The Conglomeration Of God In The Works Of Socrates

Socrates was a Western Ancient Athenian Greek philosopher who lived from 469 BCE until his death in 399 BCE. He was a student to another philosopher, Sophists, Socrates was different from most Greek philosophers he wanted to get at the truth and find out how one can truly be ‘good’ and moral in life. “To Socrates the soul is identified with the mind; it is the seat of reason and capable of finding the ethical truths, which will restore meaning and value of life” (ADD IN-TEXT CITATION SEMINAR). We continue to use many of Socrates teachings today, such as, ‘The Socratic method’, which is known as asking a question and within these questions you lead it to the answer you wanted to hear, many uses this as a teaching technique and is shown to be highly effective. A great number of Athenians looked up to Socrates and considered him the wise man of Athens, he had many followers whom would ask questions and seek answers. As popularity and following of Socrates grew so did accusations. The charges laid on Socrates by the Athenians were unjust and therefore his death was highly wrong in the eyes of true democracy that Athens was apparently known for. In this paper, I will discuss how Socrates was wrongfully convicted for the corruption of the youth despite having many young followers, introducing new Gods while still being considered an Atheist, and the main reason he was seen as a threat to Athens was that he brought change to the city.

In Phaedo, Socrates makes a number of claims regarding the existence and nature of the afterlife, and the immortality and reincarnation of the soul that can be compared and contrasted with other religious beliefs. I will be contrasting and comparing Socrates beliefs with those that practice Judaism.

In this literature review I will discuss both Socrates and Jesus Christ (Jesus). I will compare and distinguish them, by their trial, misdeeds (through the view of society), law, justice and punishment. In addition, I will write about their influence in today’s society and what impact they have made through time. Both Socrates and Jesus had many things in common yet, they we’re different. Both had different religious beliefs. While, Socrates was polytheistic, believing in several gods. Jesus, in the other hand was monotheism, believed in only one God. Both were charged, tried, and executed for their “radical”

The main argument in The Apology by famous ancient Greek philosopher Plato is whether, notorious speaker and philosopher Socrates is corrupting the youth by preaching ungodly theories and teaching them unlawful ideas that do harm to individuals and society. In his words Socrates quoted the prosecution’s accusation against him: “Socrates is guilty of corrupting the minds of the young, and of believing in supernatural things of his own invention instead of the gods recognized by the state.” 1 Further Socrates consistently introduces tediously compiled number of examples to provide valid and sound arguments to prove that he is innocent of the charges brought up against him to the court.

A8: Socrates believes he is on trial for not believing in the same gods that the city believes in and for creating new gods. (P.75, 3)

Socrates points out that this allegory corresponds to the earlier discussion about the good. Hence, it relates to the analogy of the sun and the analogy of the divided line. Socrates describes analogy of the sun as "a child of the good and most similar to it". He begins with saying that there are things which we can see and feel (visible realm) and there is the good itself, something we can only think about (intelligible realm). He continues, saying that eyesight requires light in order for object to be seen. Light comes from the sun, hence, sun gives a possibility for objects to be seen. Socrates compares the relationship between sight and the sun to the intellect and the good. Good gives power to things that are known. So, just as sun enables

The portrayal of Socrates, through the book “the trial and death of Socrates” is one that has created a fairly controversial character in Western history. In many ways, Socrates changed the idea of common philosophy in ancient Greece; he transformed their view on philosophy from a study of why the way things are, into a consideration man. Specifically, he analyzed the virtue and health of the human soul. Along side commending Socrates for his strong beliefs, and having the courage to stand by those convictions, Socrates can be commended for many other desirable characteristics. Some of those can include being the first martyr to die for his philosophical beliefs and having the courage to challenge indoctrinated cultural norms is part of

Socrates was a man in Athens, who set out in search for truth and knowledge. In doing this, he managed to anger some of his fellow men by exposing their ignorance. In 399 BC, he was arraigned on three different charges. He was accused of corrupting the youth of Athens. He was, also, indicted on charges of heresy and treason. As well, charged with being an atheist, not believing in the Gods. According to some people, Socrates deserved to die and to others his death made him a martyr. Using several sources, including The Apology, I will enlighten readers with the reasons behind some people’s beliefs that he died a martyr, in addition to, the beliefs of others who say Socrates had a touch of arrogance in insensitivity and deserved the death sentence, hence, the confessor.

