Socrates’ struggles to fulfil his personal ideals of loyalty. Socrates is aware of the influence that he has on the people of Athens and is conflicted by his trial because it solicits self-examination. Upon reflection, Socrates concludes that he has not done anything wrong but feels that to prove his allegiance to Athens, he must abide by their punishment. Furthermore, Socrates feels that he has an obligation to the city of Athens and the youth to ensure that both are fulfilling their duties as members of larger communities; Socrates feels a responsibility to question, only for further advancement in the world. Yet in doing so, he must self-dispute his definition of his loyalty to himself and to his great city of Athens. Within his loyalty
…show more content…
Socrates affirms that he is guilty of divine disobedience but does not apologize because he knows that his actions are not congruent with cultural standards but do maintain his ideal of loyalty to himself. However, he makes a point to emphasize that his recognition of his impious actions do not mean that he is not a religion man. In his conviction speech he says, “Surely it is obvious that if I tried to persuade you and prevail upon you by my entreaties to go against your solemn oath, I should be teaching you contempt for religion; and by my very defense I should be virtually accusing myself of having no religious belief. But that is very far from the truth” (35d). Socrates knowns that in this case, pleading for innocence is condemtion because that would be asking the jury to go against the proof of his questioning that both he and his accusers know to be true. He does not ask for innocence because he wants to prove his piety and knows that claiming to value piety and asking the jury to go against their oath is hypocritical. He maintains a loyalty to himself by doing this; he stays honest but also points out his own wisdom …show more content…
This feeling is not ________ to modern marginalized individuals. The concept of countering privilege is one that both Socrates and minority groups face. In the United States, people are able to demonstrate their feelings and speak out against people of power through speech or peaceful protest; something that Socrates could not do because based on the lack of separation of church and state during his time. For example, in early 2017, around 160,000 people (The Atlantic) rallied to protest the election and inauguration of Donald Trump. Contrary to Socrates, these people were not put to death because they spoke out against the alleged power and wisdom. This demonstration is not unlike what Socrates asked of his society. The march was a manifestation of loyalties which asked the global community to reflect. Independent of demographic, the Women’s March was bothersome and inconvenient to certain individuals because it questions people in positions of power and privilege. It is human nature to reject change while simultaneously searching for it. Humans inherently want to be better and do more but the steps taken in getting there are less enticing. Both Socrates and the people who participated in peaceful protest ask others to question the systems of oppression that inhibit self-reflection and sovereign thought and by doing so, allow the society the opportunity to reach its fullest
Socrates affirms that he is guilty of divine disobedience but does not apologize because he knows that his actions are not congruent with cultural standards but do maintain his ideal of loyalty to himself. However, he makes a point to emphasize that his recognition of his impious actions do not mean that he is not a religion man. In his conviction speech he says, “Surely it is obvious that if I tried to persuade you and prevail upon you by my entreaties to go against your solemn oath, I should be teaching you contempt for religion; and by my very defense I should be virtually accusing myself of having no religious belief. But that is very far from the truth” (35d). Socrates knowns that in this case, pleading for innocence is condemtion because that would be asking the jury to go against the proof of his questioning that both he and his accusers know to be true. He does not ask for innocence because he wants to prove his piety and knows that claiming to value piety and asking the jury to go against their oath is hypocritical. He maintains a loyalty to himself by doing this; he stays honest but also points out his own wisdom …show more content…
This feeling is not ________ to modern marginalized individuals. The concept of countering privilege is one that both Socrates and minority groups face. In the United States, people are able to demonstrate their feelings and speak out against people of power through speech or peaceful protest; something that Socrates could not do because based on the lack of separation of church and state during his time. For example, in early 2017, around 160,000 people (The Atlantic) rallied to protest the election and inauguration of Donald Trump. Contrary to Socrates, these people were not put to death because they spoke out against the alleged power and wisdom. This demonstration is not unlike what Socrates asked of his society. The march was a manifestation of loyalties which asked the global community to reflect. Independent of demographic, the Women’s March was bothersome and inconvenient to certain individuals because it questions people in positions of power and privilege. It is human nature to reject change while simultaneously searching for it. Humans inherently want to be better and do more but the steps taken in getting there are less enticing. Both Socrates and the people who participated in peaceful protest ask others to question the systems of oppression that inhibit self-reflection and sovereign thought and by doing so, allow the society the opportunity to reach its fullest