| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "SOCRATES MORAL LEGAL OBLIGATIONS": |
|
|
Socrates' and Moral and Legal Obligations, 2005.
This paper looks at Socrates' view of moral and legal obligations.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 23.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The writer discusses Socrates' view of the moral and legal obligations to obey the law. This paper looks at Socrates' trial for corrupting the young. The writer explains how Socrates responded to the charges against him. The writer also describes Socrates' reaction to the death sentence.
From the Paper
"Socrates was accused of the capital crime of corrupting youth with his teachings and was sentenced to death. Socrates did not deny he was guilty of the charge but rather protested that what he was accused of was something he had practiced his entire life and if it was illegal then his whole life was illegal. He claimed that he was being accused unjustly of corrupting the minds of the young, but had merely made people think and had opened their minds and made them question ... "
| |
|
Legal vs. Moral Obligation, 2004.
A review of two documents, "On the Duty of Civil Disobedience", by Henry David Thoreau, and "Letter from Birmingham Jail", by Martin Luther King.
922 words (approx. 3.7 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the value of a legal obligation as opposed to a moral one. The paper makes references to two documents, "On the Duty of Civil Disobedience" by Henry David Thoreau and "Letter from Birmingham Jail" by Martin Luther King. Both Thoreau and King address the issue of moral obligation versus legal obligation, in which an individual experiences conflict with the government and society as s/he tries to follow his/her free will as a member of the society and the rules and laws imposed by the government at the same time.
From the Paper
"In his discourse, Thoreau asserts, ?That government is best which governs least,? which means to say that the least government intervention in the society results to a better state of civil society. This is because he thinks that the government is susceptible to manipulation by people with vested interests, who consider the government as an institution that can be used to provide greater privileges to other people and not the society in general. Thoreau contends, ?But a government in which the majority rule in all cases can not be based on justice, even as far as men understand it."
| |
|
"Apologia of Socrates" by Socrates, 2002.
An examination of the trial and death of Socrates in "Apologia of Socrates" by Socrates.
1,545 words (approx. 6.2 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 50.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the beliefs of Socrates and how his aim in ?Apologia of Socrates? was to prove that death was better than a life without independent beliefs. Socrates article is written as a defense of his probable suicide and offers three points about the suicide. That he is innocent of the charges against him, that he would be going to a better place and finally that he is old and was going to die soon anyway. The Apology of Socrates is his defense at his trial, where he is found guilty. In conclusion, the writer discusses that whilst Socrates is sentenced to death, he has no fear of death.
From the Paper
"Socrates did not seem to fear death, as it was inching closer to him every day. He told his fellow Athenians that his forced suicide would come back to hunt them, because he had no doubt that one day people would recognize his wisdom and criticize the people of Athens for killing him. Socrates advised his prosecutors to juts let him die naturally, especially since he was innocent.
The Apology is Socrates' defense at his trial. Socrates is aware that his accusers have warned the jury against Socrates' eloquence. However, Socrates states that the difference between himself and his accusers is that he, unlike them, is speaking the truth."
| |
|
Hobbes on Moral Obligation, 2003.
An analysis of Thomas Hobbes' views on moral obligation, justice and rights.
920 words (approx. 3.7 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 31.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper describes Thomas Hobbes' views on moral obligation, justice, and rights, based on his general theory of human nature. It looks at Hobbes' contention that men are equal in nature and how this equality often diminishes in society.
From the Paper
"Thomas Hobbes held offered a comprehensive account of man's obligations which drew upon his theory of human nature. This essay will answer a series of questions focused on Hobbes' approach to moral obligation rights in the state of .."
| |
|
Machiavelli's "The Prince" and Cicero's "On Moral Obligation", 1992.
A comparison of their works and philosophies.
2,025 words (approx. 8.1 pages), 2 sources, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The Moral Obligation of Public Virtue as Discussed in Machiavelli's The Prince (Il Principe) and Cicero's On Moral Obligation (De Officiis)
At a cursory glance, the philosophies of Machiavelli and Cicero might seem to be similar. Both men sought the same end goal as a result of their philosophy--the stability and strength of the state--as both felt that without a stable, dependable government the lives of the individuals could find little peace or order in their lives. Likewise, at first it seems as though both men share the philosophy that the end justifies the means. But the deeper one delves into each man's philosophy, one realizes that they're actually very far apart, and represent contrasting views on moral obligation, the state, and the ..."
| |
|
Legal Naturalism vs. Legal Positivism, 2002.
