Philosophy - Admission of Ignorance

The fight to do what is right is not an easy path to traverse, but is one which demands a noble and enduring character. Defending principles of justice with logic and reason in the face of political opposition, is a difficult task to take, but the elusive Socrates boldly undertook this endeavor. In Plato’s Apology, he recalls the daring defence of the principles of truth that Socrates took against all odds. Plato’s recollections, much like the trial of Socrates at the time, has sparked numerous debates amongst scholars who seek to understand the events of the trial more deeply. One such debate has centered on what Socrates meant when he said his speech was nothing more than words spoken at random. Brumbaugh and Oldfather, in their scholarly analysis, contend that Socrates’s speech is riddled with fine polish and organization suggesting that his speech was not random. As will be discussed, there are several examples of organization in Socrates’s speech such as when he provides his jurors with an outline of his speech. Additionally, masterfully woven throughout his defence, Socrates employed many diverse modes of argumentation in a logical and consistent manner lending credence to the notion that he planned his speech beforehand. This skillful use of these modes in Socrates’s argument, all vindicate an intentional design and premeditation. Despite Socrates’s humble assertions

The Apology is one of the many written dialogues written by Plato that discuss how Socrates was arrested and charged with corrupting the youth of Athens; teaching

against him in the Court of Law of Athens, Greece. The nature of the accusation that has

In these, he tested to see how wise so-called wise men were and each and every time he claimed that these men were not wise at all. Socrates went and tested all sorts of men from poets, politicians, and artisans. He claimed that all were inferior to him because they claimed to know much when they knew not much at all. And that, although he did not know all the tings these men knew, he was still wiser. He went so far as to tell these men what he thought, and even stated all these feelings in the court. This, no doubt, led to his general hatred more than any other act. But I wonder, had anyone ever questioned Socrates? And on what basis did he judge wisdom? Socrates claimed that a man who thought themselves the wisest were the least, but that is exactly what he was, a man who thought himself the wisest. Maybe he was the type of person to dislike any man who’s intellect challenged his own. “Is there not here conceit of knowledge, which is a disgraceful sort of ignorance? And this is the point in which, as I think, I am superior to men in general.”

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

Socrates, knowing that he needed ethos in any statement that the jury themselves had not witnessed, used the credibility of other well-respected individuals within the Athenian community. While describing what he does that makes so may dislike him, Socrates told the jury that Chairephon, a man who was a friend of most people in the jury, asked the oracle of a god if there was anyone wiser that Socrates. The answer was that no one on earth was wiser than him, so Socrates set out to find someone wiser than himself. Because Chairephon was dead he could not be a witness, but Socrates stated that Chairephon’s brother would testify to this story, thus validating

Socrates was a great philosopher of the Greek world. He was quite an atypical and distinctive person. Being different from all the other philosophers of the land, Socrates was teaching his students ideas totally out of the ordinary from what the society believed was right. As a result, he displeased many people so much that they decided to get rid of him. Socrates was put to trial, accused of spoiling the youth of Athens, tried and sentenced to death. His personal defense is described in works two of his students: Xenophon and Plato. Both of them wrote papers called Apology, which is the Greek word for “defense”. In this essay I used Apology by Plato as the main resource, since it contents a more full account of the trial of Socrates and

The apology is an account of the speech that Socrates makes during his trial. In Socrates’ trial, he is being accused of not recognizing the same gods that the others in Athens recognize (specifically that those in authority). Instead, Socrates is charged with inventing new gods, and in doing so is corrupting the youth of Athens to whom, Socrates frequently preaches to about his theology. Socrates’ speech, however, is not an apology, as the name may suggest but rather an explanation of his beliefs. During his trial speech, Socrates makes frequent reference to his beliefs explaining that his behavior stems from a prophecy by the oracle at Delphi, which claims that he was the wisest of all men. Although Socrates is honest and direct about these beliefs, this did not sit well with many of the trial members who were evaluating him. Despite the fact that Socrates made frequent references to the fact that it is destined for him to be the wisest of all men, he also recognizes that he does in fact lack in knowledge when it comes to world affairs. To which, Socrates states only adds to his wisdom as he is aware of the fact that he does not know everything and that realization alone makes him wiser than most other men.