In order to determine whether or not Socrates was wise about God, we must first define the term “wise” in this context. What is the definition of wisdom? What makes someone wise? The literal meaning, or etymology, of the word is derived from the Indo-European stem woid which means to see. It also relates to similar words such as the Greek idein and the Latin videre, both also meaning “to see” (Mohr, pg. 3). Whereas, in English and Germanic languages the verb “wit” took on the meaning of knowing, because of the likeness to knowing to seeing, and thus resulting in the modern word “wisdom” which is defined as a type of knowledge (Mohr, pg. 3). So, the literal meaning of wisdom is to see and to know, which typically means same they are substitute of each other. As I mentioned above that wisdom is a type of knowledge, then what is knowledge? It is defined as a union of the consciousness of a subject, the knower, and an object, the thing known by means of an idea. Similarly, vision is a union between a seer and a thing seen by means of an image. (Mohr, Pg. 3). But, there are two kinds of knowledge. There is theoretical knowledge, such as knowledge of what love is, and there is practical knowledge, such as knowing how to love somebody. Wisdom could be described as a union between these two kinds of knowledge.

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 was a moral philosopher who was accused of impiety and was about to be tried for a crime, the nature of which no one seemed to understand. The trial and death of Socrates has four dialogs known as the Euthyphro, the Apology, the Crito, and the Phaedo which describes the process of Socrates’ controversial and insightful trial that raises the questions about human morality. Within the story we learned that the relationship between morality and religion might not be as clear-cut as some might think, Socrates forces the witnesses of his trial as well as ourselves to come to conclusions which result in a paradox that conflicts with the individual beliefs of his audience. In the event in which, Socrates poses a question to himself and Euthyphro, an attempt to answer the question "What is piety?" It has a specific tie to the events in “The Trial and Death of Socrates”, for Socrates had been accused of impiety and was about to be tried for the crime of heresy. The Euthyphro dialogue was written twenty-four centuries ago, and its conclusion is devastating for the whole idea that holiness and morality are very well connected. The idea that, “if God does not make something good by commanding it, but rather instead identifies that which is good, what measurement of morality does he use to make this judgment?” If something is right because god commands it, then it follows that something would be just as right if God instructed differently. If god declares that it is right to

To be begin with, an individual cannot be good until they have attained the virtue of wisdom, and the same can be said for the city. For the individual, the person must not only be wise himself, but his soul must have wisdom. The only way to achieve this according to Socrates, is through for philosophy. In this way it is the same for the city, for in the city, wisdom lies with the guardians as they are the philosophers. The guardians are put in charge of the city because of their knowledge of how the city should be run. Because of this, the Guardians wisdom becomes the City’s. (Book IV)

Ultimately, Socrates' whole life had been a service to the City begun out of a pious response to the saying of the gods. This is the deeper refutation of the charges. It is also another positive image of Socrates: He IS a gadfly.

In lines 31b Socrates stated, “That I am the kind of person to be a gift of the god to the city” as a defense towards the accusations that he was corrupting the youth of Athens. The people of Athens believed that Socrates’ methods of teaching were malicious and even thought he was

In his work Euthyphro, Plato introduces a religiously based moral code. This code, the divine command theory, stresses the pleasing of god in one’s moral actions. Plato’s characters, Euthyphro and Socrates, take turns in a debate defending and criticizing this theory. Its flawed nature is uncovered and we as readers are able to notice its advantages and disadvantages. Using these criticisms, revisions to the divine command theory have been made. After analyzing the divine command theory and noting both its advantages and its critiques, I largely agree with the criticisms that are made about it. However, with certain revisions, it can be transformed into a reliable and successful philosophy.