A comparison of laws understood to come about naturally or through some form of positive creation.
2,630 words (approx. 10.5 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 79.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines two of the general theories of law - legal naturalism and legal positivism, both of which have had an enormous influence on law throughout history. The first part of the paper looks at natural law which describes those diverse theories of law that do not accept human law as true law and hold that a particular "something other than the positive law is the true law". The second section examines legal positivism where one of several general theoretical traditions is based on the belief that the source of knowledge lies in experience, not in reason, nor in mind.
From the Paper
"A good example of the usefulness of classical legal naturalism can be seen in the rise of commercial law in the Middle Ages in Europe. As Glendon, Gordon, and Carozza point out, the rise of commercial law took place when Roman civil law provided no adequate coverage of new problems that arose as trade "emerged from the localism and relative economic stagnation of the Middle Ages" in the form of international banking, expanded maritime trade, and rising commercial centers."
| |
|
The Ethical Obligations of Corporations, 2008.
An analysis of the moral and ethical obligations, as well as normative theories, of corporations in modern society, focusing on the Ford Motor Company.
3,988 words (approx. 16.0 pages), 8 sources, MLA, $ 108.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This essay debates the moral and ethical obligations of corporations in modern society. The paper shows that corporations do make decisions that appear to be based on the assumption that profit is so important that injury to (and even death of) innocent human beings is an acceptable cost. The paper then goes on to analyze these kinds of behaviors by applying normative theories to them. It specifically focuses on the case of the Ford Motor Company.
Table of Contents:
Normative Theories
Strategic Considerations
From the Paper
"If the law was extended in this way, it would become possible for corporations to be prosecuted in a way that was compatible with acceptable morality. For example, in the Ford Pinto case, the engineers who conducted the risk analysis and recommended that no recall should be done, would all be charged with manslaughter. They would most likely end up in prison for a very long time. If this kind of thing happened, it is likely that corporations would stop treating people as means to an end (the end being profit). This does not mean that they would suddenly grow consciences. However, for a corporation to make a decision and carry out actions, individual human beings must play their part. If all of these human beings were aware that they could be imprisoned for their parts in such decisions, I believe they would not be prepared to play along."
| |
|
The Trial of Socrates, 2005.
This paper argues that, in the trial of Socrates, Socrates was wrongfully condemned.
1,010 words (approx. 4.0 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, in his trial, Socrates was found guilty although he presented an adequate argument, but public bias wrongfully executed him. The author points out that Socrates was attempting to convey to the masses that he had followed the letter of the law on every occasion, even when it went against the decision of the Council: "I must obey the law and make my defense." The paper concludes that the Socratic Method is one of the most widespread and universal methods of deductively drawing a conclusion; thus, if Socrates corrupted the minds of the youth, then today the world is corrupted.
From the Paper
"Due to the unpopular exposure, Socrates had amassed during his quest for knowledge, the jury that heard his apology was bias; some, possibly having been ridiculed by Socrates during his search of philosophy. The people of Athens had come with the intention of convicting Socrates so that he would have been exiled. This could be seen in the dialogue between Crito and Socrates. Crito recommended to Socrates that he should flee in exile. If Socrates did so, none of the citizenry would pay any attention or care. However, Socrates being a man who had abided by the will of the State could not allow himself to flee and retain the status of a criminal. The point, which can be made from this example, is that the primary notion of the people of Athens was not for Socrates to be executed."
| |
|
The Ethical Obligations of Corporations, 2008.
This paper debates the moral and ethical obligations of corporations in modern society.
2,970 words (approx. 11.9 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 87.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper consists of two parts. Part I of the paper shows how corporations make decisions on the assumption that injury and death to innocent people is an acceptable cost for profits. The paper looks at the Ford Motor Company that did not reveal that their Pinto model had a gas tank that could explode and burn. The paper argues that the rise in white-collar crime is linked to the materialist, consumerist nature of our society, which is reflected in our legal systems. Part II of the paper analyzes these kinds of behaviors by applying normative theories to them. The paper shows how neither utilitarian, deontological nor virtue ethics theories can give a clear and definitive answer to the question of whether Ford made a correct choice.
