Compare Nietzsche's Account Of The Good Life Aristotle

As a defender of civic virtue, the significance of obligation and authority of one’s representative government epitomizes the magnitude of respect that Socrates had for Athenian Jurisprudence, irrespective of the fact that he was prosecuted against. In the accounts of the Apology and Crito, there exists a plethora of evidence that demonstrate Socrates’s adherence of institutionalized authority. His loyalty of the Athenian State derives from his notion that the obligation to surrender to the law manifests a just society. One may ask, “how is it possible for a persecuted man to continue to profess allegiance to a polity that sought his trial and execution”? Though many would not have the capacity to sustain such integrity, Socrates had his reasons in

3. Another crucial piece of dialogue is Socrates's discussion of what would happen if they were to acquit him of the charges and allow him to live if he would stop discussing his philosophy. To this line of reasoning Socrates avows that he would not be willing or even able to cease his discussions and his practice of philosophy because he believes it is a task put on him by the gods, 29d paraphrased. This statement displays Socrates's deep need to live a life of integrity. Further he proclaims that were he to live he will continue to “go around doing nothing but persuading both young and old among you not to care for your body or wealth in preference to or as strongly as for the best possible state of your soul” 30a-b. Socrates's main concern is the welfare of the souls of all

To this question, first Socrates says that he should not revenge injustice. Because doing injustice is bad in any circumstances (Crito 49b), to return injustice just because of having injustice done onto himself would bad also (Crito 49c). Therefore Socrates should not commit injustice just to get even with Athens. Injustice is bad because it harms, and disobedience to the law would harm the city (Crito 50b); so it seems that to disobey the law would be an injustice. But why should Socrates obey the law of the city? Socrates reasons that since the city has done him great benefactions, such as giving birth to his life, taking care of his physical upbringing and his education, and granting him long years of benefits from the legal system (Crito 50e - 51c), Socrates owns the state a strong duty of gratitude just as a child would own to his father. One of those duties is to obey the state (like how a child obeys his parents), which always has included the possibility of death such as in times of war (Crito 51b). Socrates should obey the city because he has made an agreement to do so. This agreement is the social contract that he has implicitly accepted and lived under for 70 years. This contract is legitimate because Socrates had a thorough understanding of the legal system (Crito 51e - 52a), he did not leave the city when he was given the fair chance all his life (Crito 51 c-e), and that he

To Socrates laws only have meaning because the people give them meaning and only by following the laws do we see the actual value of them. According to Socrates the relationship of the people and the states are like that of a child and their parents. He claims that state raises the people by guiding them with laws giving them order and educates the people of what’s right and what’s wrong. Socrates does not believe in disobeying the law to set examples as you would not disobey your parents just to prove a point. Socrates is appreciative for what state has done for him and feels as if it is his duty and obligation to repay them or show gratitude to the state by following its laws.

Socrates, at the other end of the spectrum, saw politics as a wasted venture for him because his life was devoted to a quest for knowledge. He stated his way of life, which conflicts with that of Pericles' model, to differ from that of the democratic system of Athens because he saw the government to be corrupt and the majority to not be just. Socrates did not bother to lead a life of servitude to the ideals of the state because he showed through his actions that an unexamined life without critical thinking was not a life at all. As is made clear by the admittance of Socrates himself, his defense plea is the first time he has appeared in a court of law, even by the age of seventy. Socrates' life was dedicated to the pursuit of further comprehension and debate with the Athenian people on the deeper issues of life, not to a court

He knows that if he escaped, it would be a crime. I find it ironic that he would argue his trial, but not argue his punishment from the trial he argued. The bottom line with Socrates and laws is that he probably did not live by them very closely. It is my belief that Socrates was a good person with good morals. He probably saw laws for the weak minded, and he was certain he was not weak minded. The question of whether he would abide by these laws is that he would and he did. He died for them.

In Plato’s Apology of Socrates, Socrates defies the legislative authority of Athens by refusing to stop philosophizing, which he justifies in the name of reason. Socrates’s argument in favor of philosophizing is based on what he believes is human nature or the gods’ will, which is demonstrated when he states, “I will obey the gods rather than you; and as long as I breathe and am able to, I will certainly not stop philosophizing…” (Plato’s Apology of Socrates, 81). Socrates goes on to claim that his actions are just because he is seeking virtue and ultimately, happiness, and “how [the] soul will be the best possible” (Plato’s Apology of Socrates, 81). He argues that it is human nature to philosophize and this is how humans reach their ultimate fulfillment and happiness, and anything that interferes with that pursuit of happiness is by definition unjust. When Athens orders Socrates to stop philosophizing, they are interfering with his pursuit of happiness and thus, the law is unjust and can be disobeyed.

