The Apology Response Paper

The Apology Response Paper

The Apology is a description of the speech made by Socrates at the trial where he is accused of not perceiving the divine beings seen by the state, inventing new gods, and corrupting the young people of Athens.  It is a passage that is meant to provide education on Socrates’s teachings before his death sentence by the Athens people. Socrates was executed on account of corrupting the Athens youth with his contemporary teaching. The article was written by Plato, one of his students with the aim of providing knowledge to the people of Athens as well as enlighten on the end of history’s most significant minds era. The passage is a speech the features Socrates defending himself against the accusations. Socrates endeavors to account for himself and the choices that prompted his action, teaching his followers in the philosophical inquiries he decides to present. Socrates doesn’t attempt to dodge death in the trial; rather, he will probably illuminate the general population once and for all before his own passing. Socrates was constantly entranced with the settling of inquiries, of all shapes and sizes; his methodology was to utilize the Socratic technique of inquiry, where he would analyze the issue into a few inquiries, and afterward deliberately discover the responses to each address so as to locate the bigger answer.

The title of the writing contradicts the content of the passage. There is no evidence that Socrates apologizes for the charges he faces. Socrates applied a systematic and useful method to show his definitive mission for inquiring into genuine information. Plato argues that “This man among you, mortals, is wisest who, like Socrates, understands that his wisdom is worthless,” an indication of his quest for more knowledge (Apology 23b). As per his reasoning, philosophy begins by conceding that you are uninformed of reality, which is the thing that he does here. It is with this way to deal with philosophical inquiries and problems, the utilization of Socratic irony, that Socrates decides to draw in with his crowd and exhibit why he did what he did. The Socratic technique for argumentative examination used contentions to attempt to evaluate morals and truth.

Socrates applied two techniques throughout the trial. He first created a hypothesis and then examined any probable hypothetical conflicts. He challenged assumptions and presumptions as a way to get to know the truth. He prioritized thinking above everything. His main technique involved challenging through questions, hypothesis development, and trying them as a way to evaluate the evidence. Socrates, generally, values the respectability of society and feels as if a gathering of individuals meeting up to frame a network ought to be regarded by respecting the social contract. At a similar time, there are parts of the self that are of higher priority than a common entire, and the general public must be comprised of people that follow the standards shared by the entirety. One ought not to be compelled to carry on in a way conflicting with their convictions; a perfect society consists of people who may all buy into the various methods of reasoning yet can listen and reject ideas made by others. As Socrates referenced in the content that an individual ought to be judged by what he has done, not by his behavior as a way of serving justice.

Towards the end of the trial, Socrates claims he started to consider himself to be an agent of the words of the oracle; rather than claiming to know a lot, he decided to declare his numbness and be straightforward with himself about it (23e).  With that in mind, he had the option to go about as himself and keep up his uprightness. During the trial, Socrates holds every other person to a similar standard; when he discusses Meletus, the man that accuses him, he gets down on him about not really thinking about what he purports to think about, to be specific, the charges against Socrates. He takes note of that it may have been feasible for him to spare his life by asking the court’s pardoning and beseeching them. Nonetheless, he didn’t do this; this was not out of ignorance or insufficiency in his technique. However, he needed to be straightforward and honest about his feelings, in particular, that the jury and the individuals who were charging him feared his analysis.

His last statement is,” Now the hour to part has come; I go to die, you go to live. Which of us goes to the better lot is known to no one, except the god” (42a.)  Nonetheless, Socrates is probably the best philosopher in mankind’s history. In a nutshell, Socrates’ resistance at the trial, depicted in Plato’s Apology, was basically another stage by which he continues his ways of thinking about the virtue of thinking, personal growth, and going about as a piece of a more noteworthy entire of civilization. He was prosecuted and put to death for posing an excessive number of inquiries and corrupting the youthful when, in reality, he basically wished to call attention to the ignorance of his companions.