Socrates on Unexamined Life - Essay Example

Socrates on Unexamined Life Socrates on Unexamined Life Introduction Socrates is prominent as one of the elite philosophers of his time for shaping the intellectual and cultural development of the living world. Human history would be profoundly different without Socrates. He is renowned for his Socratic method, which follows a question followed by an answer framework and the claim of his ignorance or awareness of his lack of knowledge. He is remarkably renowned for his claim over whether he was not appropriate living an unexamined life (Plato, Grube & Cooper, 2000). The later philosophers after Socrates’ time had different opinions about the approach to life. Living an Unexamined Life The Socratic themes in the ‘Apology,’ by Plato consist of the portrayal of Socratic ignorance, the priority of the treatment of the soul and the refusal of an unexamined life. His conviction and sentencing were informed by accusations of impiety, irreverence, and incitement on the youth (Plato, 2015). During the judgment, he surprised the jury when he made the most famous and intelligent proclamation in the history of the school of thought: philosophy. He confessed to the jury that he would never keep quiet because human beings are not supposed to live an unexamined life. Socrates insistence on this claim portrays that human beings are born or called to reflect upon their beliefs, speak to seek out, account for what they do not know and know, live accordance to their views and defend those beliefs that make a meaningful and well-lived life. Socrates was right to make this claim (Plato, 2015). It follows human nature to live examined lives. For instance, we naturally live by the directions of pain and pleasure. Human beings are naturally drawn to the forces of wealth, power, and reputation. Socrates’ call to live an examined life does not necessarily show insistence to reject such inclinations and motivations (Plato, 2009). Instead, his claim was an injunction to appraise the true worth of the human soul. He believed that people should live by reflections upon their everyday values and motivations, and most importantly, to inquire knowledge into the real world and worth. Subsequently, if there is any. In case there is no value, it is upon the people to pursue the things that they believe are truly valuable. Socrates’ thoughts on examining life prepare one to be as good, as he or she could. During his jurisdictions, he examines the lives of the juror. Socrates, who awaited prosecution at that time, ends up being the prosecutor when he surreptitiously accuses those behind his conviction and sentences him of failing to live a good life that respects humanity (Plato, 2009). He challenges them that they would never escape from self-examination just by executing him. In the Socrates’ belief, we attain a conception of a life well lived that varies from the life that contemporary philosophers would support. Most philosophers, today, would most likely argue that people should live ethical lives, which is not for engagement in the kind of arguments that Socrates had on a daily basis, nor must one engage in such discussions to stand as a good person. It might be accepted that a good person is the one who lives a good life and does only what is considered just, but not necessarily engages in arguments about the purpose of either the state or the existing justice. That justifies the reason Socrates would never agree because self-examination, as humans, is always beneficial; but not on the reason that the state might not do enough or too do much, or the law and policies might not be just (Peterson, 2011). Crito, Euthyphro, and Socrates The doctrines that are more crucial to the conception of Socrates’ ethical life simply based on a belief that he would rather give up his life than compromise on his ethics. He talked of a badly deformed body, which implies the sort of damage the body gets when one acts wrongly. He believed that wrongdoing damages the soul and that is the reason he strived to do right at all costs (Plato, 2015). His friend, Crito, who was a wealthy Athenian, did not totally share Socrates’ view. In fact, he bribed guards at the jail and was ready to help Socrates to escape his fate from Athens. Socrates, however, declines his offers because doing so damages the laws completely, which betrays his bedrock principle of refraining from all wrongdoings, even in reciprocation for a wrong (Peterson, 2011). That is a clear manifestation of “two wrongs never make is right.” He applies his method of applying logos that appeases him as he uses reasons. Therefore, when Crito would apply any control to match any situation according to his demands, Socrates would use his bedrock principle to guide his life, which he would find absurd to give up merely because of his circumstantial change. Socrates responded to Crito when he appealed for an opinion on the issue that the only person he would accept to make a decision on it is from someone who is an expert on the matter at hand, which reflects his faith in doing what is right. Since Socrates’ claim is analogous to the effects of disease and death, he is looking for an authorized expert on corruption and moral health for the soul. In the case of an absence of the expert, he would make the decision by himself, which must abide by his agreement or moral principle – he should not escape without persuading the city. In conclusion, he personifies the laws because Crito could not answer his questions on the matter that one must obey the people of the city above all other things. The moral conflict between Socrates and his bedrock principle, and between him and his friend Crito, is a memorable and remarkable occurrence in the ‘Apology.’ Grote had pointed out that Socrates promised to disobey the court it lets him out on the condition he had given up his mission in Athens. The reconciliation of these texts has been key areas of difference among scholarly opinions (Plato, 2015). In the definition of the dialogue, ‘Euthyphro’ Picks up on the subject of piety and reverence, a virtue, which traditionally bears on the treatment of the weak such as suppliants and prisoners, keeping of the oaths, respect for the gods and family relationships. In this argument, reverence is lifted over traditional context, while defining the difference between ethics and reasoning. It also accepts authority and supports the unity of virtue. When Socrates is accused of irreverence, impiety, and incitement of youths, he leaves for the trial to answer for the indictment. He meets Euthyphro, who is a renowned crank on the matters of religion (Plato, Grube & Cooper, 2000). He is however puzzled that he is about to accuse and prosecute his father of and for murder respectively. Most Athenians are shocked by the show of irreverence when Euthyphro prosecutes his father. However, he is confident he is doing the right thing. His belief and ready to execute righteousness somehow shows similarity to the character of Socrates. His confidence lies on the unique knowledge he claims on reverence. The knowledge of Socrates on matters of living an examined life id, however, superior and he eventually gives advice to Euthyphro that reverence is what appeases all the gods even if the dilemma makes the same situation reverent and irreverence (Plato, 2009). Conclusion The ancient philosophers differed in many arguments. Philosophy, to some extent, advocates lack of wrong and right based on time, cultural and religious references. Socrates, as the great philosopher, outlined an important foundation for the examination of self. He believed in doing what is right even if it meant the loss of his life. Euthyphro also believed in his righteousness even if it meant betrayal to his father. In contrary, Crito believed in taking care of a situation in a way that he could make a wrong decision, at least according to Socrates, just to avoid the adverse consequences (Peterson, 2011). No matter the course, these philosophers made important tenets for the construction of knowledge in the modern world. In fact, the philosophy of Socrates on the worthiness of living an examined life provided an incredible teaching that still awakens the minds of the contemporary philosophers. References Peterson, S. (2011). Socrates and Philosophy in the Dialogues of Plato, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Plato. (2009). Four Dialogues. Maryland. Wildside Press. Plato. (2015). Apology. 122 Fifth Avenue, New York: Booklassic. Plato., Grube, G. M. A., & Cooper, J. M. (2000). The trial and death of Socrates: Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, death scene from Phaedo. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Pub. Read More