The Apology: The Importance Of Plato's Contribution To Meaned Today

With the Apology, and the Crito, Socrates comes to delve into his many teachings and finds himself put to death with the words of wisdom that have been passed down generation after generation. Socrates for many in this present day is a man of many words and great teachings, but anyone but Socrates thought differently, in Athens people thought of him as an annoyance rather than an integral part of society. As Socrates stood in front of the counsel of judges, he stood for what he thought was right and never changed opinion of himself or of his words. That’s why Socrates is still talked about in classrooms everywhere today.

1. How historically accurate is Socrates' Apology? Is there greater value in historical accuracy or in general context and meaning? Why would the Apology be more historically accurate than Euthyphro? (Intro) 2.

The first concept that I noticed shared by Russell and Socrates was the concept that one had to remove themselves before serious philosophical contemplation could take place. In Russell 's case, he refers to the "Self" and the "Not-Self". With Socrates, as seen in the Apology, confronting his accuser about the corruption of youth, his accuser is silent because he had not given the matter any thought. Socrates awareness of his own ignorance frees him from what Russell would refer to as "Self". I mention this because it serves as a common theme even as both philosophers differ in their messages.

Anish Yonjan Philosophy 1301-73426 Prof. Marcos Arandia Feb. 19, 2017 Explain and evaluate Socrates' claim in the Apology that "the unexamined life is not worth living for a human being," and briefly analyze and discuss the particular method he uses to discover the truth (i.e., dialectics or the Socratic Method), using at least two examples from Plato's Euthyphro and/or Apology. Do you agree that a human being cannot live a fully satisfying life if he or she remains ignorant, like the slavish prisoners in Plato's cave? Why or why not? In the Plato’s Apology, Socrates claims that the “unexamined life is not worth living for a human being”.

For this week's journal entry, I would like to bring up the idea of "wisdom" in reference to Plato's Apology.  Personally, I find that the way in which Socrates defends is wisdom is admirable, and although it leads to the verdict of him being killed, I think that this decision and the reaction by Socrates helps define wisdom. Socrates, in essence, says that he does not fear death because he is wise.  No one knows what death is -- perhaps it may be the best thing a person gets to experience. However, a person that is unwise would approach death into thinking that it is the worst thing that can happen in life.

In Apology, Socrates faces possible execution as he stands trial in front of his fellow Athenian men. This jury of men must decide whether Socrates has acted impiously against the gods and if he has corrupted the youth of Athens. Socrates claims in his defense that he wants to live a private life, away from public affairs and teachings in Athens. He instead wants to focus on self-examination and learning truths from those in Athens through inquiry. Socrates argues that "a [man] who really fights for justice must lead a private, not a public, life if [he] is to survive for even a short time" (32a).

In this play the Socrates here doesn't sound like the Socrates from the Apology or the real life Socrates. The real Socrates doesn't actually teach per say, he teaches in a way that makes you yourself use your brain. He makes you question everything and understand things based on your own perception. The writer of this play clearly felt as if Socrates was a major problem in his society for allowing people to actually try to think outside of the box and ask questions. He most likely enjoyed the fact that everyone were robots and all thought alike and believed in the same thing because it brought no need to bring out discussion.

The term “apology comes from the Greek word apologia which means to defend. In this essay I would like to explain why I believe that The Apology by Plato should be classified as pity and fear, in regards to Greek tragedy. I believe that this is true because I can personally empathize with Socrates; this will be discussed later on in this essay. A tragic hero is considered to be an individual with an intellectual flaw or error, Socrates fits this description; Socrates failed to understand that he could not empathize with the jurors because they simply wanted him to acknowledge his prior offenses, while he only sought out telling the truth and not sullying his own moral code. Socrates should be considered a tragic hero because he had an intellectual error, not an ethical one.

The version of Socrates presented in both The Apology, Crito, and The Republic could very well be two different versions of Socrates as presented by Plato. However, both versions of Socrates have one thing in common: they both value the importance of philosophy and they both defend philosophy as something that is important to humanity. The Apology is Socrates defending not only himself, but also philosophy as an area of study that could be useful to the city of Athens. Socrates is trying to defend himself and his study and he tries to distance himself from the sophists in that they charge for money.

Introduction The Apology was written by Plato, and relates Socrates’ defense at his trial on charges of corrupting the youth and impiety. Socrates argues that he is innocent of both charges. Plato reports the contents of three speeches delivered by Socrates in his own protection in court which has been arranged over him by the Athenian democrats and has terminated in the death sentence to the great philosopher. The word "apology" in a literal translation means "justification". Plato's purpose when writing "Apology" was to acquit posthumously Socrates from false accusation.

No matter which path death is, death is a gain. One will either be a peaceful sleep, or a journey to another world filled with intelligent people and knowledge. He had support to his theory, but only talked about conversing with people from the past. The apology is repetitive in the last two paragraphs because Socrates desired to talk to all these different people. He did not clarify as to why living on Earth was cruel and that death was the only answer.

His personal defense is described in works two of his students: Xenophon and Plato. Both of them wrote papers called Apology, which is the Greek word for “defense”. In this essay I used Apology by Plato as the main resource, since it contents a more full account of the trial of Socrates and his words. Despite the fact that the philosopher attempted to defend himself and explain the reasons for saying and doing the things he did, it did not do any good for his justification. On the contrary, Socrates’ words seemed to make the jury harden their hearts and condemn him.

Socrates was a greek philosopher who found himself in trouble with his fellow citizens and court for standing his grounds on his new found beliefs from his studies about philosophical virtue, justice, and truth. In “Apology” written by Plato, Socrates defended himself in trial, not with the goal of escaping the death sentence, but with the goal of doing the right thing and standing for his beliefs. With this mindset, Socrates had no intention of kissing up to the Athenians to save his life. Many will argue that Socrates’ speech was not very effective because he did not fight for his life, he just accepted the death sentence that he was punished with. In his speech he said, “But now it’s time to leave, time for me to die and for you to live.”

In Plato’s Apology, Socrates is put into trial because he is accused of corrupting the youth with his teachings that deviate from the established beliefs of the Greek society. Although he justifies that he is only doing what he believes is his duty, he reasons that even if he is given a death penalty, death is nothing to be feared. He raises multiple strong and effective arguments that explain to his audience that it is illogical to fear death. All of these arguments revolves around the central idea that death is not evil and that “no evil can happen to a good man, either in life or after death” (Apology, 41c). The first argument that Socrates presents during his trial is the idea that death is not the most important thing to worry about in

According to Socrates perspective, the democracy of Athens was corrupt and even though they courts were made in such a way that everyone was judged fairly, it wasn’t such because there were no rules or principles set forth. When a person was brought to court in the Athenian court and the person spoke against the jurors or offended them, he or she could be prosecuted based on that. In summary, judgment was passed based on emotion rather than on justice. In the Apology, Socrates stated, “my present request seems a just one, for you to pay no attention to my manner of speech-