The Apology of Socrates

look at news today...

Whoever raised his/her voice against the government.... is now in Jail.

nice article thou.

Re: # 2 Khuram
Again...that`s your opinion...but people have written theses on this topic. I personally don`t think Socrates adhered to the laws of Athens. He accpted the death sentence not because of Athenian laws but due to his `contentious` ideas. Socrates wouldn`t have spoken out if he adhered to the laws of State. So obviously Socrates died for truth and that`s a good thing !
Check this out http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Anci/AnciIvan.htm

---

``Socrates denied these charges, and as a result, the jury of the democratic state of Athens sentenced him to death. It is debatable whether Socrates was right or wrong in not adhering to the laws of the state.``

---

Socrates actually fully adhered to the laws of state. He was offered oppertunity by his friends and supporters to escape from the prison and leave the country. But he preferred death. Because he did not like to violate state laws. He had not denied the existence of gods. He had firm belief in after-life. But his concept of after-life was that only Philosophers could acquire eternity in the form of after-life. He was not afraid of death because he was sure that in his after-life, he would be in a state of pure thought and pondering and he will use to talk with gods etc.

See Plato`s Dialogues, to confirm these facts. In the words of Will Durant, Socrates died not for truth; but because he did not like to violate state laws...!

Socrates killing himself quietly without harming others for his truth is a lesson for all Jehadis.

Those who are eager to go to heavens and their world of ``Forms`` must emulate him than try and kill others in vengence!!!

We need to offer copies of ``Phaedo`` to all the Islamists.................

Re: # 6:
Thanks for the needed and must references.

I intend to learn about the facts about Socrates. But just guessing right now.

I think Socrates possibly was way ahead of his times. He also did not realize that being ahead of time does not win accolades, during the life anyway, but is like a Cross. Fittingly, he died due to the pygmies (no reference to Africa!) that surrounded him.

Fundamental reality for the peaceful existence and receiving reasonable recognition - if these are important for you - requires that you be not totally subversive of the existing System and Order. Chaos is worse than the worst system. You have to effect a change that can be implemented. An example is Gautam Buddha who adopted the Law of Karma even though he repudiated most of the Vedic principles.

Re: # 5
I don`t think references are needed when you are writing on such a broad topic in Philosophy. Even the topic says ``The Apology of Socrates`` and I have read so many editions of it .I reflected on one of the passages that always striked me .
But for your convenience , the most recent edition I read :
Grube, G.M.A, and John M. Cooper. Plato : Five Dialogues Euthyphro , Apology , Crito , Meno , Phaedo. 2nd ed. Indianapolis: Hacket Company, Inc, 2002. 25.

Dear Author,
Where are your references?

What passages are you referring to?

Where is the bibliography?

Such things might be helpful in lending credence to your postulations and comprehension of greek philosophical paradigm.

Re: # 9
Nouman , i was replying to Inquirer who said that Socrates respected the laws of Athens and did not question the pre-established beliefs of Athens. I didn`t mean to say its blasphemous to question the pre-established beliefs. I think what Socrates did was right but his actions were not for winning accolades. So obviously no Geocentricism !

Re: # 8
If questioning any pre-established belief in any society is always malevolent then will it be advisable still to believe in Geocentricism?

Re: # 8:
Misuse of the word malevolent.

Socrates certainly was not ahead of his time and in no way he wanted to win accolades. You can argue that Socrates had something new to offer to his fellow citizens. To question any pre-established belief in any society is always malevolent whether its Salman Rushdie`s Satanic Verses or Ahmadinejad questioning the Holocaust.

Re: # 14:

You need to get your english corrected. As a young student there is nothing wrong in getting one`s thinking normalized.

Dear Author.....

Malevolent has nothing to do with violence......

Please get a dictionary!

Re: # 13
``Muhammad and Jesus also questioned pre-established beliefs in their society and their efforts were anything but malevolent. ``

Muhammad and Jesus also questioned pre-established beliefs in their society and their efforts were anything but malevolent (wishing evil? or Violent?). ``

Jesus was violent or his efforts were violent?

Re: # 11

The word ``Malevolent`` does not fit here. You are right!

Muhammad and Jesus also questioned pre-established beliefs in their society and their efforts were anything but malevolent.

See Malevolent...comes from Latin word root MAL meaning evil......and VOLENCE meaning wishing or desiring....

APA:
malevolent. (n.d.). The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Retrieved November 16, 2006, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/malevolent

``To question any pre-established belief in any society is always malevolent whether its Salman Rushdie`s Satanic Verses or Ahmadinejad questioning the Holocaust.``

Good comparisons here................Rushdie`s work was a fiction..........a story churned out of his fertile mind..............same with that idiot Ahmadinejad`s questioning of Jewish Holocaust..........