From the Paper
"An example of corporations putting profit before any other consideration may be found in the case of the Ford Motor Company. This company decided at one time to keep quiet about the fact that their Pinto model had a gas tank that tended to explode and burn in the event of a rear end collision. This of course resulted in injury to people inside the vehicles, and sometimes even death. Ford's reasoning was that it would be more profitable to settle resultant law suits than to recall the faulty vehicles. (Samuelson) It is important to note that this decision was not classified as a crime, even though one might expect it to be. It is argued in this essay that the reasons for this kind of thinking (both the decision Ford made, and the fact that it was not classified as a crime) go right to the root of the nature and values of our society, which in turn are reflected in our legal systems."
| |
|
The Apology of Socrates, 2004.
Analysis of Plato's "Apology", regarding the prosecution of Socrates and a summary of Socrates trial.
1,478 words (approx. 5.9 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at the trial and execution of Socrates from the perspective of Plato, the general moral and religious ideology of Greek society during that era, Greek fathers, and prominent Athenians. The paper also provides an overview of the arguments Socrates presented in his self-defense and his reasons for refusing to escape the death penalty.
From the Paper
"As one of the greatest and most influential of all the Greek philosophers, Socrates (469--399 B.C.E.) passionately believed that just behavior was better for human beings than injustice and that morality was justified because it created happiness and well-being. Essentially, Socrates seems to have argued that just behavior, or virtue, was identical to knowledge and that true knowledge of justice would inevitably lead people to choose good over evil and therefore to have truly happy lives, regardless of their material success. Since Socrates believed that knowledge itself was sufficient for happiness, he asserted that no one knowingly behaved unjustly and that behaving justly was always in the individual's best interest. Thus, as Socrates defined it, "moral knowledge was all one needed for the good life" (Stone 168)."
| |
|
"The Trial and Death of Socrates", 2006.
This paper explores Socrates' refusal to escape his death sentence in the tragedy "The Trial and Death of Socrates."
1,409 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 0 sources, $ 46.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this paper the author explores why Socrates refused to escape his death sentence in the tragedy "The Trial and Death of Socrates." Although Socrates had opportunities to flee the prison, the author argues that Socrates felt escape would have been acting unjustly. Socrates did not want to manipulate the jury with his dialogue or use any other means except his beliefs to defend himself. The author sees the final decision of the court to be unjust in many ways. However, the author feels Socrates' acceptance of the death sentence upheld his moral beliefs.
From the Paper
" To Socrates, for anyone to live well, their soul must be in the best possible state. To achieve this state one must not commit any unjust acts. Committing an unjust act corrupts a person and ultimately harms their soul. For Socrates, having a corrupted soul, prevents him from living the best possible life. While speaking to Crito, Socrates states that "life [is not] worth living for us with [the soul] corrupted" (47e). This statement meaning that a life is not worth living unless you live it well. This can mean doing or seeking what someone's purpose in life is. To Socrates this purpose, or how he lives well, is by pursuing what is true and just. Since he can not know what is just, he must always be seeking it. He also says that one can not properly pursue what is good and just if one's soul is unjust or corrupt. Therefore, for Socrates to live a fulfilling life, he must never do anything unjust act that would harm his soul and prevent him from seeking what is just and true. For this reason, fleeing is not an option because an unjust act like that would harm his soul."
| |
|
The Morality of Socrates and Euthyphro, 2008.
An analysis of the characterization of Socrates and Euthyphro, as depicted in Plato's "The Trial and Death of Socrates."
1,622 words (approx. 6.5 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 52.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper contrasts the characters and moral fiber of Socrates and Euthryphro, as Plato has described them in "The Trial and Death of Socrates." The two men meet outside the court in Athens, where Socrates is being charged with impiety and corrupting the youth, and Euthyphro, a priest, is prosecuting his own father for murder. The author illustrates how Socrates is shown throughout the book to be humble, principled, caring, and just, while Euthryphro is exposed as an arrogant, foolish and impious man.
