Samantha Austin
Phil 120
October 29, 201
Socrates was Wise About God
“Wisdom” is from an Indo-European root, woid, weid, wid, which means to see. Seeing is a metaphor (a figure of speech in which a word or phrase literally referring to one kind of object or idea is used in place of another to suggest likeness between them) for knowledge (Mohr, p.3). Seeing is the union between a seer and a thing seen by means of an image. The definition of knowledge is a union of a consciousness of a subject, the knower, and an object, the thing known by means of an idea (what different things of the same kind have in common that allow them to be called by the same name). Thus, knowing is like that of seeing as the seer is united with the thing seen by means
…show more content…
Socrates willingly submits himself to the mercy of his accusers for punishment at the end of his appeal: “For I do believe that there are gods and in a far higher sense than any of my accusers believe in them. And to you and to God I commit my cause, to be determined by you as is best for you and me" (Apology, 35d). He commits himself to the mercy of the jury as he knows gods plan will be followed and that no harm will come in death to a good man such as he. Socrates also had the opportunity to appeal to the emotions of the jury by bringing in his wife and children but did not as that would be an attempt to thwart Gods …show more content…
They are one in the same. This is seen clearly as we judge others based on how well we share and communicate. In communicating, we are one with God. Thus the idea of the good is sharing which is communication, which is God. Socrates is united to God in knowledge and communication as symbolized by the analogy.
Socrates’s idea of God is of the notion that there is only one. He adamantly disagrees with the idea of many Gods, the Gods of the state. It is evident that he believes in the presence of one all mighty being in his belief that he communicates with God. Communication is the act of becoming one self with another self. Thus if he communicated with God, he became one with God. Thus there can only be one God for Socrates.
As the idea of the good is the idea of sharing which literally means communication, the idea of the good is Socrates’s idea of God. Socrates must have been wise about God as wisdom is union of God and us in communication. The cave analogy is evidence of this as it embodies the essence of the idea of ideas, of how knowing is like seeing, the idea of good, communication, and thus
“In my investigation in the service of the god I found that those who had the highest reputation were nearly the most deficient, while those who were thought to be inferior were more knowledgeable.” (Socrates, Apology) “Either I do not corrupt the young or, if I do, it is unwillingly,” (Socrates, Apology) “Men of Athens, I honor and love you; but I shall obey God rather than you…” (Socrates, Apology) “I am that gadfly which God has attached to the state, and all day long…arousing and persuading and reproaching…you will not easily find another like me.” (Plato, Apology) “To fear death, gentlemen, is no other than to think oneself wise when one is not, to think one knows what one does not know.” (Socrates, Apology) “I go to die, you go to live. Which is better God only knows.” (Socrates,
Plato's The Apology is an account of the speech. Socrates makes at the trial in which he is charged with not recognizing the gods recognized by the state, inventing new gods, and corrupting the youth of Athens. For the most part, Socrates speaks in a very plain, conversational manner. He explains that he has no experience with the law courts and that he will instead speak in the manner to which he is accustomed with honesty and directness. Socrates then proceeds to interrogate Meletus, the man primarily responsible for bringing Socrates before the jury. He strongly attacks Meletus for wasting the court¡¦s time on such absurd charges. He then argues that if he corrupted the young he did so unknowingly since Socrates believes that one never deliberately acts wrongly. If Socrates neither did not corrupt the young nor did so unknowingly, then in both cases he should not be brought to trial. The other charge is the charge of impiety. This is when Socrates finds an inconsistency in Meletus¡¦ belief that Socrates is impious. If he didn¡¦t believe in any gods then it would be inconsistent to say that he believed in spiritual things, as gods are a form of a spiritual thing. He continues to argue against the charges, often asking and answering his own questions as if he were speaking in a conversation with one of his friends. He says that once a man has found his passion in life it would be wrong of him to take into account the risk of life or death that such a passion might involve.
This is, nonetheless, done in a very subtle and intricately convoluted/questionable manner. Note, for example, how Socrates proceeds to address the question by asserting his belief in the daimonion. We witness here, therefore, a line of continuity being drawn between the aforementioned incident in which Socrates tries to convince Hermogenes that he is simply adhering to divine advice. Firstly, it is unclear to us whether this daimonion is a mouthpiece for existing gods or a novel god; in any case, however, the in any case the answer is idiosyncratic and
Here, I would like to ask you, the men of Athens, firstly, why at all should Socrates have mentioned everything I just said, if he really does not believe in god as some of you accused? Moreover, how dare you to accuse such a man, who serves the gods at all expenses and even risks his life for it? Doesn’t such a man deserve our respect? Furthermore, as we believe in our gods, how dare we put such terrible charges upon the wisest man of Athens, who is sent by the gods to awake us Athenians?
Socrates put one’s quest for wisdom and the instruction of others above everything else in life. A simple man both in the way he talked and the wealth he owned, he believed that simplicity in whatever one did was the best way of acquiring knowledge and passing it unto others. He is famous for saying that “the unexplained life is not worth living.” He endeavored therefore to break down the arguments of those who talked with a flowery language and boasted of being experts in given subjects (Rhees 30). His aim was to show that the person making a claim on wisdom and knowledge was in fact a confused one whose clarity about a given subject was far from what they claimed. Socrates, in all his simplicity never advanced any theories of his own but rather aimed at bringing out the worst in his interlocutors.
