Accusations Against Socrates free essay sample

He had no intention to teach for money but instead to spread his new ideas through conversation. Socrates empathized morality and the importance of justice leaving the Athenian society completely baffled. No one had ever experienced a philosopher who centralized his ideas on ethical beliefs. Socrates main ideas included finding the true knowledge of justice and choosing good over evil inevitably leading to a happy life. In one instance, Socrates refused to put a group of generals who had lost sailors in a storm to death all at once but rather insisted that they had to be tried individually, as the law stated. A fellow philosopher Xenophon recounts that the assembly and powerful men were angry with him but he would rather be punished then insult justice (8). Clearly, Socrates was completely focused on moral knowledge leading to a good life. Aristotle uses a different way to describe Socrates intentions claiming that Socrates used certain comparisons to strengthen his claim. We will write a custom essay sample on Accusations Against Socrates or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Aristotle says, Then they are the sort of comparisons Socrates used. For example, If someone says that people shouldt be chosen by lot to hold office, thats just like someone appointing athletes should ignore those who are the best competitors, and pick at random(3). Socrates fellow citizens however could not disagree more. Their concepts expressed the importance of public success and wealth, intentionally focusing on individual virtue rather than the community as whole, like Socrates was. Tensions rose when sons began to imitate Socrates and arguing with their parents claiming that their concepts were worthless. Challenging you father was extremely rare before Socrates due to the Athenian traditional educational hierarchy which was established many years before. Many felt that Socrates was making the young men of the next generation question Athenian traditions especially since he was accused of corrupting Cretas and Alchibades who were later involved in some type of tyranny later in Athens(1,2). Nonetheless, these young men were only intrigued to question their fathers as a cause of the Socratic method. Without the socratic method Socrates ideas would have no strength behind them and he would simply be another philosopher of that era in Athens. Socrates ability to use the power of persuasion to completely baffle some of the wisest men in Athens drew attention. The power to persuade in Athenian society was a characteristic that showed excellence in men. Then why did the Athenians feel threatened by Socrates persuasive nature? Should they not deem him the most excellent man in all of Athens? Essentially, Socrates method of humiliating the wisest men in Athenians left them feeling uneducated and upset. The Athenians, who relied on the wise mens beliefs also felt upset that the ideas they had believed for centuries could be wrong. Socrates questioned things that had never been questioned before and left the Athenian society feeling uncomfortable. Socrates even says himself during his apology that he is being accused of being an evildoer and a too-curious person(13). This pushed them towards the desire to just to get rid of him and go back to the way things were. The Athenians were afraid of change since their democracy had brought them such prosper which they were unwilling to lose. Socrates justifies his method by arguing that he is not trying to undermine others ideas but help them improve and become enlightened. While talking to plato, one of his well-known students, Socrates explains his reasoning. He uses an allusion to a cave with a hole on the ceiling. There are men chained to one side of a cave and a fire behind them, casting shadows along the wall that they are facing. If men were to walk with objects behind the chained men they would only see the shadow of the object and assume that that was what the objects looked like. However, if one of the men was to be dragged out of the cave and actually seen the object in the real world, it would look much different. The man who had stepped out of the cave would be much more educated then the man inside and would see justice firsthand. To be good, as Socrates puts it he will need to go back in an educate the others, to achieve the same knowledge that he has. In comparison to the real world, the trip out of the cave is the mind. My interpretation of the allegory is that Socrates is suggesting that him and his followers are the only ones who have dared to venture out of the cave and enlighten their minds with new ideas. Once they embark back into the cave however to bring back their new ideas they are not warmly welcomed. Plato says, Wouldnt they say of him that by going up above was neither prudent nor advisable? And if they could free their hands to seize and kill the man who had released and led one of them up, wouldnt they kill him. (12). In other words, the men inside the cave felt threatened by the man who was bringing men above the cave and wanted to get rid of him, just like Athens wanted to dispose of Socrates. Eventually, the Athenians executed Socrates to return to their secure society. Afterwards, the Athenians realized that Socrates had been their best asset in order to develop their empire. His changes may have unsettled many but in the end would bring Athens closer to its fullest potential.