From the Paper
"Not least of all, Euthyphro is an arrogant man. He talks of being laughed at by the Athenian assembly for foretelling the future. He is convinced that they laugh because they are envious of his gift of prophecy. He rates himself as superior to most men and states that he has knowledge surpassing most men. He cannot back these claims as Socrates easily turns over every definition of piety the man can create. He does not even have the knowledge to teach a man who claims he knows nothing of piety himself, such as Socrates."
| |
|
Analysis of ?The Apology of Socrates?, 2005.
A look at the self-portrait Socrates presents in "The Apology of Socrates" and his self-defense at his trial.
1,011 words (approx. 4.0 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper summarizes and analyzes the self-defense Socrates presented at his trial and explains how Socrates was condemned to die not because he did not mount a successful defense, but because his accusers were threatened by Socrates?s wisdom and perseverance. The paper concludes by pointing out that Socrates defended himself successfully by proving he was not an evildoer and that he never intentionally corrupted the youth and that God alone is wise.
From the Paper
"Socrates was known as one of the most influential Greek philosophers of his time. ?The Apology of Socrates? offers a self-portrait based not on false gods or corruption, but rather on a vigilant attention to and exposure of common thinking and false wisdom. Socrates strongly believed that just behavior was better than injustice, and that living morally correct would bring about happiness and well-being. For his life, that is proven to be true. Socrates lived a righteous life, and died a happy man. Throughout the ?Apology?, Socrates is falsely accused of being a ?doer of evil, who corrupts the youth; and who does not believe in the gods of the state? (733). Socrates? self defense was a success because throughout his trial, he was able to prove he was not an evil doer, that he did not corrupt the youth, and that there was no man wiser than God."
| |
|
Socrates, Kant and Morality, 2008.
A comparative analysis of the views of Socrates and Kant on morality.
1,982 words (approx. 7.9 pages), 7 sources, APA, $ 62.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines Socrates' and Kant's philosophies regarding morality and looks at how the fundamental difference in the definition between the two is that Kant's moral failure is an independent act to a moral right by virtue of the lack of impact of consequences while Socrates' main model of immorality is based on injustice resulting from the action. It discusses, therefore, how the dilemma of immorality in the former is an ethical one and immorality in the latter is presented as a social dilemma.
Outline:
Socrates
Socrates on Morality
Kant on Socrates
Socrates, Kant and Morality
From the Paper
"Kant's Moral philosophy is one of the main alternatives to utilitarianism which marginalizes moral humanistic virtues. Kant's view on morality is essentially deontological which implies a focus on the action to be done regardless of the consequences ("Kant: The Moral", 2001). This implies that if a person is doing something that is right, then even if the results of his actions create a negative outcome, then he still did the right thing. There is also a prescriptive quality to Kant's view: the assumption is that everyone should do what is right and that it should be universally right (Wood, 2004). Thus, for an action to be considered moral, it should be within the capacity of everyone and viewed as a correct action universally ("Kant's Moral Philosophy", 2007). Viewing Socrates' action through Kant's Moral Philosophy, there are arguments both to support the morality of Socrates actions."
| |
|
Socrates, 2002.
A discussion of I. F. Stone's essay ?When Free Speech was First Condemned: The Trial of Socrates Reconsidered? which challenges some of the longstanding assumptions about Socrates.
695 words (approx. 2.8 pages), 0 sources, $ 24.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines the way in which Stone in his essay appears to be acting as a kind of prosecuting attorney across the ages, asking Socrates why and how the philosopher behaved in ancient Athens the way he did. By doing so, by using the format developed by Socrates himself, Stone hopes to shift the emphasis from the image of the hemlock-drinking, condemned philosopher to Socrates as he was in life.
From the Paper
"First of all, Stone challenges the simple association of Socrates with free speech. In fact, Socrates periodically challenged the democratic, free speech ideals of the Athens he lived in. Socrates hoped to create an ideal philosophical kingdom, ruled by a philosopher king. Although Socrates was condemned to death in Athens for what he said and advocated, this did not mean therefore that that Socrates had advocated free speech during his life, in his philosophy. Socrates was only able to flourish as long as he did in Athens because of the free debate and discussion encouraged in his resident city. Even though he condemned such free and democratic Athenian debate, Socrates benefited as a result of the city?s tolerance."
|
|
|
