another charge that is brought upon Socrates is that of he is making up new Gods and disregarding the old Gods the Athenians believe in. These were the charges brought on Socrates.

The Apology by Plato delves deep into the concept of wisdom and self-examination. Socrates declares that “the unexamined life is not worth living”. Putting this phrase into context, Socrates has been falsely accused by Meletus of corrupting the youth of Athens and believing in artificial gods that were not the same as the gods of Athens. Meletus represents the hypocrisy of the world, he, who is not guiltless in the face of accusation, has falsely accused Socrates of social wrongdoing. These accusations stem from Meletus’ steadfast insecurity of himself. Socrates exposes Meletus’ insecurity that he may be morally corrupt himself. These accusations fulfill that insecurity, that in falsely accusing Socrates of moral corruption, he is proving

The conclusion from these premises is that Meletus is contradicting himself, and Socrates is innocent.

Socrates implies that the true nature of this charge was, in fact, vengeance carried out on the part of the power-holders of the Athenian society; the politicians, the poets, the manual artisans.  Socrates, unwillingly made fools out of these people by exposing their speeches as mere rhetoric than actual wisdom and knowledge.  These men who were seen as the wisest and the most enlightened, but in fact, by believing that they are most knowledgeble is what keeps them from real wisdom.  Socrates is also being charged with attacking the Athenian society by corrupting its citizens, mainly the youth.  He defends himself by claiming that either Meletus beleives that Socrates does not corrupt the youth or he does corrupt them but involuntarily.  Socrates bring to light that "if I corrupt them voluntarily, the law does not call upon you to procecute me for an error which is involuntary, but to take me aside privately and reprove and educate me" (33).  Socrates goes on further to say

Socrates says that the young men follow me, but not on my account they try to imitate what I say, which causes their fathers to be angry with me. Socrates says I have been accused of corrupting the youth, but I say Meletus is guilty of such things. For it is Meletus who does not believe in the gods of the city and corrupting the youth, Socrates and Meletus start to argue about the rights and wrongs of the law. Socrates proves his point by saying that Meletus contradicts himself, for he say that Socrates doesn’t believe in gods but Socrates I do believe in the gods.

Niccolò Machiavelli, a Florentine philosopher and political aficionado from the 16th century and Socrates, a classical Athenian savant who lived during the 5th century B.C., are both judged as being forefathers to modern western political science and thought. The two great men both came from erratic epochs within their respective nations of Italy and Greece: wars, transitions of power, and domestic conflicts left their countries void of sustainable leadership and in desperate need of a brighter future. But despite being from equally hopeless times, their theories on how their societies (and ultimately, future ones) should function in order to prosper, are divergent. In this essay, I will argue that Socrates would

So to sum up the trial, the charges against him were officially two, corrupting the youth and impiety. The two charges were, of course, linked, and, in the relevant senses, he was, we must admit, guilty of at least one of them. For his effect on the lives of the young men who followed him was indeed disrupting, and even corrupting, of the social order. What his followers learned from him above all else, is to do two things. They learned to scrutinize, and they learned to be skeptical. It was not that they mindlessly adopted a motto like "trust no one over 30," or that they became, like many of today 's young people, contrary simply for the sake of being contrary. Rather, they learned not to take on authority or on faith what others told them about virtue, justice, or piety; they were seeking, as was Socrates himself, the truth of the matter and the reasons for taking it to be the truth of the matter. And as we all know, the relentless pursuit of the truth produces enemies. A Socrates may in the long run serve mankind, but in the short run he aggravates virtually everyone around him.

After reading “The Apology,” I decided to respond about how Socrates used the Socratic Method during his trial. Socrates, using this method, crafted a personal defense against the allegations laid upon him and, at the same time, Socrates led Miletus to trap himself as a part of that defense. I believe that Socrates’ decision to defend himself in this manner brings up some important considerations. First, Socrates using the Socratic Method as an integral part of his defense not only unraveled most of Miletus’ support, but Socrates was able to showcase his wisdom to the people of the court to show them what kind of person Socrates was when he acted as he usual did. Secondly, Socrates, through his attack on Miletus showed the people of the court the potential threat that Socrates could have been this entire time had that been his focus. Both of these considerations are possible only because Socrates’ used his method of questioning to craft a defense for himself.

“Let us then take up the case from its beginning. What is the accusation from which arose the slander in which Meletus trusted when he wrote out the charge against me”(Steven M.Cahn 28p) Meletus is the chief was heater anger julase accuser of Socrates trying to get soctase exceeded , responsible for bringing him to trialkj. Meletus and by all accounts, he seems to have been a rather insignificant figure. Socrates' cross-examination of him in The Apology puts Meletus to shame.

In the Apology, Socrates examines the charges brought against him by Meletus and tries to prove that they are false. The first charge brought against him is that

Socrates does not throw himself on the mercy of the court. Many would bring in their children to win pity. However, he does mention that he has three young children and he tells the jury about their responsibility to ignore the appeals to pity and judge the truth. Despite Socrates' speech, the jury finds him guilty as charged. Meletos proposes death as punishment. Instead, Socrates proposes retirement in a home for benefactors of the state. He examines possible penalties: death, imprisonment, a fine, or exile. The jury sentences him to death. Socrates remarks that his internal, guiding voice, which at times would warn him to refrain from certain actions, had not once interrupted his actions in his defense. If Socrates finds that they believe themselves to be wiser than they really are, he points out their mistake, thus educates them and himself.

During Socrates’ defense, he uses the elenchus to argue against Meletus’ charges. In the beginning of The Apology, Socrates asks Meletus if it is better to associate with wicked people or virtuous people (The Apology 25c). Meletus says that it is worse to associate with wicked people, than virtuous people. Meletus reasoning was that wicked people would cause harm and misfortune to their associates. Socrates thinks Meletus’ answer in uncontroversial (The Apology 25c). Socrates argues that because associating with wicked people is harmful, he would not intentionally corrupt the Athenian youth (The Apology 25e-26a). Since Socrates would not intentionally corrupt the youth, he argues that the charge of him doing so is false.