Athens could also be seen as a place where they educated their citizens. Socrates understood that he would not be the man who he is today, without Athens. Like anything, a child would not willingly do harm on a parent, especially if they receive love and protection, and no harm in return. This parental versus child relationship is quite similar to the relationship Socrates had with Athens. The people of Athens could have assumed that Socrates would try to escape and that his death sentence would not follow through, but Socrates did not see this as an important factor. He believed that if he escaped, it would hinder the image of Athens because he would not be following their laws, which might influence the citizens to also break the laws of Athens. People with a lot of influence, have a lot of followers, for example, the people of Athens. If Socrates, supposedly the wisest man were to escape from prison and his death sentence, other people might think it is fine to disobey Athens as well. On the other hand, the citizens expected him to escape, but the fact that he stayed in prison to face his death sentence shows how seriously he took subjects like harming others and obeying the state to heart. Another objection to this argument could be, that Socrates was falsely accused and was harmed when he was truly innocent, he did not commit any of the crimes he was accused of, but Socrates still had the opportunity to a fair trial, he just did not use

well." This means abiding by a set of values and morals which will lead to a

In his hypothetical argument with the law, the law states that his idea that because the courts wronged him, he should not now wrong them because the two parties are not equal. The Athenian government believes that is is bad to wrong your country because they have given him everything: his life, education and nurturing as they did with his ancestors. This argument tells Socrates, how the gods want him to care about his country more than his own family and though he does not fear death he does think of judgement from the gods.

Do we have an obligation to obey any law, no matter how unjust or evil, provided only that it is in fact a valid rule of the legal system in which we happen to be physically located? In the following composition, I am going to examine the answer to this question in accordance to what Socrates believes. The best way to understand this almost “WWSD” (What Would Socrates Do) approach is by looking at Socrates' actions in the three Platonic dialogues we have read. These dialogues bring forth three possible bases for why Socrates believes one should obey the law. First, that there is a distinction between the the “justness” of a law and how that law is applied. Second, that if one willingly accepts living in a

“The good life” can have various interpretations to different people. Sophocles’ Antigone and Socrates in the Apology represent similar principles that guide the way in which the characters live their life. In Sophocles’ play, Antigone goes against the wishes of her uncle, Creon, to do what she believes is morally right and just. Similarly, in the Apology, Socrates defends himself against the accusations of Meletus, who claims that Socrates does not acknowledge the gods of the city and corrupts others by teaching philosophy (Apology, 28). Both Antigone and Socrates believed that “the good life” was rooted in following the wishes of the gods and doing what was right in accordance with the divine. Additionally, Socrates held the idea that

The concept of living “the good life” means something different for everyone. There is a general understanding that living “the good life” is associated with unyielding happiness and lasting satisfaction. The exact meaning of this desired life was pondered by thinkers and philosophers for hundreds of years. They constructed principals of behavior, thought, and obligation that would categorize a person as “good”. Although some of these ancient philosophies about “the good life” had overlapping ideas, their concepts varied widely. This contrast of ideas can be examined through two major characters in two famous works: Aeneas in “The Aeneid” and Socrates in “The Apology”. Aeneas exemplifies the philosophy that the direct route to “the good life" is through faith, trust in the Gods, and family, while Socrates in “The Apology” emphasizes free will, and vast knowledge of life.

Here Nietzsche is saying Socrates was wrong and false in his beliefs, that the very nature of what he preached was faulty as he had only redirected the problem and did not solve it at all. Not only was his methodology faulty and decadent however, Nietzsche believes that Socrates’s very nature was corrupt “A monster in face, monster in soul”. He believes that Socrates by his very nature makes it impossible to come to proper conclusions as Socrates himself is a bitter man, angry at the strong, seeking to tear them from their position. He believes Socrates is the first weak man to rise up against the strong. He often refers to Socrates as a criminal, to Nietzsche he is a huckster, a conman seeking to throw down the ideals of ancient Greece to subvert master ideals and replace them with the ideals of the slave.

As with most philosophers, the philosophical method of both Plato and Nietzsche was influenced by philosophers before them. Plato is the well-known protégé of Socrates. Many of Plato’s dialogues include Socrates in them or are written about Socrates, such as The Apology, which is Plato’s