Socrates The Apology Analysis

The purpose of this paper is to explain Socrates' argument that there is good hope that death is a blessing and why it is a sound enough argument (40 c). This will be done by asking six questions to understand and evaluate any argument. From there the conclusion will be met as to why Socrates' argument in the apology is a sound enough one.

According to Socrates’ purpose, he sought out the wisest of people, taught the principle of virtue, and shared his divine beliefs; which had ultimately caused him to create some enemies. Through elenchus and refutation, Socrates’ proved that the wisest of people really weren’t that wise, and this examination was a highly attended event by wealthy young adults.

In Apology, Plato 's representation of Socrates states "as I thought and believed, to live the life of a philosopher, to examine myself and others". This statement is a response to the scornful remarks of the accusers asking him if he is not ashamed of where his "human wisdom" has gotten him. Socrates states that a "man who is any good" should only consider "whether he is acting like a good or a bad man". It is evident that Socrates views good character as an important trait of a wise person. He goes on to say that all men should take care

The fight to do what is right is not an easy path to traverse, but is one which demands a noble and enduring character. Defending principles of justice with logic and reason in the face of political opposition, is a difficult task to take, but the elusive Socrates boldly undertook this endeavor. In Plato’s Apology, he recalls the daring defence of the principles of truth that Socrates took against all odds. Plato’s recollections, much like the trial of Socrates at the time, has sparked numerous debates amongst scholars who seek to understand the events of the trial more deeply. One such debate has centered on what Socrates meant when he said his speech was nothing more than words spoken at random. Brumbaugh and Oldfather, in their scholarly analysis, contend that Socrates’s speech is riddled with fine polish and organization suggesting that his speech was not random. As will be discussed, there are several examples of organization in Socrates’s speech such as when he provides his jurors with an outline of his speech. Additionally, masterfully woven throughout his defence, Socrates employed many diverse modes of argumentation in a logical and consistent manner lending credence to the notion that he planned his speech beforehand. This skillful use of these modes in Socrates’s argument, all vindicate an intentional design and premeditation. Despite Socrates’s humble assertions

Socrates has gotten the reputation of not being a great person. This reputation has come about somewhat due to the Oracle at Delphi. Socrates’s friend Chaerephon went to the oracle and asked who the wisest person was. The response was the Socrates was the wisest. Socrates did not believe this and set out prove the oracle wrong. He found people that were known as wise people around the town and surrounding areas. Socrates would question them to try and show

Since he claimed that he is not like these people, he opens himself up by saying he has no particular knowledge to teach at all but has a particular kind of wisdom, not the kind of spiritual wisdom he was accused of. This stature was originated in a prophecy and was given by the oracle of Delphi to Chaerephon. Chaerephon asked the oracle if there was anyone wiser than Socrates, and the priestess’ response was that there was no one as wise as or even wiser than Socrates.

In his explanation of his behavior, Socrates also adds that part of his duty as a wise man, is to make sure that he questions the behavior of other wise men to make sure that those men are also aware

Socrates, in skepticism, began a search for those with a reputation of wisdom. After studying men and their knowledge, he reasoned that the only true wisdom consists in knowing that you know nothing. Although one may have extensive understanding in one area, there is way too much knowledge in the world to be contained by one man. Socrates stated, “I found that the men most in repute were all but the most foolish, and that some inferior men were really wiser and better” (Plato, 23). Those who believed that they knew it all could not be more ignorant, and those who admitted ignorance achieved the highest wisdom attainable on earth. Socrates accepted the idea that he, just like all men, contained very little or no wisdom at all. He was content with knowing this, and upon meeting others that lacked this philosophy, felt he was superior to them. He was unsure of the limitations the afterlife had on wisdom, but he was aware of it’s constraints on earth. This self awareness is what gifted him with the highest sense of enlightenment.

Socrates was a pompous man who believed that he was wiser than most, if not all, Athenian men of his time. He is also credited as one of the fathers of western philosophy, his own philosophy revolving around the welfare of one’s soul and reflecting on what the good life was. He was told by an oracle that he was the wisest of men and spent a great deal of time trying to prove it false, he decided that he was considered wise for accepting that he knew nothing, and never claimed to know anything that he questioned. In Plato’s text “Apology” Socrates is depicted as a man who was arrogant, hypercritical of others, and fixed on his ways no matter the consequences. He had the qualities of a man who saw no error in what he was doing because he

The arguments Socrates gives in his defense of this accusation is essentially a lot of “double talk”. He insists that he knows that he has “no wisdom, great or small”. Socrates defends himself by invoking the words of the Oracle of Delphi, who purportedly declared Socrates as the wisest man of all. Then he reminisces about his journey to prove the Oracle wrong by seeking out men who are known for their wisdom, eventually concluding that the Oracle is not wrong because essentially wisdom is the ability to admit what one does not know and he is happily willing to do so.

   In any case of law, when considering truth and justice, one must first look at the validity of the court and the system itself.  In Socrates' case, the situation is no different.  One may be said to be guilty or innocent of any crime, but guilt or innocence is only as valid as the court it is subjected to.  Therefore, in considering whether Socrates is guilty or not, it must be kept in mind the norms and standards of Athens at that time, and the validity of his accusers and the crimes he allegedly committed.  Is Socrates guilty or innocent of his accusations?

In order to do this, he goes about Athens questioning those he believes to be wiser than him, including politicians, poets, and craftsmen. Upon this questioning, he discovers that even those perceived as the wisest actually know far less than one would expect. Even the craftsmen, who have much practical wisdom in their respective fields, see their success as merely a tribute to their vast knowledge of many subjects. This, Socrates claims, is not true wisdom. Human wisdom can be described as the acknowledgement and acceptance that one does not know everything, nor is one capable of knowing everything. This, however, does not mean that people should sit idly by, never pursuing wisdom, for it is still vital to the attainment of a good life, which should be the ultimate goal of mankind.

First of all, Socrates defines knowledge as, acknowledging the limits of one’s own knowledge. In “the Apology,” Socrates defines it as, “I know that I know nothing.” When he was questioning the politicians, he found out they were very wise, but they didn’t know much of anything. After them he questioned the poets and the poets seemed to be incapable of explaining their well-known works. Socrates came to the conclusion that their intellect didn’t come from their wisdom, but from their instinct or inspiration which is no way connected to their intellect. Several bystanders take Socrates to be an expert in the fields, in which he questions others, he denies of any expertise, and interprets the oracle as saying that the wisest of men are men like Socrates who humbly accept that their wisdom is deficient. He claimed he was wise, in the limited

When Socrates received the prophecy from the Oracle of Delphi where he affirmed that he is not wise. Howver, he spent his journey attempting to prove the Oracle wrong. In his journey after the prophecy, Socrates questioned whomever he encountered. His conclusion also involved the awareness that human wisdom has little to no worth in reality. Socrates saw countless men arguing about subjects they knew nothing about. These men argued to give the false sense to themselves and others that they are wise. They failed to see that wisdom is not having unlimited knowledge but to understand oneself and limited

He then says that he is not a person who charges money for being a philosophist. They do help people become better, but he does not do this. He then leads into what could have led to the accusation and stated that he has wisdom. In order to find this, he questioned politicians, poets, and craftsmen. He found that the politicians did not know much of anything, the poets did not understand their work, and the craftsmen only had knowledge in their own field and could not speak about others. Therefore, he stated that he would be wiser than all of them. He knows that he does not know and this helps him truly know what wisdom is. Many people say that Socrates is an expert, but he denies this. He thinks he needs to question people who think they are wise. This makes many young people follow him and when they do not like his claims, they bring charges against