Why Was Socrates Acting Unjustly

Socrates was a Greek philosopher, who is one of the founders of western philosophy. Socrates never wrote down his ideas or thoughts; his student, Plato, wrote down his ideas and thoughts. Socrates was accused of expressing there were different Gods and he was brought to trial in 399.B.C.E. Socrates character, in the different passages I read, Euthyphro, Apology and Citro are a little contradictory. Also if the act of persuading the state is the only alternative to blind obedience, why did Socrates' in both of specifically in his defense and generally in his career make so little effort to persuade the people when they were acting unjustly? In this essay I hope to demonstrate how Socrates character contradicts in these different passages and

Euthyphro prosecuted his own father because he believes that a murderer should be punished regardless of the murderer’s reasoning. Euthyphro had no fear of acting impiously in bringing his father to trial. Socrates asks Euthyphro “…is the pious not the same and alike in every action, and the impious the opposite of all that is pious and like itself, and everything that is to be impious presents us with one form or appearance insofar as it is impious?” When asked, “…what is pious, and what the impious…” Euthyphro answers that he believes the pious is prosecuting the wrongdoer even though it is his own father. Socrates then continues to ask Euthyphro what it is he believes what the gods believe is pious or impious. After moments of discussing this question, Socrates and Euthyphro have come to terms that some things are considered just by some gods and unjust by others, and as they dispute about these things they are at odds and at war with each other. Socrates finally asks Euthyphro for proof that the gods would be in favor of him prosecuting his own father. Euthyphro responds saying, “I will show it to them clearly, Socrates, if only they will listen to me.” In response, Socrates says, “They will listen if they think you show them well.” This implies that the gods will only be in favor of Euthyphro’s decision if they like the idea. At this point, Socrates starts to question if things are right because the gods say they are right, or the gods say they are right because they are right. Socrates came to the conclusion that what Euthyphro was saying is that “…the pious and the god-loved were shown not to be the same but different from each other” and then later said, “…what is dear to the gods is the pious.” Socrates was not satisfied with this answer and wanted to start over from the beginning. However, he concludes that he believes that Euthyphro has a clear

Socrates meets Euthyphro outside of the courthouse and begin discussing the nature of impious and pious acts. Euthyphro claims to be an expert on these matters so he agrees to help Socrates understand piety better. Euthyphro’s first definition is “the pious is to do what I am doing now, to prosecute the wrongdoer, be it about murder.”(5d) Socrates objects to this saying that this would only counts as an instance of piety, and he is more interested in a universal element of all pious acts. Euthyphro elaborates to say that piety is what all the gods love, and impiety is what all the gods hate. (6e) Socrates rebukes that there are matters that some of the gods love, while other gods may hate. Socrates objects saying that gods disagree on issues, and that

Socrates begins his debate with Euthyphro by asking Euthyphro does he have a clear understanding of what is pious and impious. He asks this because he is face with the crime of impiety; Socrates hopes to learn from Euthyphro so he has a better understanding of his charge and can better defend himself in trial.

Socrates is one of the greatest philosophers that walk among the world. This philosopher was accused for corrupting the youth and he was sent to prison. In prison he had many chances of breaking out and living in a hideout somewhere in Europe. He believed that breaking out of prison is unjust and the just thing would be to stay. He was with the government by staying in jail by not breaking out. This could what is going around the world today with government laws. The just thing is to follow the rules and the unjust is not to follow or get thrown into prison. Also that can go with religion for instance the Catholic Church. They say it is unjust to lie for any purposes, but sometimes you have to life to not hurt other. The church said it is unjust

He even went as far to claim that he was an expert on piety. Socrates took this as an opportunity to request for him to grant him enlightenment about piety. There were many gods believed to exist during this time, so Euthyphro firsts tries to answer the question with a simple deffiniton. He explains how Zeus punished his father for the sinful deeds of killing his previous children. That it does not matter who brings him to justice, only that it is completed. He says, “Piety is doing as I am doing; that is to say, any; prosecuting any one who is guilty of murder, sacrilege, or of similar crime -- whether he be your father or mother, or whoever he may be -- that makes no difference; and not to prosecute them is impiety.” (5e). This would mean that piety is simply persecuting ones father. Socrates is not satisfied with this simple definition answer, because an example cannot be the accurate deffiniton of something. He states, “Remember that I did not ask you to give me two or three examples of piety, but to explain the general idea which makes all things pious to be pious”

The next premise we are given by Socrates is that our obligation to follow the rules of our country stems from our consent expressed in our continuous residence in our country after we have been made aware of the entirety of the laws. If one did not wish to continue their residence in country, the Laws did not restrict them from leaving. The consent is not something explicitly given in most cases, but we give our consent through our actions. By not attempting to change our dwelling, we are giving our permission to be ruled. We were not tricked into giving our consent. We made a choice when we remained in the country by which we agreed to follow the Laws and to receive the benefits provided by such a relationship. By remaining, we receive an

