human
essay for this summary: Socrates was accused of several crimes, and the first offense was that he did not practice the religion accepted by his city. Socrates: Accusations Based on Religious Views
assistant
#Socrates: Accusations Based on Religious Views Essay
Socrates was accused of several crimes, and the first offense was that he did not practice the religion accepted by his city (Chroust, 14). The second offense was that Socrates preached an alternate history of a divine being (Chroust, 14). He argues that if one does not recognize some gods, but believes in others, then that individual cannot be considered an atheist because it is contrary to his atheistic nature (Chroust, 16). This is also the most convincing argument in Socrates’s speech, for atheism is total disbelief in any deity from the point of view of religion (Oppy, 2019). Socrates is a representative of another denomination but not an atheist (Oppy, 2019).
Socrates repeatedly mentions the Gods, whose existence he acknowledges (Chroust, 17, 73, 76, 98, 139, 112, 128). Then Socrates thought that men of genius were actual, but the ancient Greek opinion was that geniuses were the children of the gods (Chroust, 17). From this logical chain, Socrates comes to the contradiction in the charge that he who believes in the children of the Gods cannot believe in the Most Highs themselves (Chroust, 17). At the same time, those who deny the existence of any Supreme force are considered atheists, and, accordingly, the philosopher does not fit under this criterion (Oppy, 2019). Another accusation of Socrates was that of corrupting the young (Chroust, 16). The philosopher notes that it is not fair to accuse him of such behavior because every adult living in a city influences the minds of young people (Chroust, 16).
Consequently, every inhabitant corrupts the minds of young people (Chroust, 16). Socrates’ ideas about truth and the assertion that the wisest of all men know nothing consisted of the fact that searching for truth in any dialogue or study is a difficult path (Plato, 2020). Socrates regarded as an error a dialogue in which one side takes the “knowing” position. Socrates’ primary method was to encourage one that only an ignoramus is so stupid that he cannot even understand that he knows nothing (Plato, 2020). The philosopher concludes in his work that truth is an objective, immaterial and eternal entity that exists in the divine (Xenophon & Denyer, 2019).
Likewise, the philosopher admits that only an understanding of one’s ignorance is wisdom, which is the answer to the riddle of the oracle to which Socrates goes. During the trial, Socrates refers to the truth while talking for corruption of youth, believing that the truth is that all citizens corrupt the younger generation but do not even realize it (Chroust, 76). Also, Socrates says that the trial itself is a discussion of abstract crimes, not a search for truth, since the accusers are engaged in things they do not know. (Chroust, 101).