Clearly, some forms of calamity are worse than others. And there is no denying that harm is perceived, especially immediately following bad news. However, one does have control over one's reactions to these events, which I think is what Socrates' idea of "good" should mean to us today.
Socrates is able to see the good in everything that happens to him, because, in his view, he is "righteous." To develop this idea further, it is useful to consider Plato's explication of what exactly righteousness means to Socrates. In addition to treating others well and attempting to do good as far as possible, Plato sees righteousness as integrity. Socrates understands that his penalty is based basically on resentment. He maintains his sense of integrity and calmly clings to his philosophy regardless of the judges' wish to see him squirm. Socrates claims that such squirming might have gained him a few more years of life, but would have cost his integrity. This would have harmed in. In this sense, Socrates could have harmed himself by departing from his own sense of integrity. He chooses not to do this, and is therefore immune from harm by others.
In the same way today, we can either retain our own sense of integrity or depart from it and cause harm to ourselves while also exposing ourselves to harm from others, whichever form this might take. While I do not deny that random events can cause great harm, I think we can mitigate such harm by maintaining a sense of integrity in the face of these events. Again, integrity, as the opposing view indicates, can mean many different things in the context of culture, religion, age, and so on. However, like Socrates, I believe an inner sense of integrity dictates a person's idea and sense of "good." A person could, for example, base his or her integrity on a belief that the...
They have done so ever since he made them public, and while a lot of things about society have changed, the fundamental truth of how society handles its problems, its differences, and its dissenters have not. The conclusions that Plato reached in his works have held up because they are honest and true. They also hold because human nature has not really changed very much since Plato's time (Nails, 2006).
A philosopher makes "logoi," discusses, and cross examines about virtue, is short of wisdom, and is aware of it. However, in as much as one is a philosopher, one desires wisdom and searches for it. In historical Greek, this notion is virtually a tautology, prompting Socrates to hold that the wise no longer philosophize. Socrates believes that philosophy is gathering knowledge; however, going by valid evidence, philosophy is the
To wit, in Socrates' day, there were no official government prosecutors (commonly referred to in modern America as "District Attorneys"); in effect, any citizen could bring an indictment against any other citizen, and call for a trial. And that's basically what happened to Socrates. Here in America, in 2006, notwithstanding what Vice President Cheney said, President George W. Bush stated, "I will never question the patriotism of somebody who disagrees
This aspect of the work also confirmed a clear belief that Socrates held, that nothing bad could happen to a good man. Socrates believed this to be a fundamental truth and he believed that he was a good man. As such he was at peace with whatever was going to happen to him as a result of the trial. In this particular passage it is also clear that Socrates
They do not occupy space. Nevertheless, although the Form of a circle has never been seen -- -indeed, could never be seen -- -mathematicians and others do in fact know what a circle is. That they can define a circle is evidence that they know what it is. For Plato, therefore, the Form "circularity" exists, but not in the physical world of space and time. It exists as a
Socrates asked them to come forward with their thoughts if they were "still doubtful about the argument." The two proceed to make a sophisticated argument, contrary to Socrates' points, that were counterexamples to the points about the body and the soul that Socrates had been making with such eloquence. It was cross-examination, but it was also a series of new hypotheses that Cebes and Simmias presented to the philosopher
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now