2006-07-26 15:08:13 · 9 answers · asked by -.- 6 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Yea, he did.
His nature dictated the necessity.
Socrates was a little whining ***** who refused to put on a proper defense and pissed of the judges instead.
Then he continued being a ***** and killed himself making sure that his pupils will remember him and write down the stuff he said so that his whining could be heard by future generations.
2006-07-30 16:24:19 · answer #1 · answered by hq3 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
LOL. I adore (and agree with) your-humble-'s answer. I suppose he could have drank some Kool-Aid instead, but what would that have accomplished?
Wait, is it red Kool-Aid or white Kool-Aid with Hemlock? Wow, these philosophical questions only bring on more to ponder.
2006-08-02 16:08:34 · answer #2 · answered by blugoo 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes,he did. He had been such an annoyance to the city elders
that they decided to get rid of him permanently. He drank the
hemlock to avoid the unpleasant alternative,whatever that was.
2006-07-26 22:17:32 · answer #3 · answered by Alion 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Essentially you are asking the question of free will versus fatalism, are you not? I choose to believe that he chose to drink it, thereby implying that we do indeed have free will. Did I choose to say that or was it inevitable given the circumstances. Who's to decide?
2006-07-31 17:09:11 · answer #4 · answered by megalomaniac 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it was the best way I think the other way was being executed by someone else
2006-07-26 22:11:57 · answer #5 · answered by okayokayokay 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes,His fate..
2006-07-27 10:54:06 · answer #6 · answered by savi 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. He volunteered.
2006-07-26 22:10:30 · answer #7 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
wht
2006-08-02 14:29:56 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
HE thought he did.
2006-07-26 22:11:35 · answer #9 · answered by rb42redsuns 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