Okies essays

Okies essays When the stock market crashed in 1929, it only exacerbated the situation of many farmers. Banks began to collect up loans owned to them from farmers, and soon lost their farms due to meager earnings. Also, competition arose because of the development of the tractor. Farmers who had tractors almost obliterated those without one, and usually those farmers ended up buying their farm for more room. In effect, agricultural working increased to a 30% unemployment rate. With a lack of money farmers began to increase farming activity. Since knowledge of soil turning wasnt yet established, the once rich soil of the farmers lost its nutrients and its ability to retain moisture. Added to this devastation, 1931 was the start of a soon to be 7 year drought in which the sun endlessly just baked on the soil. Not before long, dust storms began and farms were literally blown away. Due to hazardous and non-lucrative farming, farmers picked up their few belongings and either moved to a city or made a long journey to California in hopes for work and a better life. Many chose to go to California because of the states mild climate, long growing season, and a diversity of crops with staggered planting and harvesting cycles. These conditions seemed ideal to many hopeful farmers. Although it wouldnt be difficult to make a journey nowadays, in the past it was very arduous, especially if you are very poor. Hundreds of miles away from California, farmers, turned hoboes were hopping on trains illegally to try to get as close as they could to California. Many had begged near and in trains and scoured for food. Railroad bulls as these supposed train security guards were called, tried to keep hoboes off trains. Their effort resulted in at least 6,500 hoboes killed in less than a year. They wanted to make sure train only had paying customers, and if not, it could be your last ride, ever. ...

Our Barbies, Ourselves by Emily Prager Article Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Our Barbies, Ourselves by Emily Prager - Article Example Prager asserts that this physical perfection on part of the most popular doll undermines the feminist movement and other feminine ideals. Prager acknowledges that Barbie does serve as a role model in terms of her liberated sense of style and living. The showcasing of Barbie’s bohemian lifestyle, spanning condos, fashion plazas, swimming pools and beauty salons is appealing for young girls. Yet, her combination of verve and freedom does not compensate for real substance. Prager constructs her arguments well through the use of deductive logic. She exposes the problems associated with Barbie’s idolatry. At the center of Prager’s criticism is the homocentric physical construction of Barbie and the highly materialistic basis of her lifestyle. As much a criticism of Barbie, the essay is a criticism of society at large for allowing a flawed concept to take such strong cultural roots. I Have a Dream by Martin Luther King Jr. This landmark speech of the Civil Rights Movem ent is one of the most powerful public orations ever. It was delivered by Martin Luther King Jr. on 28th August 1963 at the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington D.C. The speech is exceptional for both its logical merit and emotional appeal. Indeed reading the transcript of the speech dilutes some of its rhetorical effects that were witnessed firsthand by the fortunate congregation at the Lincoln Memorial. ... Though the speech is delivered for political mobilization and has for its subject the deep-rooted social malaise of racial discrimination, it does not sacrifice its rhetorical flourishes. The combination of a powerful rallying cry delivered with a style bordering on poetic recitation makes it the most singular. It is hard to find any flaws with the speech. This is testified by the fact that it continues to be a source of inspiration for social activists even today. Message to the Grassroots by Malcolm X This is a public speech by the militant black leader Malcolm X, calling upon men of his race to unite in their efforts to fight white oppression. The speech is reminiscent of the more famous counterpart delivered by Martin Luther King Jr. But the methods advocated by the two speakers are contrasting. While the philosophy of King was one of non-violent activist organization, Malcolm X forwards a more militant approach to racial equality. Malcolm X’s agenda is also much broader t han attaining political rights. He believes that unless Black Nationalism (with due territorial sovereignty) is achieved there is no scope for black liberation. Malcolm X thus condemns the pacifist and conciliatory strands of the Civil Rights Movement. He urges all the black brethren to unite in their claim for a separate black nationhood. If a bloody revolution is what it takes to achieve that end so may the black race incur is his central message. Though Malcolm X’s speech is powerful in terms of rhetoric and public appeal, I personally do not find it acceptable. Malcolm X has a valid point in urging all factions of black social activists to unite. But his ready endorsement of violent means for achieving socio-political goals is problematic on two counts. Not only is Malcolm X’s stance