Apology Reading NotesThe Apology is unique among Plato’s dialogues because it is presented as a record of the actual speech that Socrates delivered in his defense at his trial. Scholars generally agree that it is likely to be accurate. Plato makes clear in two places that he was present at the trial (34a, 38b), and it is generally believed that it was written and circulated not long after the event, which would have given rise to objections from those in the jury and those who attended if Plato had played fast and loose with the facts. So, if we’re interested in the historical Socrates, the Apology is the best place in Plato’s writings to look. When we do look, we encounter a calm, morally serious person who seems intent on saying what he believes is true no matter what consequences he may face for doing so. Socrates presents his activity – philosophical activity – as more than an intellectual pastime. It has, if he is right, an important civic function, “approaching each of you like a father or an elder brother to persuade you to care for virtue.” (31b) His vision of wisdom as not thinking one knows what one does not know (21d) and his commitment to the examined life (38a) have inspired people who pursue the life of the mind for over 2,000 years. The first study question asks you to look at some of the early moments of the speech where Socrates speaks of his occupation. Consider the story he offers. Does it adequately justify Socrates’ activity among the Athenians? What about the sense in which he is wise? Does this seem like a worthy definition of wisdom? What would be the result if everyone pursued it? Would it make the world a better place? How so? In this context, consider how he characterizes his activity among the Athenians as showing those who think they are wise that they are not, in fact, wise (23b). Does this seem like a worthy occupation? Would it benefit a society to have people who did this? Why or Why not? Since the Apology is a defense at a trial, it makes sense to approach it by considering what the charges were and how well Socrates responds to them. This is what the second study question asks you to do. If you were a juror at this trial, would you have voted “guilty” or “not guilty”? Why? On another page, I’ve drawn out the salient details that relate to the charges of the indictment. When you consider them, all taken together, what do you think the verdict should have been? Why? The third study question concerns a passage that contains an interesting argument. It doesn’t show that Socrates is not guilty. It responds to a question that hasn’t been formally asked but which Socrates’ thinks will be on some people’s minds: Shouldn’t you be ashamed to have followed the kind of occupation that has led you to being in danger of death? Do you think this is a question that Socrates needs to respond to? (Is it something that you were wondering? Is it something that a person should have an answer for?) His argument is in three parts. Once you’ve identified what those are and finished the study question, consider each in turn. Are they effective responses to the question? Is one better than the others? Why? Turning to the fourth study question, consider whether Socrates has done an adequate job of showing that “there is no greater blessing for the city” than his occupation. As you read 29d-31c, note the level of commitment to his occupation that Socrates expresses. He stakes his life on it. Why is it so important? Granted that he’s committed to it, does he do a good job of defending the idea that it is a blessing to the community? Why or why not? Finally, look at the sentencing phase of the trial. Socrates refuses to recommend exile, on the one hand because of his service to the god, on the other hand because “the unexamined life is not worth living for (humans).” This last point is worth reflection. What is the examined life precisely? Is it true that life’s not worth living without it? Why or why not? Try to spell out what Socrates means here based on what you’ve been reading in the Apology so far. The Apology is a rich document. In these notes, I am attempting to draw your attention to its most philosophical aspects. But it is also a work of literature. It has many other qualities to relish – the drama of the courtroom, the character that Socrates presents in the situation, questions about how Socrates could have approached the task differently and speculation about why he didn’t do so, questions about whether Socrates is deliberately riling up the jurors and why he would do so. Like others, I have found it a rich source of ideas for reflection, and I think that something like this is why it has had such enduring appeal. Below are questions1. Summarize the story Socrates offers to justify his occupation. In what sense is Socrates wise? How does Socrates characterize his occupation? 2. What charges have been brought against Socrates by his later accusers? Consider what Socrates says in his defense. What does he say in response to each charge? How compelling is his defense, in your opinion? Why? 3. How does Socrates support his contention that a good man would not be ashamed to have followed the kind of occupation that has led to his being in danger of death? In answering this question, make sure you can also answer the following questions: What claim is Socrates attempting to support by bringing up the scene between Thetis and Achilles from the Iliad and the analogy between his situation and military service? On what grounds does he claim that to fear death is to think oneself wise when one is not? 4. Why does Socrates think that “there is no greater blessing for the city” than his service to the god? 5. Why does Socrates insist that if he is exiled he will not be able to live quietly, without talking?

Select an issue in nurse practitioner (NP) practice that is of interest to you and in which you would like to see a practice change occur. Conduct a review of literature to see what is currently known about the topic. In 1-2 paragraphs, describe the scope and relevance of the issue and your recommended change. Provide reference support from at least two outside scholarly sources to support your ideas. No plagiarism, APA style