ipl-logo

Rhetorical Analysis Of Apology Of Socrates

937 Words4 Pages

Tristan Courtney AP Lang Mr. Sontum 2/19/15 Apology of Socrates Rhetorical Analysis The Apology of Socrates has many rhetorical devices and he uses each of them to appeal to ethos, logos, and pathos. He uses these to defend himself against the ridiculous accusation of not believing in the gods recognized by the state and also of corrupting the youth in Athens, and also to prove that their acquittal or absolution does nothing to him. Socrates appeals to ethos, or credibility, first. To do this he speaks directly to the audience, and all Athenians, by asking those who have heard him talk and preach to tell others that he is not an “evil-doer, and a curious person, who searches into things under the earth and in heaven, and he makes the worse …show more content…

His main argument using logos is when he questions Meletus, one of his accusors. Examples of this is when he asks Meletus that if there is anyone in the world that “believes in human phenomena but does not believe in human beings.” He makes an argument for why he isn’t guilty for the crimes that he is accused of, which are that he is a doer of evil, a corrupter of the youth, and does not believe in the gods of the state. To argue his point he proves, using logic, that Meletus is a doer of evil and that the evil was to make a joke out of a serious matter, which is to put Socrates on trial for a stupid matter. He proves at first that every Athenian improves the youth, and then asks Meletus if he, an Athenian, improves the youth, and he said no. He then uses a horse analogy to prove that not everyone can improve humans. His next point that he proves wrong is when Meletus says that socrates intentionally harms society, but he proves him wrong when he says that as a part of society he would not harm himself, and says that if harm was done, it was unintentional, and they should be helped and taught, not tried and punished. He then proves Meletus’ other point wrong by proving that he believes in gods of some sort by asking if there is anyone that believes in human phenomena but does not believe in human beings, and then asks Meletus if there is anyone that believes in spiritual phenomena (which Socrates does) that does not acknowledge …show more content…

I believe that his purpose was not to win thought, it was to prove them wrong, and despite the outcome, that was good enough for him. He also wanted to prove that he deserved a reward for his services to Athens, not a punishment, and after he had stated his case, he says this in the part of the speech where he should beg for his freedom and their mercy. He states that he will die soon anyway and that since it is going to happen eventually, he will not struggle but instead will accept death with open arms, because death is good either way. He ends his speech with a question; asking if whether it is better from him to die, and them to live, and that god only knows. Even in his death he was promoting individual thinking, which was his purpose all

Show More
Related
835 Words | 4 Pages

Euthyphro tries to explain him that he was doing the same as Zeus did to his father and therefore being pious. But Socrates argues that it is just an example and not an explanation. He tries again and says what gods like is pious and what they dislike is not. But Socrates points out the fallacy in that argument that one god might not agree with another to which he replies in his third attempt what all gods like is pious and what they all hate is impious. Here, in this example we can see that how he searches for a concrete and complete definition for being pious.

Read More
802 Words | 4 Pages

The version of Socrates presented in both The Apology, Crito, and The Republic could very well be two different versions of Socrates as presented by Plato. However, both versions of Socrates have one thing in common: they both value the importance of philosophy and they both defend philosophy as something that is important to humanity. The Apology is Socrates defending not only himself, but also philosophy as an area of study that could be useful to the city of Athens. Socrates is trying to defend himself and his study and he tries to distance himself from the sophists in that they charge for money.

Read More
806 Words | 4 Pages

In this play the Socrates here doesn't sound like the Socrates from the Apology or the real life Socrates. The real Socrates doesn't actually teach per say, he teaches in a way that makes you yourself use your brain. He makes you question everything and understand things based on your own perception. The writer of this play clearly felt as if Socrates was a major problem in his society for allowing people to actually try to think outside of the box and ask questions. He most likely enjoyed the fact that everyone were robots and all thought alike and believed in the same thing because it brought no need to bring out discussion.

Read More
923 Words | 4 Pages

Socrates uses methods through Euthyphro like Dialectic. Dialectic refers to “the art of investigation or discussing the truth of opinion.” This dialogue helps to understand the nature of piety and how it connects to morality. So, “what’s loved by the gods is pious, and what’s not loved by the gods is impious” (7a) but the same thing is “seemed like both hated and loved by the god is like both god-hated and god-loved. “ (8a)

Read More
376 Words | 2 Pages

He mentioned that he would worship the idea of asking them questions, discuss his sufferings to others. He believed that he would win either way because he would be living a better life of finding out who is wide and he could continue his search for true and false knowledge. His arguments are valid because after he states his beliefs, he explains why he thinks what he thinks to be true. He created the theory of, “Either death is a state of nothing ness and utter unconsciousness, or, as men say, there is a change and migration of the soul from this world by another” (Plato).

