He then leads up to his main objection of this definition by means of stating that even though men and gods love that which they think is noble and good, and hate that which is opposite to those things, not everyone thinks this way about all things (Plato, 7). This being in the nature of things that are considered to be good by a group of people, can be hated by others, and this would also apply to the gods, for not everyone thinks the same. Socrates then uses a good example concerning the gods to better prove his reasons. He states that even though Euthyphro's decision to proceed against his own father may seem agreeable to Zeus, but not to Cronos or Uranus, and that there may be other gods who have these differences of opinions (7). Concerning
Ironically though, Socrates was put to death because of some of his thoughts. Apparently, a too examined life was also not worth living through the eyes of his executioner(s). This shows a strong tie to religion and the limiting factors of Greek civilization. Despite all the ostracizing, philosophy was destined to expand. Aristotle was one of the many who continued the tradition.
Validity in the Charges of Impiety against Socrates Impiety is commonly defined as a lack of proper concern for the obligations owed to public religious observation. Plato’s Apology consists of a speech made by Socrates, a well-known philosopher, in defense of his life and conduct at his trail. Socrates was accused of being impious through accusations such as corrupting the youth of Athens, not recognizing the gods that are recognized by the state, as well as inventing new deities. The question then becomes, with these accusations in mind, are the charges of impiety against Socrates valid? This question is not easy to answer, and is in fact, quite complex.
If these things are true , then Nietzsche can feel justified in arguing that Socrates was not a great man and that all of the philosophers that followed him through the leadership of Plato were also symptomatic of all that was wrong with Socrates and with his form of reasoning Read more: http://www.mightystudents.com/essay/Nietzsches.Socrates.essay.65984#ixzz2Q4lr9MXm argues against his ugliness , which appears in both writings on and sculptures of Socrates . If Socrates was ugly and conventional wisdom at the time during which Nietzsche lived was that criminals are ugly , is it not possible to argue that Socrates was not a great man , but , rather
The first was that he was teaching new gods not recognized by the Athenians. The second was that he was corrupting the youth with his ideas and beliefs. He had arguments to defend himself but it wouldn't do much because he was one individual going against the community. The three aspects of identity and the social environment are addressed many times in this novel. Socrates was one man being accused by another man, Meletus, and was going to be judged by the jury, or the community.
Secondly, that justice may be our deep-rooted understanding and ability to identify good from evil. My motivation for presenting my own definition stems from my frustration in Thrasymachus’s inability to see justice as something much more than a form of legalism Thrasymachus starts his definition by stating that justice is the interest or advantage of the stronger (338c). Immediately after being questioned by Socrates on this definition, Thrasymachus quickly clarifies that the stronger are in-fact the rulers and that justice is in the interest of them alone (339a). Socrates forces the examination of this definition, and results in Thrasymachus then defining interests as the laws that rulers make (338e). From there, Thrasymachus then states that justice, from the perspective of the ruler, is obeying their laws (339b).
Socrates questioned life and its values. He developed the Socratic Method, which was learning by asking questions. He encouraged people to analyze their answers to develop understanding. This analysis allowed people to strip away what they were taught by others, and get a new idea or truth. The Athenian government disapproved of Socrates' philosophies because they thought he corrupted the minds of the youth and that he didn't respect the Greek gods.
Phil 115 March 4, 2013 Apology and Euthyphro After Socrates claimed that he was not like Sophists or Presocratics, he answers the question as to what led him to make his so-called false accusations? He answered by explaining that he had developed a reputation of wisdom, but a type that was limited and human based. He added that it was not the kind of wisdom that gave him the power to enforce his beliefs on matters associated with the Sophists and the Presocratics. Socrates explained that he gained his reputation by a prophecy given by the Oracle at Delphi to his friend Chaerephon. Socrates told the tale of how Chaerephon had gone to the oracle and asked as to whether or not there was one wiser than Socrates, to which the Oracle replied, no.
In Plato's the Apology of Socrates, Socrates defends himself in front of the Athenian assembly for the allegedly failing to believe in the gods as well as harming the minds of young men of Athens by questioning those in authority and spreading false truths. His defense and explanation of his actions in the "service to the god" show that Athenians do not actually have the wisdom they claim to possess, that the absence of wisdom in government and society can harm a population and that while craft knowledge is valuable and explains the "how" of things, it lacks the ability to explain the "why" of things. He begins to refute the accusations against him by asking several questions of his prosecutor, Meletus, and comparing Meletus' answers to demonstrate
Socrates the modern Einstein in his age, innovating in science, math and reasoning, always taught his students to ask the question why. No matter what an authority said ,he always told them to ask the reasoning behind it. The leaders of classical Greece feared the power that had enthralled in the educated mass so they charged Socrates for corrupting the youth. Even though he was charged, his concepts of questioning any authority lived on his disciples. Without learning from that man, the democratic government of Greece wouldn't have been an archetype of a successful government.