英文摘要 |
Socrates distinguished himself par excellence in the public oration and was prohibited from doing that by the Thirty-Oligarchy. In spite of that, he engaged in studying the general definition of ethical objects and was consequently judged unjustly to death. This article aims at discussing the causality of Socrates' death and its legitimacy. It is divided methodically into two parts: A. The contradiction between the dialectic and the sophistic by the way of reflecting upon the Socratic 'τι-εστι-question'. B. The contradiction between the dialectic and the sophistic by the way of reflecting upon Socratic death. It concludes as following points: 1. By asking 'τι-εστι-question' Socrates wins his argumentative primacy because his partners of dialogue can't find out the possibility to identify the definition with the definiens. 2. Socratic 'τι-εστι- question' claims the rationality (λογον διδοναι), not the individual facts, which are exposed by the sophists. 3. Socratic 'δαιμονια' means that there can not exist the irrationality and contradictions in the traditional theology. 4. Socratic rationality (λογον διδοναι) does not deny the existence of the Greek Gods, but rejects the irrational and contradictory statements about the Greek Gods. |