The Apology And Phaedo By Plato Essay

Philosophy is defined as the ultimate quest to help humans seek answers to questions that orbit knowledge, reality and existence. Philosophers begin their study of knowledge by asking questions they may or may not have an answer to. One famous philosopher, Socrates, utilizes this process to question his understanding on the concepts he had already attained knowledge for. At one point during his life, Socrates is proclaimed to be the wisest man alive by the Oracle of Delphi. Upon being declared the wisest man alive, Socrates begins to question everything he thought he knew.

In the retelling of his trial by his associate, Plato, entitled “The Apology”; Socrates claims in his defense that he only wishes to do good for the polis. I believe that Socrates was innocent of the accusations that were made against him, but he possessed contempt for the court and displayed that in his conceitedness and these actions led to his death.

“it is time for me to die, and for you to live- though which of us has the better destiny is unclear to everyone, save only to God.” So with this statement, Socrates seems to contradict himself and admits that nobody really knows whether it is better to be alive than dead. This statement also clearly identifies the fact that he believes in a supreme being so there is no way he could believe that there is no life after death. He in fact several times speaks about how his obedience to his God is of the utmost importance. Essentially this whole argument about death with no after life being a favorable outcome is completely preposterous. He would be abandoning his family, friends and his principles further contradicting

Plato’s Apology is the story of the trial of Socrates, the charges brought against him and his maintaining of his own innocence throughout the process. At the onset of the trial, Socrates appears to challenging the charges, which included corrupting the youth, challenging belief in the gods that were accepted and reveled by the State, and introducing a new religious focus, but also belittles his own significance and suggesting that he will not attempt to disprove that he participated in the actions maintained by the court. In essence, Socrates appears almost self-effacing, and his defense surprises even his accuser, Meletus. But by the end of the Apology, Socrates becomes almost a different person,

In the readings, “Plato’s Apology” translated by Benjamin Jowett and “Oedipus the King” translated by Robert Bagg we notice many similarities. Deeper analyzation of these texts deeper will allow the reader to foresee Socratic wisdom. Socratic wisdom is best defined as accepting ignorance, no matter how wise or knowledgeable you may be. We learn in the beginning of Oedipus the King that an oracle has told his biological father, that it is in his son’s fate to kill him, and marry his mother – the knowing of his fate leads to failure. If you believe that you know everything, your intellect can lead to your downfall.

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

“Do not be vexed with me when I speak the truth. For there is no human being who will preserve his life if he genuinely opposes either you or any other multitude and prevents many unjust and unlawful things from happening in the city. Rather, if someone who really fights for the just is going to preserve himself even for a short time, it is necessary for him to lead a private rather than public life.”(Apology 31e-32a)

Both versions of The Apology show different viewpoints Socrates had. For example, in the beginning of Plato’s Apology, Socrates hopes that he can be acquitted but he doesn’t expect it to happen. However, in Xenophon’s Apology, Socrates doesn’t necessarily want to be acquitted. Before the trial, Hermogenes asks Socrates if he has practiced his defense and he replies by saying that his divine sign has prevented him from doing so. Socrates goes on to explain that he believes the gods have written this trial and his execution into his fate to spare him the frailties that come with old age. This belief also shows a difference in Socrates’ view of the gods between the two apologies. In Plato’s Apology, Socrates suggests that the gods are pure beings that would never commit injustice and frowns upon those

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 Plato’s The Republic and The Apology, the topic of justice is examined from multiple angles in an attempt to discover what justice is, as well as why living a just life is desirable. Plato, writing through Socrates, identifies in The Republic what he thought justice was through the creation of an ideal city and an ideal soul. Both the ideal city and the ideal soul have three components which, when all are acting harmoniously, create what Socrates considers to be justice. Before he outlines this city and soul, he listens to the arguments of three men who hold popular ideas of the period. These men act to legitimize Socrates’ arguments because he finds logical errors in all of their opinions. In The Apology, a different, more down-to-Earth, Socrates is presented who, through his self-defense in court, reveals a different, even contradictory, view of the justice presented in The Republic. In this paper, the full argument of justice from The Republic will be examined, as well as the possible inconsistencies between The Republic and The Apology.

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.

The most influential philosopher of the 5th century BCE is a man by the name of Socrates. His life and teachings are the foundation of Western Philosophy. Socrates was dedicated to reasoning and the development and investigation of the truth. Unpopular then, Socrates employed a strategy to pursue the truth by using dialectic. Socrates was one to question everything and anything less than the truth was received with more questions. Socrates never wrote anything down, and therefore any dialogues and teachings are dependent on his students Xenophon and Plato account. This gives rise to the Socratic Problem. What we do know, according to Plato’s Apology, is that Socrates’ divine mission is a complex one. Using two of Plato’s written accounts of

Plato’s “The Apology” takes places in Athens in 399 BC. Socrates, a natural philosopher, is put on trial and accused of failing to recognize the god of Athens, creating new deities, and corrupting the minds of the city youth. The Athenians, Anytus, Meletus, and Lycon fear that Socrates’ teachings lack respect for the legal customs and religious beliefs established in the city and could create a damaging effect on Athens’ community (Dan I.(n.d.). In this piece, Plato writes an account of Socrates’ speech attempting to defend himself. In this account, Socrates states that “An unexamined life is not worth living.” (Plato, n.d.). When saying this, Socrates claims that a person must examine themselves and determine the purpose of life, in order

The Apology is Plato's recollection and interpretation of the Trial of Socrates (399 BC). In this dialogue Socrates explains who he is and what kind of life he led. The Greek word "apologia" means "explanation" -- it is not to be confused with "apologizing" or "being sorry" for one's actions. The following is an outline of the 'argument' or logos that Socrates used in his defense. A hypertext treatment of this dialogue is also available.