Plato 's Ion, Socrates, And Socrates

FUTTER, DYLAN. “Socrates Human Wisdom.” Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review 52.1 (2013): 61-79. Humanities International Complete. Print.

Through several dialogues Plato gives readers accounts of Socrates’ interactions with other Athenians. While some may think of him as a teacher of sorts, Socrates is adamant in rejecting any such claim (Plato, Apology 33a-b). He insists that he is not a teacher because he is not transferring any knowledge from himself to others, but rather assisting those he interacts with in reaching the truth. This assistance is the reason Socrates walks around Athens, engaging in conversation with anyone that he can convince to converse with him. An assertion he makes at his trial in Plato’s Apology is at the center of what drives Socrates in his abnormal ways, “the unexamined life is not worth living for a human being” (38a). Socrates, through aporia, looks to lead an examined life to perfect his soul and live as the best person he can be. This paper looks to examine the ‘unexamined life’ and the implications rooted in living a life like Socrates’.

Gorgias invites Socrate to the party of an unknown person’s house to show off his knowledge and sees how much Socrate knows as Gorgias brags about how rhetoric is something he have a good knowledge of. Socrate may be prepared to battle against the rhetoric and finds a way to defeat Gorgias in the competition. Socrates first arrives late the competition in front of the crowd of people in the party to show his opponent his disrespect. Socrate blames his friend Chaerephon of being late to the party because he didn’t want others to know that he is doing it purposely. Before Gorgias shows up Socrates has a conversation with Gorgias’ student Callicles. Callicles claims that Gorgias can answer any questions are being asked. As Socrate finds a way

The problem with Socrates concerns the problem with the role of value and reason. Nietzsche believes that the bulk of philosophers claim that life is a corrupt grievance for mankind. Nietzsche reasoned that these life deniers were decadents of Hellenism, as a symptom of some underlying melancholy. For someone to paint life in such a negative light they must have suffered a great deal through the course of their own life. Furthermore, these no-sayers agreed in various physiological ways and thus adopted the same pessimistic attitudes towards life. Socrates was ugly, alike decadent criminals and by ways of these similarities was decadent as well. Nietzsche also claims ugliness as a physiological symptom of life in its decline supported by studies in phenology.

Finally i will have to tell you who is this man you are falsely accusing today. Even though we all, men of Athens, hates Socrates’s way of seeing and doing things and the way he embarrassed our greatest men of Athens in public. But the past had proven to us that he is a good wise man that rarely been mistaken in term of what was good for Athens. Moreover, one event that we cant forget is the trail of the 8 Generals where he oppose the exception of the 8 men. Even though he was threaten to take the same fate as theirs. Athenian thought he was crazy back then and ordered to execute the 6 Generals they have at hand and the same fate awaits for those who fled. However, few years later Athens needed as much strong men as they can get so they dropped

In Phaedrus, Plato expands on the social implication that those who wield rhetoric ought to be just and act justly when utilizing it. This recurring theme is clearly portrayed through his analysis of love, the soul, and rhetoric itself. Phaedrus is written as a dialogue, with Phaedrus and Socrates discussing their views on rhetoric. Plato structures his writing so that Socrates is the one bestowing knowledge upon Phaedrus, his young and playful pupil, by asking pointed questions to which Phaedrus replies. The relationship between Phaedrus and Socrates is both one of a student and teacher but also one of lovers, made clear by Socrates’ soft attitude and affection towards Phaedrus.

In 469 B.C. a man by the name of Socrates was born. Socrates was a very wise man that cared about doing the right thing. He believed that the best ways to develop ideas was in the give and take of conversation, and that the best way to educate people was to ask them a series of questions leading in a particular direction (now named “Socrates method). Socrates had been quick to identify the drawbacks of democracy, and he had also been the teacher of two men who in different ways harmed Athens: Alcibiades and Critias. Which made the parents of the children that Socrates had taught very upset and angry. Granting all this, it lead to the Trial of Socrates 399 B.C. During this trial Socrates expressed his view of death by using his question-and-answer method, for which he was famous for and what seemed to have gotten him in trouble. Socrates did not write so we have to depend on on what others wrote, and by doing that we now get to see the diverse ways people read and understand what was written about his speech. My chosen primary source, Socrates View on Death, is important, because it gives one view of Socrates speech while my outside source, Ancient Greece, gives a slightly more in depth view.

