Socrates's Interlocutors

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.

Socrates’ argues that his unfortunate sentence to death may actually be a blessing. After addressing those who had voted against him he directs his attention towards those who have acquitted him. During his monologue, Socrates explains that the divine voice which warns him of dangerous actions was silent during the trial. This silence, to Socrates, means that his actions were not potentially harmful to himself or others but in fact a blessing from the divine. He concludes that death is either an everlasting sleep or a transferring of soul.

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

Things are not always what they seem. The Republican Party has now captured the House of Representatives and the Senate. Many were not surprised, as history has shown that when a president has low approval ratings, the opposing political party usually gains seats in Congress. The Republicans’ main argument was the failure of the Affordable Care Act. The platform was that they would work on their constituents’ behalf to repeal the health care law. However, it has been shown that the health care law is working, providing health insurance for many who previously did not have any health insurance. How did the Republicans convince their constituents to believe the contrary? Plato would argue that the Republicans are truly the masters of rhetoric.

Thus these could be the early influences to young Socrates and used their teachings as a basis to establish his own set of principles and moral philosophies. Although these philosophers did not live in the same time period as Socrates, he responded to their ideas and challenged them later on. Particularly, he challenged people to think about different things such as : what is virtue? what is justice? what do you mean by piety? Unlike other philosophers, he wanted people to consider the true meaning of qualities such as justice and courage, and therefore also challenged the Greeks conventional idea of wisdom. Socrates challenged philosophers by insisting that they must question conventional wisdom and challenge the traditional beliefs. He did this through the Socratic method, where it served to reveal the disputers lack of knowledge and ignorance. Ultimately by challenging Athenian people to think about the beliefs eventually earned him many enemies from different sectors of the society. While many Athenians admired Socrates challenges, an equal number grew resentment and felt he threatened their way of life and uncertain future. The effect of Socrates investigations had therefore aroused “a great deal of hostility” and this lead to this trial in the Athenian court of being a

In the Dialogue Crito, Socrates employs his Elenchus to examine the notion of justice and one’s obligation to justice. In the setting of the dialogue, Socrates has been condemned to die, and Crito comes with both the hopes and the means for Socrates to escape from prison. When Socrates insists that they should examine whether he should escape or not, the central question turns into whether if it is unjust to disobey laws. Socrates’ ultimate answer is that it is unjust; he makes his argument by first showing that it’s wrong to revenge injustice, then arguing that he has made an agreement with the city’s law for its benefits, and finally reasoning that he

In Plato’s Symposium, seven friends gather at a banquet to honor their comrade Agathon, who has just written his first successful tragedy. The men agree to entertain themselves through speeches rather than drunkenness. They dedicate these speeches to Eros, god of love, for whom no odes or hymns have been written. As in Plato’s other works, Socrates is one of the main characters featured throughout the dialogue. Plato is able to distinguish Socrates from his fellow comrades as an outsider, or someone who strays from social norms, by calling attention to Socrates’ unusual behavior. The content of Socrates’ speech, as well as his friends’ opinions of him, serve to further illustrate that Socrates is an outsider.

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.

A little bit of background behind the dialogue, it primarily focuses on the exchange between Socrates and a man known as Euthyphro. Euthyphro is tired of being looked down upon by his family and Athens for his divine excesses. “Whenever I speak in the assembly concerning the divine things…they laugh at me as if I were mad” (Euthyphro 3c). When his manservant murdered a family slave of Naxos, it did not occur to his father to seek the advice of Euthyphro, the family theologian. Instead, he dispatched a man all the way to Athens to ascertain from the exegete what should be done to the murderer. In the intervening time, Euthyphro’s man died of neglect and exposure. Euthyphro had to suffer the double humiliation of being both disregarded

Commonly the most widely renowned teachers in history often are remembered as the most intriguing teachers in history. Scholars often ask, what made their teaching style so different, or what was so unique about this educator? Perhaps the most investigated teachers of the world often left the smallest written mark on the world. No exception to this, is the philosopher, Socrates. Widely known as one of the greatest Athenian philosophers, he never wrote anything down, and is theorized as illiterate. The only record of this man lies in his student, Plato’s Dialogues, as well as references from other writers of the

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 use of Socrates’ inquiry in the Meno is a perfect example to show how Socrates pushed his listeners to question their own knowledge. Socrates never told Meno his definitions were wrong and his own were right, rather continued to question Meno’s conclusions to show him that he did not know the true meaning of virtue. The people of Athens were unable to accept the fact that many of them were ignorant on topics such as the definition of virtue, whereas Socrates himself was able to admit it. The Athenians disguised Socrates’ true desire to teach people for corruption and impiety because they believed he was trying to humiliate them. Although the people of Athens were blind of Socrates’ true intentions, his method of inquiry did in fact benefit the city of Athens. Socrates’ methods eliminated ignorance and increased proper knowledge on important things such as virtue and knowledge within the city of Athens, which is what he meant when he said he was “a gift of the gods to the city of Athens.”

By breaking down his interlocutors’ various thoughts, ideas, and theses, Socrates was trying to reveal to them that they were not in fact wise and that the knowledge they thought they possessed was not true knowledge. Socrates himself was only considered wiser than his fellow Athenians because he considered his one piece of knowledge to be that he didn’t know anything. By breaking down, piece by piece, the arguments of those he conversed with, he intended for them to realize that their knowledge was relative and therefore meaningless in the grander scheme of things. By recognizing this, only then could they begin living a life in search of finding true meaning. In searching for meaningful things they would have to learn to question things. While he is on trial in The Apology, Socrates tells the jury that, “The unexamined life is not worth living” (Plato pg. 24) Living life without asking questions, and without inquiry, is not living life at all, and is therefore

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.