Introduction to PhilosophyPAPER

The Paper

Reading: “The Apology.” Thesis: “The purpose of this paper is to summarize and

critically evaluate Socrates’ Horse Trainer Analogy and Unintentional Argument.”

Issue: Do Socrates’ two arguments refute the corruption charges against him?

Label the 4 sections Introduction

Summary

Argument

Conclusion

Writing the Introduction

5 points 125 words or less. Content

Thesis

Summary Statement

Position Statement

Argument Statement

Minimal Background

Writing the Summary

45 points Objective: summarize the text

Clearly

Concisely

Accurately

In your own words.

Writing the Summary Outline

Charges A doer of evil who corrupts the youth

Does not believe in the gods of the state but has his own divinities

The Corrupter of the Youth Socrates will prove Meletus is

A doer of evil

Pretending to be earnest

Is eager to bring men to trial

Questioning Meletus Meletus claims to think a great deal about the youth

Socrates asks Meletus to tell the judges who improves the youth

Every Athenian, except the sole corrupter Socrates, improves the youth

Writing the Summary Socrates’ Horse Trainer Analogy

One is able to do the horses good

The trainer does the horses good

Others injure the horses

This is true of horses and any animals

The youth would be happy with one corrupter and everyone else improving them

Meletus shows he has never thought about the young.

Writing the Summary The Unintentional Argument

Meletus Agrees It is better to live among good citizens than bad

The good do their neighbors good, the evil do evil

No one would rather be injured than benefited

No on likes to be injured

Meletus accused Socrates of intentionally corrupting the youth.

Meletus admitted the good do good and the evil do evil

Socrates knows that if he corrupts a man he has to live with, he is likely to be harmed

Socrates either does not corrupt or corrupts unintentionally.

Either way Meletus is lying

If his offense is unintentional, Meletus should have corrected him

Meletus has no care about the matter.

Writing the Argument 45 Points Position Statement

Does the HTA (Horse Trainer Analogy) succeed as an analogy?

Does the HTA refute the original charge?

Does the HTA refute the modified charge?

Does the UA succeed as an argument?

Does the UA refute the original charge?

Does the UA refute the modified charge?

Writing the Argument

Assessing the HTA Form of an Argument from Analogy

Premise 1: X has properties P, Q, and R.

Premise 2: Y has properties P, Q, and R.

Premise 3: X has property Z as well.

Conclusion: Y has property Z.

Assessment The number of properties X & Y have in common.

The relevance of the shared properties to Z.

Whether X & Y have relevant dissimilarities.

Writing the Argument

Does the HTA respond to the charge? Original Charge: Socrates corrupts the youth.

Modified Charge: Socrates is the sole corrupter of the youth.

Writing the Argument

Assessing the UA Assessing the premises

Key premise: “if he corrupts a man he has to live with, it is very likely he will be harmed by him.”

Assessing the premises using an argument from example. Historical examples for/against

Assessing the premises using an argument from analogy Dog analogy

Assessing the reasoning Do the premises support the conclusion?

Overall Assessment (premises & reasoning)

Writing the Argument

Does the UA respond to the charge? Original Charge: Socrates corrupts the youth.

Modified Charge: Socrates is an intentional corrupter of the youth.

Writing the Conclusion 5 points 125 words or less. Content

Thesis

Summary Statement

Position Statement

Argument Statement

Final Relevant Remark