Socrates's Existence

Born in Athens in 437 B.C, Greek philosopher Plato is one of the most powerful thinkers in history. Coming from Greek aristocracy, Plato had political ambitions as a young man and appeared to follow the family tradition. However, Socrates and his dialectical method of inquiry, which was to question and answer everything to show ignorance, soon captivated Plato.

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’.

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.

Will you choose to stick with your values and principals when facing death? It has been a month since Socrates was put in prison waiting for his execution. Socrates’s execution took long because a state galley had set out on a religious mission that took place annually, and the law was to never allow any executions until the state galley returns. Socrates was sentenced to death after he was found guilty in not believing in the Gods and also corrupting the young children. When the ship was about to arrive, Crito, Socrates’s old faithful friend, arrives early to where they held Socrates. The guard allows Crito to see Socrates because he offered them a bribe. Crito becomes surprised on how Socrates remains calm even when facing a death sentence.

Socrates’ argument for why the soul is analogous to the city begins with an observation--that the city is comprised of individuals. The city is therefore a reflection of the characteristics of the individual. This observation allows Socrates to derive the characteristics of an individual from the characteristics of the city that had previously been discussed and established. However, this task is more difficult than it seems at first because of the differences between the soul and the city.

Throughout Plato’s Phaedo, Socrates invokes different arguments to portray specific ideas about the immortality of the soul. One of the arguments in which Socrates brings about is the cyclical argument. The cyclical argument, also referred to as the principle of opposites, connects the core ideas of the body and the mind to later prove that the soul is an immortal entity. Forms are ever changing in and of themselves to create the cycle in which Socrates explains the basis of all things. It is through knowledge of the Forms, and the existence of the body and the soul that Socrates enhances the cyclical argument to demonstrate the concepts leading to the immortality of the soul.

There are times in every mans life where our actions and beliefs collide—these collisions are known as contradictions. There are endless instances in which we are so determined to make a point that we resort to using absurd overstatements, demeaning language, and false accusations in our arguments. This tendency to contradict ourselves often questions our character and morals. Similarly, in The Trial of Socrates (Plato’s Apology), Meletus’ fallacies in reason and his eventual mistake of contradicting himself will clear the accusations placed on Socrates. In this paper, I will argue that Socrates is not guilty of corrupting the youth with the idea of not believing in the Gods but of teaching the youth to think for

Socrates ponders this thought and explains that, “His soul must have always possessed this knowledge, for he either was or was not a man” (The Philosophical Journey 89). This explains that it is an innate notion, where the soul always has the knowledge and can be obtained through remembering said knowledge. Therefore, Socrates believes that since the truth is always inside the soul, then it must be immortal. The soul has all knowledge, and through the process of recollection, one can recover this information.

Socrates attempts to solve this paradox with his theory of recollection. He begins by speaking of the soul of man as being immortal - that it dies and is reborn, again and again. He goes on to say `seeing that the soul is immortal and has been born many times, and has beheld all things both in this world and in the nether realms, she has acquired knowledge of all and everything; so that it is no wonder that she should be able to recollect all that she knew about other things. For as all nature is akin, and the soul has learned all things, there is no reason why we should not, by remembering but one single thing - an act which men call learning - discover everything else.'

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

The original meaning of the word philosophy comes from the Greek roots philo- meaning "love" and -sophos, or "wisdom." When someone studies philosophy they want to understand how and why people do certain things and how to live a good life. In other words, they want to know the meaning of life. Socrates was considered the father of ancient philosophy, and the wisest man in ancient Greece. Although he was eventually condemned for his wisdom, his spoken words are still listened to and followed today. Socrates believed that the purpose of life was both personal and spiritual growth. He establishes this conviction in what is arguably his most renowned statement: "The unexamined life is not worth living." Socrates lived his life to question and

In Phaedo Socrates claims that the soul exists somewhere after the body dies. He uses the argument of opposites to make his claim. Socrates believes that for something to “be” it must have been something else before or come from something. He gives Cebes examples of thing that are generated as a result from its opposite. “when anything becomes greater it must inevitably have been smaller and then have become greater.” He uses this example to say that being “greater” is derived from having been “smaller” at some point; and that in between being “greater” and “smaller” there are a lot of variables. After giving several examples to Cebes and Cebes agreeing to most outcomes, Socrates asks Cebes if there is an opposite to living, Cebes responds

Socrates’ views of death as represented in “The Trial and Death of Socrates” are irrevocably tied to his beliefs of what makes life significant. For Socrates, life must be examined through constant questioning and one must hold the goodness of life above all else. Consequently, even in the face of the un-good, or unjust in Socrates’ case as represented in his trial, it would not be correct to do wrong, return wrong or do harm in return for harm done. Therefore, no act should be performed with an account for the risk of life or death; it should be performed solely on the basis of whether it is good and right.

What Socrates is attempting to explain to Glaucon in the above passage is that all the forms arise out of The Form of Good. The Form of Good is essentially the Ideal world. Everything in the Phenomenal world, or the world that each individual person and society as a whole exists physically in, is a less-Good representation of the Ideal Realm; in the allegory of "The Cave", the Phenomenal world is represented by shadows of actual things being thrown onto a wall. So, Socrates is saying to Glaucon that the Ideal realm is a perfected, real version of our own world, and that each thing contained within our world has an Ideal form, of which the physical objects are merely bad representations. Interpreters of Plato should be careful not to think of the Phenomenal world as evil in comparison to the Ideal realm; that idea would be akin to thinking of a broken bicycle as evil in comparison to a working bicycle. Neoplatonists do not believe in good or evil, only 'good' or 'less good'. Plato's forms have suffered many different interpretations over the years, but one can safely say in simple terms that The Forms result from the imagination taking a stab at perfection. Whether or not Plato considered their existence as a reality is beside the point. Many Renaissance philosophers, often called theologians by

Only God knows the truth of what his form. Socrates does not believe in this type of lie.