Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Socrates contribution towards education
Philosophy: the hellenistic era of ancient greece
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Socrates contribution towards education
Socrates, on his death bed, did not want to escape his punishment because he did not fear death and wanted to stand by what he believed (Source B). This allows Socrates’s followers to gain tremendous amounts of respect for him because he followed through with his beliefs until the end. This makes an effective ruler because then his followers respect him and thus it helps everyone in a whole. Not only was Socrates true to himself but he also was brave. It took tremendous amounts of courage for Socrates to spread his views at a time when they were not popular (Source B).
He believed that one should never harm the person harming them. This is the equivalent of saying turn the other cheek. This was revolutionary, since it was widely agreed upon to harm the enemy and help your friends. His belief says to not harm your enemy. Socrates believed it was better to suffer than to do wrong.
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.
(Modus Ponens) Socrates is like Jesus: both of them did not believe in gods of that time and both were just speaking to society, but in those speeches were hidden the great idea. Like Jesus, Socrates chose to die for his idea, not surrender norms of the society. Both men had their students, who recorded their words during their life or after death. (Analogy) Rejection of civic life in democratic
Additionally, I have learned more about how arguments were conducted by Socrates, and how analytical he is about specificity in the answers he receives. It is clear from the text that Socrates is quite hard to please in terms of answering the questions he presents, and will take almost every point made to him to its logical conclusion in a dialectic manner. I have also learned much about Socrates as a person, as he makes it clear that he cares much for the pursuit of knowledge in all of its forms and even cares about the well-being of society as he shows when he sympathizes with Meletus over his concerns that Socrates may be having a negative effect on the people and functioning of
Socrates was put on trial for his intentions that were good. Society thought them out to be bad, but all socrates was trying to do was to improve society as whole. To improve society socrates would question citizens of Athens and make them think about their reality. During Socrates trial they accused him of corrupting the youth. Socrates would never willingly corrupt the youth because he saw the youth as the future.
Doing so would result in a weak soul that is full of ignorance. Socrates had developed an understanding that came from within. This gave him
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.
Socrates sees himself as wiser than other men including the politicians, craftsmen, and poets because he did not go around thinking he knew what he did not know. As a result of this, his character reflected someone who saw himself as superior to others and instead of feeding that ego, he could have been a joined politics and have an influence on the Athenian democracy. If he had done this, people like Meletus and his later accusers would have taken his criticism in a positive way. Socrates has the right to criticize the democracy of Athens because, in his perspective, verdicts are passed in the court by jurors with respect to whoever seems good to him. The democracy of the people was biased because, even if a person was wrong in court, he would not receive the right punishment her deserved because of his relations with the jurors.
Through becoming a teacher of the young men who followed him in Athens, Socrates effectively began to enter the public life. He was able to influence others through sharing his conclusions of justice, self-examination, and piety, and by asking relentless questions. Socrates effectively showed that an individual can live a private and a public life, even if Socrates was not directly involved in the policy-making in Athens. An individual can combine these two aspects of life in a productive way allowing her/him to live a full existence. These individuals can become teachers, politicians, and activists who use their focus on justice and piety in their private lives to advocate and create laws that promote true justice for the rest of the
I think that it is a little ironic that Socrates, the man who was all about intellect, had an intellectual error. Socrates was a man who focused on the truth, and unfortunately he failed to realize that the truth might not be what everyone else was focused on. In relation to what I stated earlier here is some in text evidence; Socrates said “to disregard the manner of my speech- it doesn't matter how it compares- and to consider and concentrate your attention upon this one question, whether my claims are
Socrates was a great philosopher of the Greek world. He was quite an atypical and distinctive person. Being different from all the other philosophers of the land, Socrates was teaching his students ideas totally out of the ordinary from what the society believed was right. As a result, he displeased many people so much that they decided to get rid of him. Socrates was put to trial, accused of spoiling the youth of Athens, tried and sentenced to death.
In his innocent eyes, all he did was go out to talk and question the Athenian people. Although at times there may have been youth following him as he went out to question others, they simply were just there to listen. In the event that the youth may have come up with ideas of their own based off of Socrates’s conversations they heard, that is not direct teaching from Socrates. This is like when a parent tells their child not to touch a hot stove, yet the kid goes and touches it anyway. Children have a mind of their own regardless of what they have been told is right or wrong.
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.
Socrates and Aristotle, despite being related through Plato, are in fact very different people and have many differing theories. Socrates outlook on life was that we 're all inherently good, but we will do bad things on accident. For example, when talking about ignorance, Socrates believes that we do not willingly do anything wrong. We instead have two branches of ignorance: not knowing something and knowing that you don 't know, or not knowing but you think that you do know (Plato, P.561). Aristotle on the other hand, claims that there is a different outlook on the model of ignorance.