Comparing Plato's Euthyphro, And The Apology

The Apology and Phaedo by Plato are two different books describing what is like to be a philosopher per Socrates believes. These two books take place in two different scenarios in Socrates’ life, The Apology takes place in a court room where Socrates is to defend himself from false charges brought to him by Meletus who is acting as the prosecutor. Phaedo, on the other hand, takes place in a prison cell post judgment on the day of Socrates execution. Hence, The Apology and Phaedo appeared to display different philosophies: The Apology, Plato presented Socrates as wise for he knows that he knows nothing, hence he is seeking wisdom by questioning those who think they know more or something, just to find that they don’t know anything, therefore Socrates makes it his duty to make them look ignorant/stupid. Phaedo, Socrates focuses primarily on death and the immortality of the soul, hence he is seeking knowledge by devoting his final hours picking the minds of his friends to explain the role of a philosopher, which is preparing for death. Consequently, these two views are really the same, yet presented differently by Socrates, for in one he is defending his freedom and life using philosophy, hence he has only done what the Gods expected of him. From the other view, he resigned to his fate, for as a philosopher, he knows his soul will finally become liberated from the evils and limitations of the body to come to its divine state.

Plato’s Apology is the story of the trial of Socrates, the charges brought against him and his maintaining of his own innocence throughout the process. At the onset of the trial, Socrates appears to challenging the charges, which included corrupting the youth, challenging belief in the gods that were accepted and reveled by the State, and introducing a new religious focus, but also belittles his own significance and suggesting that he will not attempt to disprove that he participated in the actions maintained by the court. In essence, Socrates appears almost self-effacing, and his defense surprises even his accuser, Meletus. But by the end of the Apology, Socrates becomes almost a different person,

In the readings, “Plato’s Apology” translated by Benjamin Jowett and “Oedipus the King” translated by Robert Bagg we notice many similarities. Deeper analyzation of these texts deeper will allow the reader to foresee Socratic wisdom. Socratic wisdom is best defined as accepting ignorance, no matter how wise or knowledgeable you may be. We learn in the beginning of Oedipus the King that an oracle has told his biological father, that it is in his son’s fate to kill him, and marry his mother – the knowing of his fate leads to failure. If you believe that you know everything, your intellect can lead to your downfall.

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 year is 399 B.C.E the stage is Athens and these are the words that famed philosopher Socrates spoke as he stood in an Athenian court room accused of corrupting the youth of the city, of not believing in the gods and introducing new gods, and of making the weaker argument appear stronger. In Plato’s apology, these words

Both versions of The Apology show different viewpoints Socrates had. For example, in the beginning of Plato’s Apology, Socrates hopes that he can be acquitted but he doesn’t expect it to happen. However, in Xenophon’s Apology, Socrates doesn’t necessarily want to be acquitted. Before the trial, Hermogenes asks Socrates if he has practiced his defense and he replies by saying that his divine sign has prevented him from doing so. Socrates goes on to explain that he believes the gods have written this trial and his execution into his fate to spare him the frailties that come with old age. This belief also shows a difference in Socrates’ view of the gods between the two apologies. In Plato’s Apology, Socrates suggests that the gods are pure beings that would never commit injustice and frowns upon those

The philosopher’s views on religion were unorthodox to say the least. His actions seem to suggest atheism, as he is more interested in debating wisdom than pursuing favor with the gods. Socrates is not adverse to a religious conversation, though, as he stops on the steps of the courthouse to discuss the nature and meaning of piety with Euthyphro. Although he does not speak in favor of the gods, neither does he move to deny spirituality or divinity.

