Emily Wilson’s The Death of Socrates provides its audience with a comprehensive account of how Socrates’s death has been viewed through history since the philosopher ended his life using hemlock in 399 BC. Having set the scene in her introduction, Wilson first outlines Socrates’ philosophy and explains the factors which caused his death. After this, Wilson chronologically details perceptions of Socrates’ death (and to a lesser extent his life), covering an enormous range of intellectual and cultural media in the process, from the writings of Cicero, Voltaire and Nietzsche to 20th century depictions of his death in plays and on television.
The introduction begins by outlining the overwhelmingly positive modern consensus on Socrates: a man
…show more content…
Wilson first recognises the so-called ‘Socratic Problem’: due to the differing representations in the sources, there is little certainty “about the historical Socrates” (p.92). Meanwhile, Plato’s (literary) Socrates has proved overwhelmingly dominant in the “western tradition”, (p.94) making it difficult to consider him outside “the eyes of Plato” (p.94) Plato’s Socrates is then contrasted with the different version given by Xenophon, who presents a more ordinary, ascetic figure. This reflects Xenophon’s admiration of Sparta and for him, Socrates’ death demonstrates Athenian “moral decadence” (p.97). Wilson reminds us that though less interesting, Xenophon’s Socrates has been more prominent than Plato’s at various points. Indeed, she suggests that there has been a recent return to a “Xenophontic vision of Socrates” (p.99). After this, Wilson provides a detailed account of Socrates in various works of …show more content…
In the 18th century, the significance of Socrates’ death diverges from Christianity and is swept up by the cultural and intellectual currents of the Enlightenment. According to Wilson, this reflects a “change in the source material”, (p.173) as Plato became increasingly read during the 18th century. Whilst always a topic of focus, Socrates’ life and death was interpreted in several ways during the Enlightenment. Diderot saw the “dying Socrates as a model of integrity.” (p. 180) On the other hand, Ferret contended that Socrates was “no martyr to truth” (p.185) and that his death was a justified political decision on the part of the Athenian government. For him, Athens was rightly condemning the disliked “teacher of Alcibiades and Critias” (p.185) and a “man who threatened the wellbeing of the state.” (p.186) Meanwhile, Voltaire had a more conflicted relationship with Socrates as although he considered him a precedent of deaths caused by intolerance, he disliked the man himself. In the final chapter, Wilson begins by suggesting that the death of Socrates “was seen as an iconic moment in the formation of modernity.” (p.192) Here, she focusses on Hegel, Kierkegaard and Nietzsche, who all reflected on the event as the beginning of “modern ethical and political thought.” Hegel considered Socrates’ death as tragic precisely because both sides, Athens and Socrates himself, were correct in their respective approaches. As
In this paper I talked about Plato’s essay The Apology, in which Socrates was accused of committing four crimes against the people of Athens. These four charges were that he argued the physical over the metaphysical, he argued the weaker claim over the stronger claim, he went against the gods, and he corrupted the youth. Each of these claims was completely erroneous for their own reasons, however the court sentenced him to death anyways. The fact that he was executed despite being falsely accused and the fact that he accepted death instead of abandoning his beliefs helped make him the philosopher that is loved and revered still to this day.
For these two articles that we read in Crito and Apology by Plato, we could know Socrates is an enduring person with imagination, because he presents us with a mass of contradictions: Most eloquent men, yet he never wrote a word; ugliest yet most profoundly attractive; ignorant yet wise; wrongfully convicted, yet unwilling to avoid his unjust execution. Behind these conundrums is a contradiction less often explored: Socrates is at once the most Athenian, most local, citizenly, and patriotic of philosophers; and yet the most self-regarding of Athenians. Exploring that contradiction, between Socrates the loyal Athenian citizen and Socrates the philosophical critic of Athenian society, will help to position Plato's Socrates in an Athenian legal and historical context; it allows us to reunite Socrates the literary character and Athens the democratic city that tried and executed him. Moreover, those help us to understand Plato¡¦s presentation of the strange legal and ethical drama.
In his work Socrates’ Apology to the Jury, Xenophon produces an account of the Socratic deliberation –and indeed the logic that seemed to inform that deliberation- over his trial. Specifically, Xenophon, provides his readers with an ambivalent justification of Socrates’ chosen rhetoric during his trial, namely his “boastful manner of speaking” or megalegoria (Patch, footnote 2). Indeed, instead of choosing to deliver a speech that would gain him the jury’s sympathy and the city’s acquittal, Socrates proceeds to deliver a speech that is characterized mainly by its ironic arrogance. Xenophon goes so far as to provide his readers with a kind of statement of purpose that frames Socrates’ megalegoric speech; Socrates had, in the words of Xenophon,
Works Cited Plato. The. The "Crito". Annotated text. The Last Days of Socrates.
In Plato’s Apology, Socrates uses religious appeals, proof by contradictions and various examples to argue for his innocence in court. Socrates is forced to argue for the sake of his life to prove that he is not guilty. In Socrates’ speech, however, he is not apologizing for anything instead, the word comes from the Greek word “apologia,” that translates to a speech made in defense. In this paper, I will argue that Socrates’ decision to stay in Athens and to accept suicide was unethical, because he purposefully antagonized the people who control his fate and this ultimately led to the death penalty.