The trial of Socrates has established itself as one of the most popular topics for not only the deliberation of Socrates as a Philosopher, but in the context of Philosophy as a whole. When we think about forgiveness, it is likely that our mind associates the phrase with the task of asking someone for their legitimate pardon, or as a ritual part of a religious ceremony, asking the high all mighty for his forgiveness. As we turn our attention to Socrates, the idea of pardon in the context of his Apology, illustrates both reality and truth, shifting back and forth between one another; as he demonstrates his knowledge by the idea of knowing by not knowing to those who accused him. It is important to state, that though the Apology involves Socrates directly and represents him as the main character and narrator, the factual evidence of his trial was brought together, written, and established into a formal Philosophical piece by one of his most known disciples, Plato. As one reads through the famous Apology, it is relatively easy to locate the audience in mind in terms of whom it is directed to; that is students majoring, or currently taking a Philosophy class, or Philosophy fanatics who are intrigued by Socrates and the things that were said as part of his well-known trial. As we emphasize the idea of his Apology, it is relatively amusing why Socrates found himself in a court of law to begin with. Socrates as the Apology written by Plato narrates; was formally being charged with

In the beginning of the play, after Euthyphro enquires from Socrates about his reason for being present in King Archon’s court, to which he informs him on how he was indicted by Meletus for corrupting the people’s minds against the Gods, Socrates enquires about Euthyphro’s presence at court, which he replies that he is prosecuting against his father for murder of a labourer, who was one of Euthyphro’s defendants, which leaves Socrates surprised. Nonetheless, what leaves Socrates astonished about Euthyphro’s confidence on his father’s prosecution on murder, when he shares his, his father and family’s thought on this prosecution as: “it is impious for a son to prosecute his father for murder. But their ideas of the divine attitude to piety and impiety are wrong, Socrates.” (4e, Grube and Cooper, p.5)

In Plato’s Euthyphro, Socrates, in his discussion with the religious “expert” Euthyphro, expressed his disbelief at the Athenian’s boldness in charging his own father with murder on the grounds of impiety. Since Socrates himself was being charged of impious behavior, he is interested in understanding what exactly piety and impiety are, and knowing that Euthyphro considers himself an expert on piety and impiety, he felt it would only make sense if he began his usual line of questioning to better understand the charge he was facing. Of course, as in every other case, Euthyphro is unable to give Socrates an answer that would satisfy him.

Few names in history have withstood the test of time, remaining currently studied and discussed to the point of familiarity. Socrates is one such unique name. A man of ethics and reason, Socrates would change history forever, creating a love of reason and knowledge unestablished by his predecessors. Despite the admiration and respect Socrates found in most Athenian circles, his revolutionary methods and inquisitive mind would eventually be his undoing. Socrates pursuit of the truth directly conflicted with the ideas of moral and social conformity, ultimately leading to his conviction under the very laws he deemed fair and just. I intend to argue that Socrates, though unfairly

From the beginning when Socrates discovers that Euthyphro is charging his father with murder he begins to wonder how much he actually knows about piety and impiety. There is a bit of irony when Socrates acts as if he needs help learning from an expert (Euthyphro) when he knows more than him and decides to play with his mind to see what he actually knows. Socrates questions him “Tell me then, what is the pious, and what is the impious, do you say?”. (20) Euthyphro states that he believes what he is doing is right by accusing

Practically in all his discourses, Plato wrote about the works of Socrates that acted as the main persona in his confabs. In Plato’s laws and Xenophon’s Hiero, a further wise man other than Socrates acted as the leader of the discourse. While having protagonist confabs in Plato’s and Xenophon’s works, Socrates tries to interrogate understanding of the further man on the aspect of morality. Socrates presented himself as a less knowledgeable person in the domain of moral issues to confuse the other person who boasts of being more knowledgeable on the same. Using this ironical approach –known as the Socratic Irony -, Socrates was able to illustrate inconsistency of the other person’s views on morality. Although the early and middle works of Plato are considered as Socratic dialogue, understanding the composition and chronology of Plato’s work is a bit complex since even the ancient sources do not present these works chronologically. Plato’s work basically involved posing questions and answers as a way of stimulating critical thinking. Defender of a particular point of view would be questioned, and then one of the parties would contradict himself in order to confuse his counterpart and in doing so, the defender would be made weak. Socrates discourses revolved around traditions, justice, afterlife and education. In light to this, this paper will unravel Socrates accounts balance Aristophanes’ and Xenophon’s on afterlife, justice and law, education and traditional practices.

In the Euthyphro, Socrates goes on to have a serious argument with a self assured, presumptuous young man, Euthyphro. Euthyphro has the reputation of being a wise person, godly of some sort. Both Socrates and Euthyphro are involved in matters of a legal nature. Socrates has been accused of impiety and the youth and is facing a court trial. Euthyphro advises Socrates for making a contrast when it comes to murder and goes on to say that he feels as if it is his duty to bring charge against his father even if it is family, otherwise impiety, while the rest of his family go on to say “He did not kill him, and that if he did, dead man was

This brings me to my second point, where I am going to introduce Euthyphro. Euthyphro is a professional priest and he claims to know everything there is to know about the holy manners. Long story short, Euthyphro wants to prosecute his father and Socrates wants to ask questions about Euthyphros decision. Socrates brings up the idea of piety and asks him what it is.  Socrates, already knowing what piety is, only does this to get Euthyphro to realize he actually has no idea what he is talking about. In Plato Five Dialogues on page 7, Socrates says to Euthyphro, “…For now, try to tell me more clearly what I was asking just now, for, my friend, you did not teach me adequately when I asked you what the pious was…” Here, Socrates is trying to get him to realize that everything that he is saying is wrong. He is trying to make Euthyphro feel as if he knows nothing about what he is talking about. Socrates is trying to get him to realize how arrogant he is. Instead of telling Euthyphro his view isn’t right, Socrates questions him about it instead. Instead of acting like he knows what he is talking about, Socrates pretends to admire Euthyphros’ “wisdom”. Socrates states “…I am so desirous of