Acting well politically requires an individual or set of individuals to exercise a careful balance between maintaining their convictions and understanding when to make exceptions; however, it is almost always more politically beneficial to have the courage to abandon previous convictions than to strictly maintain one’s convictions, especially when faced with confounding evidence or overwhelming backlash. Abandoning one’s convictions entails revising one’s decisions when presented with suggestions or information that invalidates what an individual previously held to be the correct course of action. Having the courage to change one’s mind not only is to have the courage to admit one was wrong, but also to have the courage to accept that others’
…show more content…
Abandoning previous convictions also necessitates that an individual gives the proper attention and consideration to those who criticize him while endeavoring to understand their legitimate concerns. For the act of abandoning one’s decision to be politically beneficial, the decision cannot simply be an acceptance of any criticism, but rather the careful consideration of legitimate criticisms that are substantiated with evidence or illustrated by fact. Ancient Grecian works such as Sophocles’ Antigone and Plato’s Trial and Death of Socrates illustrate examples of individuals whose pride and obstinacy ultimately led them to ruin. By analyzing these stories, the merits of changing one’s mind in times of duress can be …show more content…
Socrates is tasked with defending himself against accusations made by Meletus, Antyus and Lycon that he doesn’t believe in the gods (Apology 23c, 26b). He also takes this opportunity to address previous accusations from other members of the jury, chiefly that he corrupts the youth, makes weaker arguments the stronger and carries out questionable investigations into the physical sciences (Apology, 18b, 23d). Socrates says he cannot be a sophist or a student of the physical sciences because he claims to have no knowledge in these areas (Apology, 20c). Socrates then questions Meletus about the current accusations that he doesn’t believe in the gods by pointing out that he believes in spiritual things, which are inherently divine (Apology, 27d). Socrates, having proved that he does in fact believe in the gods by proxy of spirits and spiritual things, transitions to explaining how he does not corrupt the youth because he teaches nothing and there isn’t anyone who will testify that they have been corrupted (Apology, 33a-34b). In questioning men who claim to be wise Socrates is not doing so with the intention of making them appear stupid in front of youths, but rather with the genuine intention highlighting their falsehoods so they may humbly recognize the fallacy they commit when they equate their practical knowledge of human activities to a knowledge of “the most important pursuits,” such as justice or truth.
Abandoning previous convictions also necessitates that an individual gives the proper attention and consideration to those who criticize him while endeavoring to understand their legitimate concerns. For the act of abandoning one’s decision to be politically beneficial, the decision cannot simply be an acceptance of any criticism, but rather the careful consideration of legitimate criticisms that are substantiated with evidence or illustrated by fact. Ancient Grecian works such as Sophocles’ Antigone and Plato’s Trial and Death of Socrates illustrate examples of individuals whose pride and obstinacy ultimately led them to ruin. By analyzing these stories, the merits of changing one’s mind in times of duress can be …show more content…
Socrates is tasked with defending himself against accusations made by Meletus, Antyus and Lycon that he doesn’t believe in the gods (Apology 23c, 26b). He also takes this opportunity to address previous accusations from other members of the jury, chiefly that he corrupts the youth, makes weaker arguments the stronger and carries out questionable investigations into the physical sciences (Apology, 18b, 23d). Socrates says he cannot be a sophist or a student of the physical sciences because he claims to have no knowledge in these areas (Apology, 20c). Socrates then questions Meletus about the current accusations that he doesn’t believe in the gods by pointing out that he believes in spiritual things, which are inherently divine (Apology, 27d). Socrates, having proved that he does in fact believe in the gods by proxy of spirits and spiritual things, transitions to explaining how he does not corrupt the youth because he teaches nothing and there isn’t anyone who will testify that they have been corrupted (Apology, 33a-34b). In questioning men who claim to be wise Socrates is not doing so with the intention of making them appear stupid in front of youths, but rather with the genuine intention highlighting their falsehoods so they may humbly recognize the fallacy they commit when they equate their practical knowledge of human activities to a knowledge of “the most important pursuits,” such as justice or truth.