Compare and contrast Plato's claim - Essay Example

Conversely, in Twilight of the Idols, Nietzsche calls into question the very nature of meaning and advances the notion of a transvaluation of values that reconsiders the notion of morality. This essay considers Plato’s characterization of the examined life through his dialogue the Apology and contrasts it with Nietzsche converse understanding from Twilight of the Idols. Apology One of the most seminal of Plato’s dialogues, the Apology constitutes Socrates’ argument to the Athenian court for his innocence.

Throughout Socrates’ argument there is the thematic undercurrent that in teaching wisdom and spreading the truth to the Athenian youth he is pursuing the right path, and that to cease doing so and live an examined life to prevent the court form taking his life is not worth doing. The first instance where Socrates indicates as much occurs in his rebuttal of Meletus, when he states, “a man who is good for anything ought not to calculate the chance of living or dying; he ought only to consider whether in doing anything he is doing right or wrong - acting the part of a good man or of a bad” (Plato).

Socrates goes on to explain how according to Meletus’ reasoning the men who died valiantly at the battle of Troy were wrong in doing so. One of the primary complaints that Meletus levies against Socrates is his argument that Socrates has corrupted the youth by advising them not to believe in the gods. In refutation of this Socrates seems to argue that he actually embraces a belief in the gods, just not in the form that is traditionally accepted in Greek culture. Instead, Socrates embracement of the gods comes in terms of his purpose in life, which is living the examined life.

In these regards, Socrates states, “God orders me to fulfil the philosopher's mission of searching into myself and other men, I were to desert my post through fear of death, or any other fear; that would indeed be strange, and I might justly be arraigned in court for denying the existence of the gods, if I disobeyed the oracle because I was afraid of death” (Plato). Here Socrates is indicating that since God has made his purpose that of a philosopher, then the core element of his existence is to live the examined life, so that ultimately Meletus’ claims that Socrates has corrupted the Athenian youth by expounding on the knowledge he gained from living the examined life is erroneous as he has done this out of following the purpose God or the gods placed him on Earth.

While this is an interesting rebuttal, perhaps the most notable element of this discussion is the relevance it holds for the current examination of the examined life, and the importance contextualizing Socrates perspective in terms of the argument. While the prevailing wisdom of individuals only cursorily familiar with Plato’s statement through Socrates that the unexamined life is not worth living generally understand it to mean that Socrates is speaking to all individuals; they believe that Socrates is stating that any individual who chooses not to live an examined life, or the life of a philosopher is unjustified in doing so, when in actuality Socrates is indicating here that this is true only for him.

As the Apology continues Socrates keeps with this line of reasoning, and seems to expand his earlier statement to include all men. In considering Socrates’