Four accusations about Socrates are that he commits injustice and is a busybody; he investigates things in the heavens and beneath the earth; he does not acknowledge the gods; he makes the weaker argument the stronger; he teaches this to others; he corrupts the young (Plato, Apology, 18c-19b, pg 47). While he is guilty of the first, second, fifth and sixth accusations, he is innocent of the third and the fourth.

Plato: I can describe Socrates as a charismatic philosophical teacher. Socrates could urge those whom he was conversing with that they must put the care of their souls ahead of the pursuit of wealth.

Close analysis of the Athenian society surrounding Socrates reveals that he was very much a black sheep. He devoted much of his time to experiments that were then deemed acts of impiety. The Apology divulges Plato’s perception of Socrates’ defense when he was put on trial in 399 B.C. Socrates’ stubborn refusal to conform is highlighted in the piece alongside the common idea among philosophers at the time that “examining” oneself and one’s peers is what makes a life worthwhile. I agree with the idea that examination of human morality is vital to living a fulfilled life, because without virtue or goodness, there is no worth in life.

Let us sketch out the scope of this argument against Ion, as mentioned above, Socrates employs the image of the Heraclean stone in his discourse of refutation to mirror the magnitude power of the muses on mankind. This reference is aroused by Ion's inadequacy to talk about the subjects endorsed in Homer, in archilochus hesiod's account. This reads erroneously for if had true knowledge of the subjects in homer's account he would be able to discuss this in the other poets for they are the same after all. This leads to Socrates to conclude that there is something rather phantasmorgorical occurring here, namely a divine interference is taking possession of his mind and thus intends to belabour this activity with reference to the heraclean stone. This image serves a perfect representation for the gods, portraying similarly an attractive force set abound to not only attract iron

Socrates spent his time questioning people about things like virtue, justice, piety and truth. The people Socrates questioned are the people that condemned him to death. Socrates was sentenced to death because people did not like him and they wanted to shut him up for good. There was not any real evidence against Socrates to prove the accusations against him. Socrates was condemned for three major reasons: he told important people exactly what he thought of them, he questioned ideas that had long been the norm, the youth copied his style of questioning for fun, making Athenians think Socrates was teaching the youth to be rebellious. But these reasons were not the charges against him, he was charged with being an atheist and

     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 had a unique way of teaching and expressing his thoughts and ideas. He taught by constantly posing questions with the assumption that any person could approach the truth through logic if he set aside ingrained prejudice and received knowledge (Hattersley 17,18). His dialectic method of questioning consisted of a subject being broken down by one or more people, in search of the same truth but with differing views. Instead of merely trying to convince listeners, Socrates would approach others by questioning what they felt to be true and therefore would be able to determine that person’s true feelings and the basis for those feelings. Socrates was open to receive knowledge wherever he could find it, yet when he approached people who claimed to be wise, he found they really knew nothing. He would challenge preconceived opinions, based on the words of others and fallacious logic. Many felt that he was attacking their identity and security causing them to resent Socrates when he pointed this out. Due to his search for truth, Socrates would, eventually, pay the ultimate price. Socrates teaches us to assume nothing and to question everything. In scientific study today, this is a fundamental element of scientific study, starting with a theory and afterward refining it to the point of when a decisive conclusion is made.

Socrates was an influential Greek philosopher; however, he never wrote any book and his ideologies are mostly presented by Plato, who was his student. Plato explains Socrates’ attitude towards poetry in his books, the Republic and the Symposium. Afterward, he offers his perceptions and solutions to the matter. Plato’s Republic explains Socrates’ mindset towards poetry censorship. Socrates argued that poetry lacked wisdom because there was no censorship of works of poetry. As a result, poets can write about anything they wish to inscribe, which enhances imitation. On this note, Socrates argued that poetry exposed citizens to different forms of imitation, which would corrupt their minds because they had no restrictions.