Philosophers are known to question, analyze and evaluate everything but do not always end with concrete conclusions. Plato’s Euthyphro and Apology, to no surprise, highlight one of such debate: the human characteristics of wisdom. Though Plato was one of the earliest philosophers, the topic of wisdom is still debated by modern philosophers today, contemplating questions such as “What are the classifications of ‘wisdom’?” According to Plato’s two dialogues, the characteristics of wisdom have a strong correlation with the characteristics of “being a good person”. This concept highlights the values of virtue and selflessness and at the same time juxtapose views on virtue while taking into account the different forms of rationality. In this paper, I will highlight how Plato uses his two dialogues to enforce his own opinion about the relationship between being wise and being a good person, and evaluate the inconsistencies within this claim.

In Plato’s The Republic and The Apology, the topic of justice is examined from multiple angles in an attempt to discover what justice is, as well as why living a just life is desirable. Plato, writing through Socrates, identifies in The Republic what he thought justice was through the creation of an ideal city and an ideal soul. Both the ideal city and the ideal soul have three components which, when all are acting harmoniously, create what Socrates considers to be justice. Before he outlines this city and soul, he listens to the arguments of three men who hold popular ideas of the period. These men act to legitimize Socrates’ arguments because he finds logical errors in all of their opinions. In The Apology, a different, more down-to-Earth, Socrates is presented who, through his self-defense in court, reveals a different, even contradictory, view of the justice presented in The Republic. In this paper, the full argument of justice from The Republic will be examined, as well as the possible inconsistencies between The Republic and The Apology.

I didn't have any questions on parts of the text that I found difficulty some much as I am curious other people's perspectives on a specific part of Socrates' defense in the apology. On page 28, section 25b, Socrates enters into a line of questioning with his accuser Meletus. However, this line of questioning seems to be somewhat different to the line of questioning we saw in the Euthyphro. In the Euthyphro, Socrates seemed to be trying to get to the truth, or maybe trying to show that Euthyphro knew less than he claimed to know. I the Apology, though, it looks like Socrates is simply trying to win an argument. He goes from a philosopher to a rhetorician. When questioning Meletus, he answers himself before Meletus even has a chance to answer.

Throughout The Apology, Socrates shows his true philosophical standpoint of not knowing anything, he provides his form of questioning to prove that no one actually has wisdom. Those who think they are wise, have subjective and human wisdom. Basically, they do not have any wisdom, like those Socrates refers to, the Sophists. While he refutes his charge of not acknowledging the gods, he proves this further by explaining that the Oracle simply used him as an example to show he views wisdom. He claims to not know anything and this is considered subjective, superhuman wisdom.

The most influential philosopher of the 5th century BCE is a man by the name of Socrates. His life and teachings are the foundation of Western Philosophy. Socrates was dedicated to reasoning and the development and investigation of the truth. Unpopular then, Socrates employed a strategy to pursue the truth by using dialectic. Socrates was one to question everything and anything less than the truth was received with more questions. Socrates never wrote anything down, and therefore any dialogues and teachings are dependent on his students Xenophon and Plato account. This gives rise to the Socratic Problem. What we do know, according to Plato’s Apology, is that Socrates’ divine mission is a complex one. Using two of Plato’s written accounts of

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 Apology is Plato's recollection and interpretation of the Trial of Socrates (399 BC). In this dialogue Socrates explains who he is and what kind of life he led. The Greek word "apologia" means "explanation" -- it is not to be confused with "apologizing" or "being sorry" for one's actions. The following is an outline of the 'argument' or logos that Socrates used in his defense. A hypertext treatment of this dialogue is also available.

The Apology Written By Plato, is a detailed account of the trial of Socrates, who was a great philosopher in Athens. Socrates was brought to trial based on charges of “corrupting the youth” and “not believing in the gods” (23d). The people of Athens believed Socrates was corrupting the youth because they simply did not understand his method of inquiry, which consisted of Socrates teaching them to question what they thought to be true. Socrates’ method of inquiry drove his listeners to question their beliefs and often brought them to a state of puzzlement, or a state Plato calls ‘aporia.’ There are many examples of the Socratic method present in The Meno, which is also written by Plato. The entirety of The Apology consists of Socrates