Euthyphro Apology And Crito Analysis

Socratic Views Versus Plato In the Euthyphro, Apology, and Crito, philosophers across the world tend to view them as “Socratic” views. As opposed to the Phaedo, where is it seen that Plato is representing his own views. Within this essay, the argument that the Phaedo is a completely separate philosophical entitity compared to the Euthyphro, Apology, and Crito will be disputed. Through textual evidence and comprehensive literary analysis, the exploration of differences will be clearly observable. To begin, a slight summarization on each book is necessary to further analyze the argument that the Phaedo is separate from Socratic views. The Euthyphro examines the question, “what is piety?”. During this book, Socrates way of arguing is introduced; also known as the method of elenchus. This method consists of asking a question, finding an exception to the answer given by the other individual, receiving a reformulated response, and repeating it until the debate cannot be overturned and eventually, the opposing individual refuses to continue the debate. The elenchus method is an important idea to hold onto when analyzing further on the initial thesis.

The depth and consistency of Socratic Irony is fully introduced in this book, which is important for analyzing the difference between these books and the Phaedo. Socratic irony is defined as a pose of ignorance assumed in order to entice others into making statements that can then be challenged. This is seen right away when Socrates proclaims, “I do not know, men of Athens, how my accusers affected you; as for me, I was almost carried away in spite of myself, so persuasively did they speak” (17a). Moving along, highlighting the important concepts in these books will correctly analyze the differentiation of the three books to the