Socrates, Plato, Euthyphro, Apology and the Republic

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.

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

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.

Socrates was a pompous man who believed that he was wiser than most, if not all, Athenian men of his time. He is also credited as one of the fathers of western philosophy, his own philosophy revolving around the welfare of one’s soul and reflecting on what the good life was. He was told by an oracle that he was the wisest of men and spent a great deal of time trying to prove it false, he decided that he was considered wise for accepting that he knew nothing, and never claimed to know anything that he questioned. In Plato’s text “Apology” Socrates is depicted as a man who was arrogant, hypercritical of others, and fixed on his ways no matter the consequences. He had the qualities of a man who saw no error in what he was doing because he

In the Apology Socrates is accused of being a sophist. A sophist is someone who will argue for any cause using rhetoric for money, a sophist makes a weak argument strong. Socrates disputes this accusation, he claims that if he is guilty he simply is ignorant of it. In the Republic, Socrates has a dialogue with various people with one main objective, to determine what is justice. Following the dialogue, the reader can start to see that Socrates is not a sophist. His arguments seemed to be weak but is strengthened by Socrates use of rhetoric. However, his arguments are logical, he isn’t arguing just for fun, and he is not being paid. Socrates is not a sophist. He is a great speaker and uses rhetoric to his advantage, that does not make him a

The Apology is a Plato’s version of the speech Socrates presented when defending himself against two official charges and two “old charges”. The official charges are the only charges the jurors are to worry about, while the “old charges” are informal charges. These informal charges are rumors made about Socrates that Athenians have heard their whole life. These charges were brought to the courts attention by three accusers. The three accusers were Meletus, Anytus, and Lycon.

In Plato’s early dialogue, Apology, we are given a depiction of what happened during the trial of Socrates. The main charges brought against the character Socrates were that he was an atheist and that he was corrupting the youth of Athens. These charges stem from the types of public interactions he would have with Athenian citizens, which to some of his accusers resembled sophistry; sophistry was typically frowned upon because sophists were known to be deceptive, and teach people the art of deception through arguments. On the surface, this might seem exactly like what Socrates is doing with his method of argument in the early dialogues such as the Apology, Euthyphro, Laches, and Charmides. However, there seem to be

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.

(Pg 26, 21b) Socrates believes what the Oracle actually meant when he said that no one was wiser than Socrates, is that human wisdom is worth little or nothing and he uses his name as an example. (Pg 27, 23 b). When examining the quote, “This man among you, mortals, is wisest who, like Socrates, understands that his wisdom is worthless.”

In 399 B.C.E, the scholar Socrates was put on trial based on acquisitions by Meletus and other Athenians that say that he has corrupted the youth of Athens with his complex way of thinking. This trial is a matter of life and death to Socrates so he makes his defense to the people of Athens as to why he should not receive a guilty verdict. Although it may translate to apology, it stems from a greek word that means defense. Socrates has nothing to apologize for because he believes himself to have enlightened the people and not corrupt them. Socrates speech is broken up into different parts: his defense, his confrontation of Meletus, his response to the guilty verdict, and his acceptance of it. Socrates valued his life and used many examples

Throughout Socrates’ defense speech in Plato’s Apology of Socrates, he argues that any man of worth thinks of the justice of his actions. Justice, or the lack of it, plays a role both in Apology of Socrates and in Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War. In both texts, justice and power do not go together all the time, with instances of the men in power not considering the justice of their actions. In the Apology of Socrates, Socrates stands trial for crimes of corrupting the youth and not believing in the gods of the city.

"How you have felt, O men of Athens, at hearing the speeches of my accusers, I cannot tell; but I know that their persuasive words almost made me forget who I was – such was the effect of them; and yet they have hardly spoken a word of truth.” – Plato “The Apology”

The Apology is a piece of writing, where Socrates is addressing all of his accusers about the all of the wrongdoings that he has been accused of having a part in. The story starts off in a courtroom, where Socrates is addressing the men of Athens about the persuasive words of his accusers (Plato 1). Socrates states that he is a man of old age, being over seventy years old (1). He states that this trial is the first time he has ever been in a court of law, and he asks them to excuse any language that he may repeat (1). The Apology is a great piece of literature that gives the arguments of Socrates, in his defense, to the two accusation brought on him by his accusers.

Humans possess a natural and profound curiosity. This curiosity subsequently is the driving force for the emergence of philosophy. From early on, individuals realized that the world and many of the things and concepts within the world were inconceivable, which created a desire or love for wisdom. While many were interested in philosophy, pre-Socratic philosophers were more interested in determining how the world worked and its origins/cosmology, as oppose to philosophers such as Plato And Socrates who focused more on ethics or morality. Plato’s conception of God and religion can be depicted in his literatures “Euthyphro” and “The Apology” which he expresses through his writings of Socrates in dialogue formation. While one may assume that

Although I have always been aware of the contributions that Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, and others have made to the advancement of philosophy, I was never quite aware of how profound their teachings impacted their fellow citizens as well as modern day society. In seems as though their teachings can be, and have been, applied to every facet of life. For myself, I feel that virtue is something that can be taught and learned from sources such as parents, friends, and the environment.