The Concept Of Individual Rights

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 his defense, Socrates claims over and again that he is innocent and is not at all wise, “…for I know that I have no wisdom, small or great.” Throughout the rest of his oration he seems to act the opposite as if he is better than every man, and later he even claims that, “At any rate, the world has decided that Socrates is in some way superior to other

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 by Plato delves deep into the concept of wisdom and self-examination. Socrates declares that “the unexamined life is not worth living”. Putting this phrase into context, Socrates has been falsely accused by Meletus of corrupting the youth of Athens and believing in artificial gods that were not the same as the gods of Athens. Meletus represents the hypocrisy of the world, he, who is not guiltless in the face of accusation, has falsely accused Socrates of social wrongdoing. These accusations stem from Meletus’ steadfast insecurity of himself. Socrates exposes Meletus’ insecurity that he may be morally corrupt himself. These accusations fulfill that insecurity, that in falsely accusing Socrates of moral corruption, he is proving

In this excerpt of Plato’s Apology, Socrates question method, the Socratic Method, is shown. Socrates presents Meletus with a thesis which Meletus agrees with, and then Socrates proves it wrong. By using the case of horses, Socrates proves to Meletus that like all other citizens of Athens, Socrates is a good influence on the youth. Socrates, yet again possessing the truth in this situation, demonstrates his wisdom through his skillful speech that “others fear.”

The apology is an account of the speech that Socrates makes during his trial. In Socrates’ trial, he is being accused of not recognizing the same gods that the others in Athens recognize (specifically that those in authority). Instead, Socrates is charged with inventing new gods, and in doing so is corrupting the youth of Athens to whom, Socrates frequently preaches to about his theology. Socrates’ speech, however, is not an apology, as the name may suggest but rather an explanation of his beliefs. During his trial speech, Socrates makes frequent reference to his beliefs explaining that his behavior stems from a prophecy by the oracle at Delphi, which claims that he was the wisest of all men. Although Socrates is honest and direct about these beliefs, this did not sit well with many of the trial members who were evaluating him. Despite the fact that Socrates made frequent references to the fact that it is destined for him to be the wisest of all men, he also recognizes that he does in fact lack in knowledge when it comes to world affairs. To which, Socrates states only adds to his wisdom as he is aware of the fact that he does not know everything and that realization alone makes him wiser than most other men.

Socrates put one’s quest for wisdom and the instruction of others above everything else in life. A simple man both in the way he talked and the wealth he owned, he believed that simplicity in whatever one did was the best way of acquiring knowledge and passing it unto others. He is famous for saying that “the unexplained life is not worth living.” He endeavored therefore to break down the arguments of those who talked with a flowery language and boasted of being experts in given subjects (Rhees 30). His aim was to show that the person making a claim on wisdom and knowledge was in fact a confused one whose clarity about a given subject was far from what they claimed. Socrates, in all his simplicity never advanced any theories of his own

In Apology, Plato 's representation of Socrates states "as I thought and believed, to live the life of a philosopher, to examine myself and others". This statement is a response to the scornful remarks of the accusers asking him if he is not ashamed of where his "human wisdom" has gotten him. Socrates states that a "man who is any good" should only consider "whether he is acting like a good or a bad man". It is evident that Socrates views good character as an important trait of a wise person. He goes on to say that all men should take care

Socrates was a very simple man who did not have many material possessions and spoke in a plain, conversational manner. Acknowledging his own ignorance, he engaged in conversations with people claiming to be experts, usually in ethical matters. By asking simple questions, Socrates gradually revealed that these people were in fact very confused and did not actually know anything about the matters about which they claimed to be an expert. Socrates felt that the quest for wisdom and the instruction of others through dialogue and inquiry were the highest aims in life. He felt that "The unexamined life is not worth living." Plato's Apology is the speech Socrates made at his trial. Socrates was charged with not recognizing the

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

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 name of the dialogue is derived from the Greek word “apologia” which translates into “defense.” Socrates mission has led to animosity from his fellow Athenians and is in trial for what he claims he is just following orders from God. To examine why Socrates is determined to continue this mission regardless of any consequences, we must first understand how Socrates began his philosophical mission. Socrates had a friend, Chairephone; he went to Delphi and asked the oracle if anyone was wiser than Socrates. In The Apology Socrates is recorded saying “he asked if any man was wiser than I, and the Pythian replied that no one was wiser” (The Apology, 21a). Trying to understand this “riddle”, Socrates was at loss and goes to question someone who was considered wise in Athens. After finding out that this man was no wiser than he was he thought to himself, “he thinks he knows something when he does not, whereas when I do not know, neither do I think I know; so I am likely to be wiser than he to this small extent.” (21d). Socrates did not just stop with this one man. He went on to question politicians, poets, generals among others and received a similar experience with each one. What Socrates derived from these dialogues was that he was aware of his own ignorance rather than being completely wrong. This awareness of one’s own ignorance is known as “Socratic Ignorance” and is the premise of Socrates’

Throughout the piece Socrates, deals largely with the examination of others. In “The Apology”, Socrates said, "above all I should like to spend my time there, as here, in examining and searching people's minds, to find out who is really wise among them, and who only thinks that he is." In this, we see how the philosopher views the people around him. He thought that it was his responsibility to examine the “wise” men around him and expose their false claims of wisdom as ignorance (“The Apology”, n.d.). He is implying that it is important to evaluate the people around you, and their claims of being wise as well as that should not take everything at face value and should gain our own sense wisdom by examining ourselves and the people around us.

He goes on to tell the story of why he began to challenge the intellectuals of society in the first place. Socrates tells of a deceased friend by the name of Chaerephon who “… went to Delphi and boldly asked the oracle to tell him whether… there was anyone wiser than I [Socrates] was, and the Pythian prophetess answered that there was no man wiser.” This troubles Socrates, and he contemplates what this statement really means. Unable to come to a sound conclusion, he devises a plan to get the answer he seeks: “I reflected that if I could only find a man wiser than myself, then I might go to the god with a refutation in my hand. I should say to him, ‘Here is a man who is wiser than I am; but you said that I was the wisest.’” After meeting with a man who had a reputation for being wise, however, Socrates departed without the man wiser than he. He left the man, thinking to himself: “Well, although I do not suppose that either of us knows anything really beautiful and good, I am better off than he is – for he knows nothing, and thinks that he knows.” After encounters with multiple men who possess supposed wisdom, Socrates realizes the prophecy must be correct: “… but the truth is, O men of Athens, that God only is wise; and in this oracle he means to say that the wisdom of men is little or nothing…” Socrates proceeds to question Meletus in front of the councilmen. He questions Meletus about the charges he has brought against him and his reasons

While the concept of human rights was not first developed during the Enlightenment period it made great advances during this time due to the change in thinking that took place. According to Kocchar online, “The thinkers of the Enlightenment believed that human reason could discover the natural laws of the universe, determine the natural rights of humankind, and thereby achieve continuous progress in human knowledge, technology, and society.” (Lesson I) This description of the change in thought is key to the development of human rights during the Enlightenment. However, the application of science based reasoning had both positive and negative consequences in this development. While there were positive changes such as the abolition of torture and slavery, reform of the penal code and an increasingly universalistic application of human rights there was also the rise of biological based exclusion theory and a rise in ethnic nationalism which were purported by “scientific” theories developed during this time period.