During this essay the trail of Socrates found in the Apology of Plato will be reviewed. What will be looked at during this review is how well Socrates rebuts the charges made against him. We will also talk about if Socrates made the right decision to not escape prison with Crito. Socrates was a very intelligent man; this is why this review is so critical.
Plato was the author of the Apology of Socrates, which was one of the four major works of ancient Greek literature. Though the title was the Apology of Socrates, the text referred to the defense speeches of Socrates against the Athenian council. At the end, Socrates was found to be guilty and was sentenced to death. However, the Athenian council was not acting justly because Socrates did nothing wrong as he had successfully developed a reasonable logic against the charges. I will address this notion through the analysis of the arguments and the logic that Socrates used to conduct his defense.
In the book “Phaedo,” Plato discusses the theory of forms with ideas that concern the morality of the form. There are four philosophers that are expressed which are Phaedo, Cebes, and Simmias regarding the execution of Socrates. Socrates is presented in “Phaedo” on the morning of his execution where he is being killed. He tells his disciples Simmias and Cebes that he is not afraid of dying because a true philosopher should welcome and look forward to death but not suicide. A man should never commit suicide. He says that we are possessions of the Gods and should not harm themselves. He provides the four arguments for his claim that the soul is immortal and that a philosopher spends his whole life preparing for death.
In 399 BC, Socrates, the great philosopher in ancient Greece, was put to death under the hands of his Athenian fellow-citizens to whom he had a strong attachment, after a final vote with over two-thirds of jurymen against him. We cannot experience the situation where Socrates gave his final argument in the court of law. From Plato’s Apology, we admire Socrates’ brilliant rhetoric and rigorous logic, while at the same time feel pity for him and indignant with those ruthless jurymen. However, the question of what exactly caused his death and why was Socrates, such a remarkable thinker sentenced to death in the very society that valued democracy the most is not easy and straightforward to answer. There are multiple elements involved that finally caused this tragedy in which “a person of high moral principle is confronted step by step with a situation from which there is no escape” (38). First of all, the moral principle and belief in divinity held by Socrates are inconsistent with those of the Athenian society, implying the very crimes charged upon Socrates were not completely groundless. Secondly, the imperfect juridical system of Athens played a role in causing this tragedy. What’s more, Socrates himself, could have offered better defense in the court, also had a hand in his own death by his stubbornness regarding to his own interpretation of wisdom and piety. His rebuttal, though brilliant and insightful, was not persuasive enough to move the fellow-citizens for his wrong approach and sophistry in his cross-examination on Meletus.
Socrates is faced with a death sentence after getting accused of devaluing the Athens religion through his practice of philosophy. Most people will feel outraged and betrayed, but not Socrates. He accepts his punishment and takes it on as faith.
Socrates reaches a conclusion that defies a common-sense understanding of justice. Nothing about his death sentence “seems” just, but after further consideration, we find that his escape would be as fruitless as his death, and that in some sense, Socrates owes his obedience to whatever orders Athens gives him since he has benefited from his citizenship.
(37) The problem is that many of the citizens of Athens who wanted Socrates dead, lacked that emotional intelligence and thought highly of themselves. So of course they become defensive when Socrates sheds light on the idea that they may be wrong. As someone who cared most about the improvement of the soul, Socrates would have made a constructive role model to the criminals of Athens, as he would go on saying, “virtue is not given by money, but that from virtue comes money and every other good of man…”(35) Socrates was able to benefit everyone alike as he had human wisdom- something that all the Athenians could relate
Imagine the time just after the death of Socrates. The people of Athens were filled with questions about the final judgment of this well-known, long-time citizen of Athens. Socrates was accused at the end of his life of impiety and corruption of youth. Rumors, prejudices, and questions flew about the town. Plato experienced this situation when Socrates, his teacher and friend, accepted the ruling of death from an Athenian court. In The Last Days of Socrates, Plato uses Socrates’ own voice to explain the reasons that Socrates, though innocent in Plato’s view, was convicted and why Socrates did not escape his punishment as offered by the court. The writings, “Euthyphro,” “The Apology,” “Crito,” and “Pheado” not only helped the general population of Athens and the friends and followers of Socrates understand his death, but also showed Socrates in the best possible light. They are connected by their common theme of a memoriam to Socrates and the discussion of virtues. By studying these texts, researchers can see into the culture of Athens, but most important are the discussions about relationships in the book. The relationships between the religion and state and individual and society have impacted the past and are still concerns that are with us today.
Whether Socrates is portrayed correctly or not, he certainly was a great man. His contribution to western thought cannot be denied. For even if his teachings were different from what they are known to be at present, his influence on Plato is immense. And so, it is no small matter to describe the tragic passing of such a man as Socrates was and remains for philosophy today. Yet in all the indignation which is expected to arise at the death of Socrates, the panache with which he departs is captured excellently in Plato's “Apology.” Specifically, at the end of the "Apology," Socrates makes a very important statement that has had great impact on philosophy ever since its original proclamation. The Stoics in particular have taken this to be the cornerstone of their ideology. The statement made is that "you must regard one thing at least as certain—that no harm can come to a good man either in his life or after his death,” (Plato 100). The following examination focuses therefore on a brief explanation of the circumstances which lead to this statement being made by Socrates, as well as a closer look at why he thinks this to be the case. It is assumed that this statement is true, and validation for that assumption is to be sought as well.
When Socrates was brought to trial for the corruption of the city’s youth he knew he had done nothing wrong. He had lived his life as it should be lead, and did what he ne...