The Apology by Socrates

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

In the Apology, Socrates aimed to do three things: defend his ideas and principles, continue to teach those who will open their mind and state that he knew regardless of what he said he was aware that all five hundred and one jurors knew who he was and disliked him. Socrates was well aware of the fact that he had made multiple enemies, he knew that the politicians, poets, rich and craftsmen all

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.

   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?

Socrates is at the age of seventy and appearing in a law court for the first time. For the people of Socrates time is accusing Socrates, for miss leading the youth corrupting them and boasting about being wise, causing him to become very unpopular. Socrates says to the jury I am going to speak the whole truth, for it is me by myself that I have to defend. He says my accusers are many and I don’t know them, they say, “you should be careful not be deceived by an accomplished speaker like me” (Cohen, Curd, & Reeve, 2000). The accuser goes on to say that Socrates is accomplished speaker; Socrates starts to praise them, because their lies are so good well put together, that Socrates himself is almost convinced but then he says that they do not

After reading “The Apology,” I decided to respond about how Socrates used the Socratic Method during his trial. Socrates, using this method, crafted a personal defense against the allegations laid upon him and, at the same time, Socrates led Miletus to trap himself as a part of that defense. I believe that Socrates’ decision to defend himself in this manner brings up some important considerations. First, Socrates using the Socratic Method as an integral part of his defense not only unraveled most of Miletus’ support, but Socrates was able to showcase his wisdom to the people of the court to show them what kind of person Socrates was when he acted as he usual did. Secondly, Socrates, through his attack on Miletus showed the people of the court the potential threat that Socrates could have been this entire time had that been his focus. Both of these considerations are possible only because Socrates’ used his method of questioning to craft a defense for himself.

One of the arguments that Socrates first shows throughout the Apology is that he is being guided by the work of his Gods. He says that he is not scared to be hated because he knows that many people in Athens only dislike

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

Socrates had no written work, never had a job and there are questions of whether he was even literate. However, Plato was a student of Socrates and recorded what occurred at his death trial.

In the Apology, Socrates is facing charges of corrupting the youth and being an atheist. Socrates provides the argument of believing in the gods and the children of the gods to the jury. I will quickly discuss the “offspring of the gods” argument made in the Apology 27a-28a. Then, I will analyze the argument and specify the contradictions made in the argument. I will use this contradiction to show how Socrates implements it into his defense. Throughout this paper, I will declare that this argument does not rightly find Socrates guilty because of lack of evidence and contradiction.

Ancient Greek had many exemplary thinkers called philosophers and Socrates was one of them. He imparted about knowledge, amity, and integrity as the Delphic Oracle declared Socrates as the wisest man in Athens. One of Socrates’ students was a philosopher named Plato who wrote an Apology about Socrates. Socrates was wise in respect to the fact that he never accepted a “truth” that was told to him, without getting clear evidence to back it up. He made the realization that people believed in polytheistic religion without even knowing where their ideas came from. Athena was the most worshipped goddess among Athenians. Moreover, Ancient Greek formed city-states and all of them were independent but the most popular was the Athens. "Apology" begins with the speech in which Socrates makes his defense to the Athenian court at Agora and the voting for Socrates assassination were

Throughout the readings of The Apology of Socrates and Crito I have found that Socrates was not a normal philosopher. It is the philosopher's intention to question everything, but Socrates' approach was different then most other philosophers. From one side of the road, Socrates can be seen as an insensitive, arrogant man. He did indeed undermine the laws so they fit his ideals, leave his family, and disregard the people's values. On the other side he can be seen as an ingenious man who questioned what many thought was the unquestionable. As he can be criticized for disregarding the many's ideals he can also be applauded for rising above the daily ways of popular thought. He

In Apology by Plato, a man named Socrates is put on trial for trumped-up charges. These charges are, “Socrates is a criminal and meddles in matters where he has no business. He’s always poking under the earth and up in the sky. He makes the worse case look better; and he teaches this sort of stuff to others” (Plato 1). In response to this, Socrates gives his defense, which is not used for defending himself, but for saving the Athenians. Socrates does not care if he survives or not; he just wants to share his story with the Athenians. He uses many ways to convey his point.

The Apology of Socrates is a Plato’s version of speeches given by Socrates who was accused for two main reasons: the corruption of the youth and impiety (not believing in gods in whom the city believes). In the Apology Socrates tries to defend himself and his actions but not to apologize for it. He insisted that he must be wiser than others because he knows and recognizes that knows nothing. The Apology by Plato shows that there is a great influence of Socrates in searching for the truth about humanity and society even when his attempt contradicted with the opinions of the “many”.

The Socratic Apology written by Plato is a written account of the speech performed by Socrates during the trial in which he was being charged. Socrates was defending the charges posed against him for corrupting the youth of Athens through his philosophical teachings and failure to believe in the city’s gods. Plato wrote in dialogue form in which Socrates consumed a vast majority of. According to Plato’s accounts, Socrates explained to the courts his way of life and why he does what he does. He attacked those who accused wrongly of him and that any corruption was performed unknowingly.