Plato's Apology through Socrates - Book Report/Review Example

Philosophy Over the of Plato’s career, his works span an enormous array of s. Indeed, his writings through the Platonic dialogues constitute some of the foundational elements of the Western philosophic tradition. Plato’s Apology considers Socrates trial in front of the Greek lawmakers who have accused him of undermining the Athenian youth through teaching them his knowledge and wisdom. A Greek citizen, Meletus, has brought these claims against Socrates. The Apology then represents the entirety of Socrates’ argument to the court to prove his innocence and demonstrate the absurdity of Meletus’ claims against him. In this effort, Socrates bravely presents arguments relating to the need to life the examined life, as without living a life of purpose and meaning he believes there is no purpose in existence, and the examined life is the highest such pursuit an individual can pursue in life. This essay considers Plato’s characterization of the examined life through his dialogue the Apology and then advances a counter argument that ignorance is bliss. 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 philosophers 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’ reasoning it’s important to consider the broader implications of Socrates argument. It seems that Socrates is indicating that in Meletus and the Athenian counsel harming Socrates they are doing so in a sort of bad faith. Socrates believes that in being a wiser than Meletus he has chosen to live his life virtuously. In living his life virtuously Socrates has contributed to society and lived his life in productive ways. He has also worked towards achieving his own sense of purpose and meaning; in Socrates’ instance, it seems that he believes this to be living honestly and spreading his wisdom and intellect to the Athenian youth. If Meletus were to have Socrates killed, which he is attempting to do, it would not harm Socrates has lived his life in accord with the principles set out before him and done so in a virtuous and just way; therefore, in dying Socrates has simply realized the potential his life had for him. Socrates is indicating then that he would rather die than not engage in seeking and spreading truth and wisdom. This leads him to state, “the greatest good of man is daily to converse about virtue, and all that concerning which you hear me examining myself and others, and that the life which is unexamined is not worth living” (Plato). In these regards, Socrates is indicating that in not living his life purpose of spreading and examining wisdom then life is not worth living. Furthermore, while earlier he indicated that the examined life was his purpose, here he is indicating that in living the examined life humans are pursuing a life of the highest virtue and worth. Ignorance is Bliss While through Socrates Plato indicates that the unexamined life is not worth living, there are a number of means by which a critic could refute this claim. In terms of the Apology perhaps the most pervasive claim relates to the actual means by which Socrates has become engaged in the court proceedings. As Socrates has become embroiled in this court issues because he has been a speaker of truth and wisdom one might consider if it would have been better for him to simply live a life where rigid examination of such philosophical issues wasn’t as central an aspect of his existence. It seems in Socrates regard, his seeking of truth and wisdom has so centrally gone against Greek culture’s mainstream beliefs that it caused problems within that society. While Socrates might argue that he was only attempting to seek truth through rational thought, one can question what purpose there was behind him finding this truth. To consider the issue utilizing the same logic Socrates implements with his philosophical arguments, one might ask Socrates what is the purpose of life. In these regards, I believe most people would indicate that the purpose of life is to gain the most enjoyment without inflicting pain or duress on other individuals. It follows then that in seeking to live the examined life, Socrates has gone about ignoring both of these tenants. Regarding the first tenant, it can hardly be indicated that seeking to live the examined life is the most enjoyable means of spending one’s time. Surely Socrates has a number of hobbies that he would rather pursue, such as fishing, cooking, or even watching Greek sporting events, than he would deep philosophical issues. There is also a sense that in seeking the truth of things, one does not discover a greater sense of happiness, but instead a greater sense of despondency as the ultimate reality is not something that is always happy to understand. For instance, in the Apology one of the greatest charges that Meletus brings against Socrates is that he has attempted to undermine the prevailing beliefs in the Greek gods. While Socrates’ views on this subject are accurate, there may be a deeper purpose for this belief in the Greek gods. For example, it’s highly probably that many individuals in contemporary American society embrace a belief in Christianity because it contains a belief in the afterlife and is extremely comforting. Similarly, in undermining the Athenian youths’ belief in the Greek gods, Socrates is undermining this comfort and sense of security. Considering the second tenant of the issue, namely that individuals should not harm other individuals, it seems that it’s possible Socrates has violated this tenant. Ancient Greek culture, and indeed contemporary society, is structured on the cooperation of individuals with each other to achieve a harmonious working environment. One of the conditions that society has to achieve this harmonious cooperative atmosphere is for society to agree on a number of basic assumptions and values; these include things that generally fall under the categorical distinction of laws. It follows then, that in living the examined life and preaching his findings to the Athenian youth, Socrates has sought to undermine the very values that unite Greek society in this harmonious and cooperative environment. It follows that Socrates’ way of life has sought to harm other individuals, as without this cooperative aspect it would be impossible for individuals to achieve many of the things that are needed for their subsistence. Conclusion In conclusion, it’s clear that in the Apology through Socrates Plato indicates that the unexamined life is not worth living. Socrates begins by indicating this since his purpose in life is being a philosopher, for him it is essential to live an examined life. Later Socrates extends this argument to indicate that in living the examined life humans are living a life of the highest virtue and worth, so that living an unexamined life is not worth living. While Socrates presents a compelling argument, a counter-argument that ignorance is bliss is explored that argues the examined life may present issues that are problematic to the individual and society. References Plato. Trns. Jowett, Benjamin. "Apology." MIT Classics. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Oct 2010. . Read More