Why does Socrates assent to his sentence?
Socrates assent to his sentence because according to Meletus, he was found guilty of refusing to recognize the gods that were being recognized by the entire states and he introduced new divinities (Morrison, 2011) . He was also found guilty of corrupting the young people. All these penalties called for a death sentence. Even though Socrates had reasons for his beliefs during the trial, he was not willing to take an advice from the judges. He declared that he shall continue to obey God only and will continue teaching and practice the philosophy he believed was true and right. On the contrary, he became apologetic during his defense and was willing to die. This is because he was not going to stop teaching people about the new philosophies.
Does he contradict the values, morals or ideas he expresses throughout his trial?
Socrates did not contradict values and morals throughout his trial because he used apology. Even though his teachings and philosophies were not accepted at the time because it was not honoring the gods of the states, he did not contradict values and morals during his trial. He understood that if he gave in during the trial, it would show that his teachings were not valuable and could be a lie. He remained consistent in his speech and was willing to die as a way of defending the philosophies (Woods & Pack, 2007) . At the end of the trial, he rebuked the judges asking them if they had no untroubled conscience after pronouncing the penalty for his charges.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
What is Plato’s attitude about Socrates?
Plato admired his teacher Socrates and had trust in him. He had seen his previous works and was pleased about how he was a passionate religion leader. However, during the trial, Plato had a theory that was backed up by Phaedo and led to the death sentence of Socrates (Morrison, 2011) .
Why is it considered moral or immoral? Who has the authority to decide? How does that person or institution get the power to decide?
The sentencing of Socrates was immoral because he was accused of teaching new philosophies that were not matching with the beliefs at the times. The gods’ religion had dominated over the state for many years and the authority was not willing to welcome any other new philosophy. Instead of accusing Socrates, the leaders should have evaluated the new philosophies and try to find the truth. Suppressing one religion at the expense of the other form of religion was not okay. The chosen authorities were to decide what best for all people and allow people to make choices. Even though during the Socrates trial, more judges voted for guilty while less judge voted for not guilty, it was not enough to save Socrates from the death penalty (Woods & Pack, 2007) . The person or institution is to get the power to decide from the society through democratic nomination. Finally, the death sentence was immoral because it did not show the value of respecting human life.
What would Socrates say? Would he think the thing or choose what is moral or immoral? What would be his rationale or justification for his belief?
Socrates believed that his teachings were moral and that is why he accepted the death sentence. He was not willing to abandon his beliefs in exchange for his life. Throughout his trial, he did not contradict is believes in the favor of the judges’ judgment (Morrison, 2011) . He remained true to his words. The rational or justification of his belief was the source of his teachings. The philosophy was not new, it was only new in the states he was living because the majority of the people believed in gods. This is what brought a problem between him and the religious leaders.
References
Morrison, D. R. (2011). The Cambridge companion to Socrates. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Woods, C., & Pack, R. (2007). Socrates of Athens: Euthyphro, Socrates' Defense, Crito, and the Death Scene from Phaedo. San Francisco, California: Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
