summarize the charges against Socrates (distinguishing between the “earlier” from the formal, “immediate” charges)
Place your order now for a similar assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, At affordable rates
For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order Now
Socrates was charged, put on trial before an Athenian jury, and sentenced to a painful death after a guilty verdict. Before determining whether or not this outcome was just, you must 1) summarize the charges against Socrates (distinguishing between the “earlier” from the formal, “immediate” charges), 2) outline Socrates’ defence (how he attempted to refute the charges), and 3) indicate whether or not you believe his arguments were successful. Finally, in your conclusion, explain why you believe the verdict/sentence was just or unjust. Please note that you cannot discuss all the relevant aspects of this dialogue in a short essay. This means you have to select carefully what your focus will be. I strongly recommend that you pay special attention to Socrates’ cross-examination of Meletus, since it is here that Socrates’ philosophical positions are most clearly revealed. In your analysis of these key sections, you should at least attempt to indicate what point Socrates is trying to make, how his arguments work, and whether they are good or bad. Again, since you cannot discuss everything, pick what you think are the most important passages and analyze them in as much detail as you can. I’m not looking for a vague summary or “book report;” I want you to evaluate the philosophical positions advanced in the dialogue. Get into the details and enjoy yourself!
