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 with me." Bush was responding to a reporter's question on August 21; Bush was asked if he believed, according to http://mediamatters.org, that the "Democrats advocating for U.S. withdrawal from Iraq 'embolden Al Qaeda types' as...Cheney similarly stated. Bush's answer was, "I will never question the patriotism of somebody who disagrees with me... [although] leaving [Iraq] before the job would be done would be to send a signal to our troops that the sacrifices they made were not worth it...this has nothing to do with patriotism. It has everything to do with understanding the world in which we live."
Later that day, on his nationally syndicated radio program, Rush Limbaugh played the role of unofficial prosecutor. Much like the prosecutors in Socrates' day, high-powered media stars can attack individuals and in effect, become not only prosecutors, but judges and juries as well, just like the citizens who heard Socrates' defense during his trial. Here in 2006, it doesn't matter whether the media person is liberal (like Al Franken) or conservative (like Limbaugh); anyone with a microphone and an audience can play prosecutor.
In the case of Bush's rebuttal to Cheney's assertions, it gave Limbaugh the opportunity to attack some Democrats who disagreed with Bush, and with Limbaugh as well. Limbaugh, as reported on http://mediamatters.org, stated that he wished to "respectfully disagree with the president...I am going to challenge the patriotism of people who disagree with [Bush] because the people that disagree with him want to lose." Limbaugh went on: "How come we can't question the patriotism of people who are actively engaged in sabotaging victory over this enemy?" The right wing radio commentator added, "We most certainly should. Dam straight, we should. I'm tired of *****footing around...The far left fringe in this country is actively seeking our defeat...Jimmy Carter...Bill Clinton...John Kerry...Al Gore..." And although this paper is not putting Carter, Clinton, Kerry and Gore up on the moral and intellectual mountain with a philosopher giant like Socrates, there are links between self-appointed prosecutors like those who brought indictment against Socrates, and self-appointed media "prosecutors" like Rush Limbaugh, who can basically charge leaders who don't share his views with treasonous acts.
And in any event, patriotism is always controversial, and is used to advance whatever position the person in question has chosen to take; patriotism means something different to each thinking individual. And when it comes to patriotism and American foreign policy, and the freedom that all Americans have with regard to expressing their opinions, Thomas Jefferson said it well (http://en.wikiquote.org):"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism."
And Mark Twain also had relevant and germane things to say about patriotism (http://en.wikiquote.org):"Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it"; and, "The citizen who sees his society's democratic clothes being worn out and does not cry out is not a patriot but a traitor."
SOCRATES' TRIAL: "The trial itself was an adversary proceeding...the accuser was 'the pursuer' and the accused 'the fleer'" (Allen, 25). Also, the rules of evidence "...were laxly enforced," author Allen explains, and "...requirements of relevance were loose...you could say pretty much what you pleased..."
FINDING SOMEONE to BLAME - PUTTING PEOPLE on "TRIAL": In America, in 2006, the country is at war - the "war on terror," the war in Afghanistan, the war in Iraq, a threatened possible war started by North Korea (which has successfully tested atomic weapons), the verbal and political battle at home over policy - and so there is a lot of tension, and the American citizens deeply divided on many issues. Things are said that are seemingly unfair during a time of great social division, and America is in the midst of one of those periods right now. And this links to what was happening in Socrates' day; there was a lot of tension too, war was a recent reality, democracy was under attack, and enemies (real or imagined) were sought. What the Athenian leaders planned to do in order to make their nation-state safe from those accused of "refusing to acknowledge the gods acknowledge by the City" (Allen, 3), was to find scapegoats - someone to blame.
In January, 2006, after...
Socrates and the Apology Socrates and Death in the Apology In The Apology, Socrates contrasts his ability to address the crowd against more skillful speakers stating that he offers truth over eloquence (17b). In essence, he infers that others use the power of persuasion and slick words to sway others vs. The truth. He postulates that there are others who will always present a skewed depiction of the facts in order to
As someone might say today, the lack of knowledge as a result of not willing to search for it is no excuse. How can anyone be sure to do right since the truth remains hidden? Socrates thinking was aimed at making his fellow humans who were willing to listen to him aware of the dangers of doing wrong by not being willing to question the truth or what it
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).
From this we need to understand that the existence of entities, beings which superior power and knowledge is accepted. People not only accept that these being actually exist, but they obey their commands. From this one can deduce that morality is connected with power. People obey the commands of the gods because the gods are what they are. The implications are that on the one side, the gods have access
Socratic Argument In the Apology, Socrates is being placed on trial by three of his rivals for different activities that he is accused of being involved in. The most notable include: corrupting the youth of Athens and not supporting the same religious beliefs as everyone else. During the trial, his enemies are utilizing these charges to demonstrate how he knowingly engaged in these actions. They are demanding that he apologize for
Socrates is one of the most renowned philosophers of all times. His dialectic method is used in a number of ways and has vital importance in literature and deliberation. In the contemporary era, Socratic or Dialectic Method is the term that is used to point out a conversation between two or more people who might have opposing views about an issue but they come to a conclusion after trying to
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