Read More
1314 Words | 6 Pages

He was proving this because throughout his speech, he made it seem like the idea of knowing the truth and having real knowledge about a subject wasn’t needed in order to achieve the goal of persuasion. In Socrates’ speech he stated, “...if I say that the unexamined life is not worth living, you’ll believe me even less... you think I’ve been convicted for lack of arguments that would have persuaded you…” Socrates never specified or went into details about his beliefs that he was presenting to the court which, revealed to them that he did not know anything. He wasn’t able to strengthen his claims by providing evidence meaning his use of logos was faulty. However, Socrates’ goal was not to gather evidence to make it seem as if he was putting all his efforts in saving his life.

Read More
961 Words | 4 Pages

In the Apology Socrates defends himself against the charges brought against him by his prosecutor Meletus in two ways. In the first way Socrates describes his method and

Read More
1177 Words | 5 Pages

Throughout “Apology”, we see Socrates pointing out the different charges placed on him by individuals who he does not actually know, by approaching and responding to each one separately. For the most part, what all of the charges imply that Socrates is going around and spreading a new, and out of the norm, type of knowledge to people. For example, one of the charges was that he does not believe in the traditional gods, but rather has scientific explanations for several phenomena’s. “Socrates is guilty of wrongdoing

Read More
708 Words | 3 Pages

He justifies what he is doing, prosecuting his own father, by saying that the gods, specifically Zeus, have done the same. To Socrates, his response is blatantly insufficient and he challenges it by saying that

Read More
740 Words | 3 Pages

Socrates attempted to make a logical argument of the accusations when he questioned his accuser, Meletus. Then, to ensure his acquittal, he tried to appeal to the emotions of the judges. While Socrates’ defense was thought provoking, his inflation of self-importance worked against him in his trial, as he failed to persuade the court of his innocent ignorance. Socrates opening statement to the court was not only to build upon his character as favorable but also to lower the character of his accusers. He stated “I know that their persuasive words almost made me forget who I was - such was the effect of

Read More
912 Words | 4 Pages

Making enemies and becoming the topic of conversation, the Athenians began to view Socrates as a threat to their beliefs and way of life and sought to end it. In order to end this, Socrates was accused of blasphemy (Mod1SlideC7). Socrates’s accusers took him to court and after Socrates did not play their game by asking to be sent into exile, and in the end, he was sentenced to death. After reading the textbook and Plato’s writing influenced by Socrates, I realized that in the period of his life Socrates was indeed truly a threat to the Athens society, because he looked for answers that no one else bothered to find which challenged their culture.

Read More
1520 Words | 7 Pages

He especially liked to challenge the authority and government of Athens. He would examine both his and their point of view. Socrates drew conclusions from what he’d heard and later on life it became more useful during his trail. He was on trial for corrupting the youth by asking questions and going against the Greek gods believes in regards to power. On trial, he performed The Apology, to the judges who didn’t take it as an apology but more as defense statements.

Read More
1070 Words | 5 Pages

His personal defense is described in works two of his students: Xenophon and Plato. Both of them wrote papers called Apology, which is the Greek word for “defense”. In this essay I used Apology by Plato as the main resource, since it contents a more full account of the trial of Socrates and his words. Despite the fact that the philosopher attempted to defend himself and explain the reasons for saying and doing the things he did, it did not do any good for his justification. On the contrary, Socrates’ words seemed to make the jury harden their hearts and condemn him.

Read More
1535 Words | 7 Pages

Socrates’s official new charge “asserts that Socrates does injustice by corrupting the young, and by not believing in the gods in whom the city believes, but in other daimonia that are novel” (24b, p. 73). By looking deeper into the dialogue of The Apology and Euthyphro, one can see how passionately Socrates strives to express to the Athenian people his innocence in teaching the youth and worshiping of the gods. Socrates maintains his innocence in teaching the youth for three reasons. Primarily, there is no proof or evidence from past examples in which Socrates has taught the youth because no one has come out and said so. Socrates brings up a valid point that his so-called ‘teachings’ haven’t changed over time and therefore if he is accused

Read More
969 Words | 4 Pages

Philosophical thinking uses three acts of the mind: understanding, judgement, and reason. In order to have a sound argument all of the concepts must be applied. Socrates didn’t want to please the people by saying or doing what they wanted him to say or do. Socrates thought it was not important to seek wealth or fame; he was concerned with truth and virtue. He wanted to create an impact on humanity by relying on the truth and shining a light in people’s lives, even if they put him on trial.

Read More

More about Rhetorical Analysis Of Apology Of Socrates

Related Topics

Open Document