Many people have gone through their lives conforming their beliefs and practices for the sake of fitting in or for the happiness of others, but Socrates was not one of these people. In “The Apology” Plato shows Socrates unwillingness to conform through a speech given by Socrates while on trial for supposedly corrupting the youth of Athens and believing in false gods. Although the title of the dialogue was labeled “The Apology,” Socrates’ speech was anything but that, it was a defense of himself and his content along his philosophical journey. At no time during the trial was Socrates willing to change his ways in order to avoid punishment, two reasons being his loyalty to his God and his philosophical way of life.
In response to the second objection, Socrates does make a large leap from saying that he believes in the spirits to saying that he believes in the gods, however, this does not necessarily mean that his statements are false. In the objection we say that these supernatural spirits could include ghosts or other dead souls, but at the same time the spirits can include other divinities and gods. We are not trying to prove that Socrates believes in a certain god, but that he is not an atheist, or one who denies or disbelieves the existence of god. Furthermore, Socrates is already charged of teaching the youth to believe in divinities and unlike supernatural powers, divinities are deities or gods and goddesses. The fact that Socrates believes in divinities refutes any objection that Socrates may be an atheist.
In Plato’s Apology it seems that overall Socrates did an effective job using the 3 acts of the mind. The three acts of the mind are: Understanding, Judgment, and Reasoning. These acts are stragically used to rebut the charges made against him during trial. The two charges that are formed against Socrates are corrupting the youth and not believing in the gods. The first act of the mind that we will be looking at is, understanding. The question that needs to be asked is what does corruption mean? The accuser believe that Socrates in corrupting the minds of the children by introducing new concepts. Socrates is trying to teach and involve the minds of the youth by getting them to ask question. It is very important that people are always asking questions about why things are. The next question that needs to be address is what does not believe in the gods mean? Socrates believes in God but that is one god that rules the world, not multiple gods who together rule. They are mad that he has “created” his own god.
The trial of Socrates in Athens is both similar and different from the trial of Jesus of Nazareth. The trials could be compared in three main areas: the evidence and reasons provided for their executions, their last messages to their accusers, and the two leaders’ thoughts about their impending deaths. For both figures, there is no evidence to support their convictions and they are convicted for similar reasons, though Jesus is given less time to defend himself. Both Jesus and Socrates warn their accusers that they will suffer for their actions. However, Jesus views his accusers as ignorant and Socrates views his as vengeful. Both men conclude that it is G-d’s will for them to die. However, Socrates is more secure about death than Jesus. Despite the differences that exist between the two trials, Socrates and Jesus face similar predicaments and deal with death in comparable ways.
Some of the best sources of information about Socrates' philosophical views are the early dialogues of his student Plato, who tried to provide a faithful picture of the methods and teachings of the great master. The Apology is one of the many-recorded dialogues about Socrates. It is about how Socrates was arrested and charged with corrupting the youth, believing in no god(s) (Atheism) and for being a Sophist. He attended his trial and put up a good argument. I believe that Socrates was wrongfully accused and should not have been sentenced to death. Within the duration of this document, I will be discussing the charges laid against Socrates and how he attempted to refute the charges.
In the retelling of his trial by his associate, Plato, entitled “The Apology”; Socrates claims in his defense that he only wishes to do good for the polis. I believe that Socrates was innocent of the accusations that were made against him, but he possessed contempt for the court and displayed that in his conceitedness and these actions led to his death.
Socrates, according to Plato challenged the norms of society by questioning life and having others question it as well. He was labeled of “corrupting the youth” and for not believing in the Athenians gods. “Socrates is guilty of corrupting the young, and of not acknowledging the gods the city acknowledges, but new daimonic activities instead.” (The Apology, pp 654) Although, he was cast by being “corrupt”, Socrates had many followers that saw him as a wise man. Socrates trial was made up of thirty jurors, who were later known as “The Thirty.” The “Thirty” really wanted was to silence Socrates, rather than taking his life. However, Socrates did not want to disobey the laws, he did not want to be violated of his right to freedom of speech, nor did he did he want to be undermine his moral position. (The Apology, pp. 647) He stood against injustice acts several times while he was in counsel. “I was the sort...
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’s argument that what is holy and what is approved of by the gods are not the same thing is convincing because they both are two different things. Like Socrates stated in EUTHYPHRO, “Is the pious being loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is being loved by the gods?” This connects back to Socrates argument because it states that the gods choose what is pious because they love it or is it pious because it being loved be the gods. The gods are determining the definition of pious instead of letting it be defined. In a way they are changing the definition of it because their peers will look up to them and follow what they have to say. Socrates arguments relate to this because if the gods don’t approve of something
...ns. Why would he do this if he did not see the laws of Athens as just? In order to fulfill the agreement he has made with Athenian law, Socrates must accept the punishment he is given, though he feels that his being punished is Athens wronging him. It would be wrong, by his view, to escape from prison, though he would not be pursued, because he would be breaking his agreement to obey Athenian law. Since he and Crito previously agreed that one must never do wrong, he simply must stay in jail until his death. This is merely one example of the way in which Socrates uses a method of logical dialogue in order to make his point. He appears to be unmatched in his skills of deduction and consistently demonstrates his love of knowledge and truth. Socrates exemplifies all that is philosophy, both as a student and a teacher, because of his constant, active pursuit of wisdom.