Apology
When we hear the word “apology” the definitions that rings bell to our mind is “begging or pleading forgiveness” but it is very distinct in the “Plato’s Apology”. This article rather authenticates how Socrates defensed himself by virtue of his arguments for being the wisest, honest, and knowledgeable person but remained guilty of the applied charges at the end. He was charged guilty by his fellow Athenians for, not recognizing the gods that everyone believed in and creating new gods; and corrupting the youth of Athens. [1]. In his defense, Socrates requested the jury not to cause any disturbance for the figure of speech that he uses. For the most part, he kept his speech very directive and plain. He was a man of honesty and expressed his thoughts purely without adding any professional filters or mannerism. His arguments were mostly conveyed in a form of questions and he answering those questions himself. He strongly attacked Meletus who was primarily responsible for bringing him to the court for felonious charges. He argued that Meletus considered Socrates as a believer of spiritual things and yet charged him for not believing in gods but imaginary gods are based on spiritual beliefs. He further argued and confirmed with the audience who he had conversed with before that he never imposed anyone to believe his thoughts but instead he liked sharing and receiving other people’s thoughts …show more content…
Some of his arguments were very compelling but since majority of the prosecutors were against him, it was very hard for him to prove himself free of charges. He lacked strategy in his arguments to make it more impactful but then again, he chose the path of integrity and did not use any false cards to play safe like sympathy and lies. Overall, I believe that the effectiveness of his arguments was contemplated by the
When we hear the word “apology” the definitions that rings bell to our mind is “begging or pleading forgiveness” but it is very distinct in the “Plato’s Apology”. This article rather authenticates how Socrates defensed himself by virtue of his arguments for being the wisest, honest, and knowledgeable person but remained guilty of the applied charges at the end. He was charged guilty by his fellow Athenians for, not recognizing the gods that everyone believed in and creating new gods; and corrupting the youth of Athens. [1]. In his defense, Socrates requested the jury not to cause any disturbance for the figure of speech that he uses. For the most part, he kept his speech very directive and plain. He was a man of honesty and expressed his thoughts purely without adding any professional filters or mannerism. His arguments were mostly conveyed in a form of questions and he answering those questions himself. He strongly attacked Meletus who was primarily responsible for bringing him to the court for felonious charges. He argued that Meletus considered Socrates as a believer of spiritual things and yet charged him for not believing in gods but imaginary gods are based on spiritual beliefs. He further argued and confirmed with the audience who he had conversed with before that he never imposed anyone to believe his thoughts but instead he liked sharing and receiving other people’s thoughts …show more content…
Some of his arguments were very compelling but since majority of the prosecutors were against him, it was very hard for him to prove himself free of charges. He lacked strategy in his arguments to make it more impactful but then again, he chose the path of integrity and did not use any false cards to play safe like sympathy and lies. Overall, I believe that the effectiveness of his arguments was contemplated by the