Comparison and contrast of the apologia of Socrates and the defense speech of Gorgias: A Defense on behalf of Palamedes

Comparison and contrast of the apologia of Socrates and the defense speech of Gorgias: A Defense on behalf of Palamedes Term Paper example
Undergraduate
Term Paper
Philosophy
Pages 5 (1255 words)
Download 0
Student’s Name Course Name Instructor’s Name Date Socrates defense against his case before the Athenian council are based on the principle of his curiosity and the facts that he seeks to comprehend. This is concerning and in response to his accusers that attempt to label him as an evil doer for seeking to acquire knowledge beyond that which is conventionally visible and understandable…

Introduction

Therefore, because of this his defense is not perfect, as it only addresses his accusers as a crowd and not as individuals who bring their arguments and cases against him, but are rather guarded by the crowd. In addition, his issues are that the arguments and cases against him have been built over a long time and not a one-time thing, which implies that the same people charging him feign ignorance over the actual value of his works and beliefs (Adams). With this in mind, his charges are not even valid or based on actual occurrences, but are just accusations that have developed over an extended period and terms of heresy from other people. This makes his defense a bit shaky as all cases against other philosophers who seek to gain an understanding and acquire an explanation of occurrences are leveled against him as the perpetrator of them all. In his defense, Socrates states that his role in life is to examine the wisdom of man and expose their false ways and wisdom as ignorance, which he says is part of why he is being charged. This is because his activities expose many prominent people and embarrass theme while Socrates gains acclaim from the youths of Athens (Tindale). ...
Download paper
Not exactly what you need?

Related papers

Alvin Plantinga's Free Will Defense
Platinga demonstrates how theistic belief, about God being omnipotent and wholly good, is logically consistent. Permitting evil means creating a world with moral good, as well as, moral evil. This is an argument that answers the questions raised by different philosophers, or defends itself against some philosophers, with contradictory ideas about the existence of evil and the role of God. In the…
Sartre's Defense of Existentialism
Nevertheless, Sartre’s response to the objection that his existentialism makes all choice arbitrary is not only good but also sensible. Sartre interprets the objection that confronts him and his existentialism – “It does not matter what you do” – in three ways: “First they tax us with anarchy; then they say, ‘You cannot judge others, for there is no reason for preferring one purpose…
Theodicy and the Free Will Defense
This paper deems to tackle the concepts revolving around theodicy and free will; this also aims to know whether the free will defense meet all the three criteria for an effective theodicy. Free Will Human free will and freely chosen good actions are of high value, even though free will opens up the possibility of evil (Pinnock 5). Furthermore, as guided by the definition of freedom, free will or…
Socrates
To put it in simple words, Protagoras views the principle of morality as a valuable aspect that facilitates social cooperation. On the other hand, Socrates holds a vision about the principle of morality as a matter of an individuals’ interrelation towards his/her own soul which cannot be taught based on certain defined theories or assumptions contradicting Protagoras’ views that a person…
Insanity defense
249). This defense has posed an insoluble problem to the criminal justice system – Contrary to the criminal law which seeks to punish the criminal; the insanity defense seeks to excuse the criminal of responsibility (Fersch, 2005). Affirming the crucial importance of criminal intent in defining a crime, this term paper contends that insanity defense is morally justified and necessary because…
Defense Paper: David Hume
Every person has his own perception of the world, thus, he/she may have his/her own experience. Hume states that we all have our own views and there are no two views which are actually the same. From here Hume derives his attitude towards scientific knowledge. His view of knowledge also raised indignation and misunderstanding among scholars as the philosopher stated that there is nothing certain…
Socrates Defense of Athenian Law and C.S. Lewis' critique of subjectivism
Why would Lewis insist that we interpret Plato’s Socrates in this way? Socrates was an Athenian who firmly believed that the system of the law under which the jury was acting was fair. The city of Athen’s tribunal sat to bestow justice in accordance with the city’s regulations. From the outset of his trial, Socrates declared that, “I must observe the law and make my defense” (Plato 35c).…