Socrates - Essay Example

Socrates In his works, Plato acknowledges the minimal role played by Socrates in Athens politics. Through his conversation processes with Athens population, especially with the youth, Socrates influenced people with new deities and philosophies. Socrates was occupied with educating the youth population on the importance of moral excellence. Socrates emphasized the need to apply Sophists intellectual principles in moral contexts. Socrates asserted the need of eliminating ignorance before engaging in any deliberative process (III. 162-165) In this essay, we will appraise the Mytilenean debate from the perspective of Socrates deities. If Socrates had participated in this debate, he would have applied his philosophy in deliberating on the underlying issues. In his argument, Cleon disapproves of the effectiveness of a democratic system of governance in managing an empire. According to Cleon, democracy is a recipe for chaos in a society characterized by master and slave relationship. Cleon asserts that Mytilenaeans would not change under democracy, which presents them with a substantial freedom to conspire against their masters. In his argument, Cleon insinuates that laws bestowed upon an empire by democracy are not effective in preventing a revolution from the rebels within the society (III. 167-168) Therefore, Cleon discredits democracy and its governance elements. With respect to the underlying subject, Socrates would have disagreed with Cleon on his firm position concerning the ineffectiveness of democracy. Socrates emphasized on moral excellence, which entails doing the right in the society. Democracy gives the population freedom to pursue their objectives per their will. This is an example of a morally excellent social act. In this context, Socrates would have told Cleon to exercise his Sophistic principles in addressing moral pretexts of Athens. Cleon emphasizes the negative influence of intellectuals in structuring governance policies. Intellectuals of Athens were responsible for the restructuring and relaxation of state laws for purposes of democracy. Relaxation of state laws resulted in a revolution which ended in Athens defeat. In this regard, Cleon blames intellectuals of betraying the Athenian people with their war of wits. According to Cleon, politics and structuring of state law is not the appropriate platform for displaying intelligence and cleverness by intellectuals. In addition, Cleon asserts that intellectuals should not pretend that they trust their acquired cleverness more that their inbred wisdom when it comes to governance. In this context, Socrates would have disagreed with Cleon in his arguments. In his deities, Socrates valued acquisition of knowledge and intelligence. In addition, Socrates emphasized the importance of applying the acquired intelligence in practical affairs of life (III. 171-173). The Athenians trusted intellectuals in their society even at governance levels. Socrates asserted that Sophists were fond of applying their knowledge in handling public issues. In this case, Socrates would justify the reliability of applying intelligence in public governance. Socrates would have insinuated that Cleon should deal with his ignorance before making leadership decisions or opinions. Cleon highlights that Sophistic rhetoric in public forums misguides the public in making uninformed political decisions. Cleon argues that Athenians are so ignorant so as to trust speeches of individuals with an aim of furthering their political and self-actualization mileage. Sophistic critics are individuals with a vested interest in diverting the public from the bigger picture. According to Cleon, the results of subscribing to ideologies are immeasurable. However, Cleon blames the public for propagating sophistic rhetoric within Athens. Athenians are fond of listening to this rhetoric debate to the extent of trusting what they ear depending on who said them. At this juncture, Socrates would agree with Cleon’s argument on the influence of Sophistic rhetoric in politics. Throughout his arguments, Socrates emphasized the need of subjecting a claim to a deliberative process before subscribing to its principles. In this context, Athenians trusted ideologies of Sophists before evaluating them for reliability in making political decisions. This lies contrary to Socrates thoughts, which discredited the element of ignorance in making decisions (III. 174-175). Cleon highlights the negative effects of articulating self interest in making foreign policy decisions. According to Cleon, those in power are too swift to satisfy their interests by responding to their desires. Men are naturally interested in tackling adversity than maintaining a harmonious environment for the already gathered prosperity. According to Cleon, Mytilenaeans went to war out of the interests of their leaders. Mytileanean leaders believed that they are mightier than their masters. They trusted the self interest of their leaders. As a result, their efforts ended up in defeat. In this context, Athens failed by trusting their leaders who entertained incorporation of Mytileaneans into their society. Self interests dominated their leaders’ minds in making decisions on how to establish their relationships with foreign bodies (III. 74-77). Based on the underlying issue, Socrates would disagree with Cleon. Socrates maintained his stand concerning the aspect of virtue in moral excellence. Socrates acknowledged that people did wrong and evil deeds because of their ignorance. Therefore, self interests are not to blame for the negative consequences of broken foreign relations. According to Diodotus, people have a higher tendency of subscribing to political ideologies made with plain postulates of philosophies. Political decisions are made through ideal communication, which entails conveyance of meaning through words. In his argument, Diodotus acknowledges that there is a misguided notion among the public on the right person to trust political rhetoric. Politicians go to the furthest end in lying about their advocacies in an effort of establishing their credibility at the public domain. Eloquent and mischievous speakers get attention and trust for their political opinions even if their advocacies have a hidden agenda. On the other hand, Diodotus asserts that when the wisest man stands to express his credible position, the public will swiftly disapprove of his claims upon suspicion of an ill motive. In this context, political decisions should be made with substantial reasons (III. 81-82). Socrates would agree with Diodotus on this point. Socrates emphasizes the need of information and tangible facts before making a decision. Therefore, Socrates would have asserted the need of thorough evaluation when it comes to selecting the best political decisions to make. Diodotus advocates for justice and fairness in making decisions concerning foreign relations. It is true that Mytilene in an oligarchic state. The fact that foreigners, who in this case are Mytilenaeans went up against Athens should not warrant a general victimization of all the oligarchic foreign empires. In addition, Diodotus advocates for exercise of fairness and objectivity in legal proceedings. All Mytilenaeans were not responsible or the revolt. In fact, they were swift in surrendering their arms after they got arms. Diodotus argues that Athens courts should not be swift in arriving at a subjective judgment as this will result in damaged reputation to the outside parties (III. 83-84). In this context, Socrates would agree with Diodotus. In his deities, Socrates prioritized the elements of moral excellence towards all members of a society. Therefore, Socrates would emphasize on the need of objective justice in handling foreign issues in politics. Diodotus disapproves of the death penalty as a deterrent to the crime of revolt. Administration of the death penalty to convicted rebels discourages them in their process of repentance and reform. According to Diodotus, convicts should be given a chance to correct their mistakes and revert to their former selves. In addition, death penalty will not prevent further occurrence of revolts in the society. History shows that poverty and repression is substantial to motivate a nation’s population into initiating a risky revolt. People are always taking risks venturing into unprecedented enterprises. In this regard, risk taking is natural among the human population; hence death penalty will not curb development of criminal and revolt ideologies among members of any given society (III. 91-92). In this context, Socrates would agree with Diodotus. Socrates asserted that evil deeds in the society happen out of ignorance. Elimination of ignorance through the pursuit of knowledge and virtue will act as an effective mechanism for preventing the occurrence of wrongful acts. In addition, Socrates stood for moral excellence. In this regard, severe violence like death penalty is not within the scope of moral excellence principles. Work Cited Thucydides. On Justice, Power, and Human Nature: The Essence of Thucydides History of the Peloponnesian War. New York: Hackett, 2003. Print. Read More