Socrates thinks that it requires wisdom to know the difference between the knowledge and an opinion. And what he means by that is knowledge is based on reasoned ideas beliefs, and can be proved and confirmed by rational arguments, where’s other opinion is not proved. For Socrates, the reason is the bigger way to show the truth. Socrates explained that role model is how to act well for example an equivalent way, knowledge is in an unqualified manner, according to Socrates statement beauty and wealth could benefit us sometimes if we used correctly, however, also harm to us if we did not use it the right way. This is means with knowledge we know how to act well. Socrates explained of wisdom and knowledge, as expressed by Plato in The Apology (StevenM. Cahn 29p-30), is sometimes interpreted as an example of a humility theory of wisdom Socrates and his friend Chaerephon visit the oracle at Delphi. As the story goes Chaerephon asks the oracle

One of the arguments that Socrates first shows throughout the Apology is that he is being guided by the work of his Gods. He says that he is not scared to be hated because he knows that many people in Athens only dislike

In the Apology, due to Socrates activities against the politicians, poets, and craftsmen resulted in being prosecuted. That activity was the quest to find an individual who is wiser than himself to understand what the Delphic Oracle told Socrates. This led to Socrates questioning and insulting their wisdom. Meletus, who represents the poets, is the main accuser of Socrates and convicts him for “investigating the things beneath the earth and in the heavens and making the weaker argument stronger and teaching others these same things” (19b-c). The point I will try to express in this exegesis is to show Socrates defense against

Socrates tells a story in an attempt to explain this. It starts with a man named Chaerephon, a well respected citizen of Athens, who had died recently. Chaerephon goes to the Oracle at Delphi and "he asked if there was anyone wiser than" Socrates. (Apology, Plato, Philosophic Classics, page 23) The Oracle, of course, says that there is no man wiser than Socrates. When Socrates heard of what the Oracle said, he begins to wonder what riddle is hidden in those words. He knows that he is not a wise man, so he knows that he cannot be the wisest of men. Not knowing what then Oracle truly meant, he goes out to investigate this. He went to a man who was reputed to be very wise. He thought that he would find a man who is wiser than himself, and thus point out to the Oracle its mistake. Socrates finds that this man actually knows nothing that is worth knowing. When Socrates tries to point this out to the man, he and the bystanders become angry. Socrates says that he is wiser than this man because, while they both know nothing, Socrates realizes this. The other man thinks he knows things that he does not, while Socrates knows that he knows nothing. Socrates claims that he has done this with many men, and that each time, he came to the same result: the man knows nothing and thinks he knows everything, and Socrates has made the man angry. In continuing to do this, Socrates made many men angry, and that anger turned into

Plato’s “The Apology” takes places in Athens in 399 BC. Socrates, a natural philosopher, is put on trial and accused of failing to recognize the god of Athens, creating new deities, and corrupting the minds of the city youth. The Athenians, Anytus, Meletus, and Lycon fear that Socrates’ teachings lack respect for the legal customs and religious beliefs established in the city and could create a damaging effect on Athens’ community (Dan I.(n.d.). In this piece, Plato writes an account of Socrates’ speech attempting to defend himself. In this account, Socrates states that “An unexamined life is not worth living.” (Plato, n.d.). When saying this, Socrates claims that a person must examine themselves and determine the purpose of life, in order

The accusers, Meletos, Anytos, and Lycon, are all young and trying to make a name for themselves. They begin by telling everyone not to be deceived and to take caution because Socrates is a “clever speaker”. According to Socrates, the difference between him and his accusers is that he speaks the truth. He is on trial for two items, which include, corrupting the youth and impiety. Socrates tells everyone that he has no experience with the court and he will speak the way he is used to by being honest and direct. Socrates explains that his behavior is from the oracle of Apollo at Delphi.      

Undoubtedly, the Apology of Socrates is one of the most significant work among all the classics. It is an account of the speech of Socrates makes at the trial in defence for the accusations of not recognizing Gods recognised by the Greek and corrupting the adolescents of Athens. Throughout the speech, Socrates speaks in a very plain manner to attempt to defend himself and his conduct. Though Socrates was sentenced to death as even his eloquent argument could not persuade all the juries, his final speech provides tremendous philosophical insights that help us to examine ourselves. At such, I believe the Apology of Socrates teaches us quite a few important ideas, that include the necessity for one to be humble withstanding one knows a lot