Get help with any kind of assignment - from a high school essay to a PhD dissertation
Writer: A dialog about whether or not I think that Socrates' views in the Crito contradict his viewpoints expressed in the Apology. My position: I am in conjunction with this announcement as well as my analysis, dependent on contextual evidence, is as follows: Although I could argue the question posited above from either position, as most have done before and, as many will continue to do after me, I don't believe that Socrates waivers in his faith between the 2 accounts based on Plato. Even the contradiction, it seems, concentrates on whether or not Socrates is a proponent of civil (dis)obedience, and the obvious conflict between the two functions revolves around passages from the Apology, which appear to be in opposition to his stated convictions at the conversation between he and Crito. These passages seem to suggest that Socrates is responsible for violating Athenian law when they are deemed to be unjust or unjust. Only who and how one would determine injustice and immorality in any particular situation is in question and seems to add to the understanding of inconsistency. In the Apology, Socrates introduces his shield against accusations that he has not only corrupted the youth of Athens with his incessant Philosophizing, however, that he's also guilty of impiety, being an atheist, or rather, not believing in town gods as well as introducing new gods (Apology 24b-c). Summarily, Socrates does not answer the accusations straight in the conversation of his shield, but rather, he utilizes a cross-examination plan against his accusers Meletus, Anytus, and Lycon, to convince the jury that he is not guilty of corrupting the youth any more than any other Athenian citizen (Apology 19e-20c). And more importantly, he contends that the main reason he now faces a ju...