Socrates Apology Analysis

As a defender of civic virtue, the significance of obligation and authority of one’s representative government epitomizes the magnitude of respect that Socrates had for Athenian Jurisprudence, irrespective of the fact that he was prosecuted against. In the accounts of the Apology and Crito, there exists a plethora of evidence that demonstrate Socrates’s adherence of institutionalized authority. His loyalty of the Athenian State derives from his notion that the obligation to surrender to the law manifests a just society. One may ask, “how is it possible for a persecuted man to continue to profess allegiance to a polity that sought his trial and execution”? Though many would not have the capacity to sustain such integrity, Socrates had his reasons in

The main question of this dialogue is the definition of the word holy or piety. Euthyphro brags that he is more knowledgeable than his father on matters relating to religion. In this case, Socrates suggests to Euthyphro to define that term. The first definition fails to satisfy Socrates because of its limitation in application. Apparently, Socrates perceives this definition as an example rather than a definition. Subsequent arguments and line of questioning lead to five sets of definitions that are refined to find the general definition. Socrates expects that the acceptable general definition of the question will act as a reference point in his defense.

The speech named Apology, was given by Socrates many centuries ago. This speech was made by Plato to highlight Socrates’s defense against Athens, who was another philosopher. To this day, this speech is still considered to be one the best pieces to bridge the gap between literature and philosophy. The reason this speech was given is because Socrates was convicted of corrupting the youth, and challenging the ideas of the sky and what's below the ground. Consequently, Socrates was convicted by the state of Athens as guilty and he killed himself by eating the poisonous flower Hemlock. This speech uses all three strategies, but logos is more profound than the other two.

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

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

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.

The Apology was written by Plato as an account of the defense that Socrates presented during the trial in which he was condemned to death. Socrates gave this apologia, or defense of one’s actions, against the accusations that he did not believe in any gods, and that he was corrupting the young men of Athens. Not being as skillful in the art of oratory as his accusers, Socrates admitted that he would, as plainly as possible, present only truthful and logical refutes to the accusations that were against him. Being wise in the way of rhetoric, Socrates used pathos, ethos, and logos to argue in his defense. Although ultimately executed, Socrates masterfully defended himself in court and proved that he was a man of both virtue and wisdom.

Socrates, always depicted as searching for the answer of the good, uses dialectic to probe for knowledge and virtue. Through the use of questioning, Socrates disturbs the citizens into thought and the pursuit of the good. Like a gadfly, although annoying,

In his explanation of his behavior, Socrates also adds that part of his duty as a wise man, is to make sure that he questions the behavior of other wise men to make sure that those men are also aware

While reading the article “Socratic Christian Philosophy,” I have come to the conclusion that Socrates knows much about how to follow a god and how not sway away from his beliefs, but his arrogance and god-like personality come in the way of that because at some points it seems as though Socrates believes he is as high as god. David Talcott, the author of this article, even mentions that he believes that Socrates may have a gift which makes him as divine as god. Talcott suggests that Socrates knows a lot about that Christian philosophy before it was even created but I believe how Socrates goes about presenting this information is a problem because he seems too arrogant. For example, in the Apology, Socrates says he believes poets are not wise

Socrates is a widely renowned teacher, who has taught and demonstrated a variety of lessons that regard how he views the world. Socrates has described his view on morality, purpose, death, and the ultimate. He has spoken about these views through multiple texts including The Last Days of Socrates and they have been interpreted through the text Socrates by George Rudebusch. Through these worldviews, Socrates has given people the opportunity to expand their wisdom and question the world around them.

The skepticism found within Socrates' logic leads us to realize that he has no claims that he has answers, yet he is living and dying for the ideal that "an unexamined life is not worth living." There is no point at which Socrates is looking for followers, much like a prophet would look for disciples, for his ideals appeal to reason, not faith. Although this may be the case, he has left his contemporaries, ancient and modern day philosophers, as well as any other students of his teachings in a complete paradox. For centuries, many have attempted to carve out a middle path between the severity of his claim on the examined life, and the predestined state of doubt that surfaces with the search for justice and virtue.

According to the majority of the jury members of Athens, Socrates is a corruption to the youth, doer of evil and does not agree with the gods of his people. In the Apology, written by Plato these are the assumptions and accusations Socrates is held in court for. In court, he is faced with what most men fear, being wrongly accused leading to the death sentence. Socrates argues and strives to prove that he has no fear of being hated, being accused of serious crimes, being threatened with punishment, or being put to death.

   In any case of law, when considering truth and justice, one must first look at the validity of the court and the system itself.  In Socrates' case, the situation is no different.  One may be said to be guilty or innocent of any crime, but guilt or innocence is only as valid as the court it is subjected to.  Therefore, in considering whether Socrates is guilty or not, it must be kept in mind the norms and standards of Athens at that time, and the validity of his accusers and the crimes he allegedly committed.  Is Socrates guilty or innocent of his accusations?

Because of his role, Socrates switches roles from the teacher to the students and asks Euthyphro to explain the differences of piety and impiety to him. Socrates makes no claims; only that he is ignorant