Aristotle's definition of the virtue of magnanimity in Nicomachean ethics, and what constitutes the excess and deficiency of this virtue, poses a problem when applied to that of Socrates in the Apology of Plato. On the one hand, Socrates is of noble principles when he accepts his death sentence, despite believing that he performs an important function in Athens, and because he advises people without asking for any compensation. On the other hand, Socrates shows shyness because he does not spread his beliefs in public affairs nor does he make distinctions between rich and poor, which would be characteristics of the mean-spirited person. Aristotle's criteria for nobility of soul make us reflect on the question of whether Socrates is consistently virtuous. During his defense speech, Socrates displays both characteristics of magnanimity and meanness, indicating a flaw in Aristotle's definition of virtue, since according to Aristotle one cannot be virtuous and deficient in virtue at the same time. to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Socrates fits the definition of magnanimity because he does not spare his life, despite believing that he does not deserve the death penalty. Even though he believes that he has been given a divine role to play in making Athens a better place, Socrates realizes that the best thing for him to do is to accept his death sentence. He thinks that because he is “superior to most men,” pleading with the jury by involving family members and begging for acquittal would be considered shameful (Plato 35a). He does not object to his death sentence because being convicted for maintaining his beliefs would be a greater honor than being remembered for acting in “pitiful courtroom dramas” (Plato 35b). Aristotle's definition of magnanimity applies here because Socrates does not necessarily believe that the death sentence is what he deserves, but rather that it is a more honorable option than begging for mercy. According to Aristotle there is “no honor worthy of total virtue” (Aristotle 1124a 7-8). By avoiding the misfortune of begging for mercy, Socrates is able to aim more closely at the honor of which he is worthy. Aristotle also states that the magnanimous person will not spare his life in the face of great dangers (Aristotle 1124b 7-8). Socrates does not think that his life is so great that he needs to save it. After his death sentence he tells the judges that he is still convinced that he has not wronged anyone or himself (Plato 37b), yet he does not spare his life, because it is not worth being ashamed by advocating a different punishment. Socrates' willingness to help others without asking for compensation in return is another reason why Socrates would fit Aristotle's definition of magnanimity. The high-minded person asks for nothing, or almost nothing, but is willing to readily help others (Aristotle 1124b 17-18). Socrates fits this statement because he claims that he does not "undertake to teach people and ask for compensation for it" (Plato 19d). Spreading his beliefs is Socrates benefiting others, but asking for nothing in return. He questions others for the sake of stirring up the city because that is what he believes he was sent to the city to do. The high-minded person is also one whose “possessions are noble but useless” (Aristotle 1125a 12). Socrates does not own many possessions and lives in great poverty, since he does not charge for his occupation of questioning people to show them that they are not wise (Plato 23b). He is self-sufficient because he does not need material goods to continue spreading his beliefs. At the same time, however, Socrates would be considered mean-spirited because he did not strive for greater honor by spreading hisbeliefs in public affairs. The mean person is one who "deprives himself of what he is worthy of" and is similar to the timid rather than the foolish (Aristotle 1125a 22, 24-25). Socrates only goes around advising people in private affairs, but refuses to venture out in public to advise the whole city because he believes that he would have died long ago if he had tried to take part in public affairs (Plato 31c-e). Trying to advise the city by taking part in politics would have been senseless, because if he had died, Socrates would not have been able to spread his beliefs to anyone. Socrates took a more moderate approach by only intervening in private affairs, so he would not be considered vain, as the vain person is foolish because he is ignorant of his own worth (Aristotle 1125a 28). Taking this more moderate approach, however, would be considered mean and timid, because the mean person would have to “strive for the things of which he was worthy” (Aristotle 1124b 26-27). There is a problem with this situation, because whether Socrates had chosen to advise the audience or not, he would have acted stupidly or timidly. It seems that reaching the average is impossible, but Aristotle recognizes that sometimes it is better to lean towards one excess rather than another. In this case, acting stupidly would be closer to reaching the mean of magnanimity because the smallness of the soul is more contrary to magnanimity than to vanity (Aristotle 1125a 32-3). Although Socrates served twice in public life, he did not actively spread his beliefs as he does in private affairs. When serving in the Hall during the 330s, Socrates simply left when he and the rest of the Hall were ordered to bring Leo from Salamis to be executed, something he considered unfair (Plato 32c-d). He managed to stay true to his beliefs about what he considered right and wrong by not participating, but he did not remain in public life to save Leon's life or continue to spread his beliefs. Another indication that Socrates missed the mark of magnanimity is that he is equally ready to question anyone, whether rich or poor (Plato 33b). According to Aristotle, the high-minded person should be “dignified in his behavior towards important or wealthy people, but unpretentious towards people of middle rank” (Aristotle 1124b 18-20). Socrates does not distinguish between those who are wealthy and those who are not. Use the same method of questioning for everyone as long as they are willing to listen and are not interested in hierarchy. Superiority over the rich would be considered impressive by Aristotle, but superiority over the poor would mean nothing because it is easy (Aristotle 1124b 22-23). Since Socrates displays the same behavior to people of all types, he does not fit this definition of magnanimity. It makes no distinction between poor and rich; rather, it only distinguishes between people who are willing to listen or not. Furthermore, Socrates tells the jury that he is accustomed to spending time in the market at bankers' tables (Plato 17c). This shows that he spent more time interacting with the masses rather than distinguished or wealthy people. Socrates is not modest towards those who do not stand out, a characteristic of the high-minded person. This is another indication of his mean behavior. Many of the actions that Socrates describes during his defense speech and his acceptance of the death sentence would be considered noble; however, his actions are not always consistent, because some of them would be classified as petty. According to Aristotle, virtue is a kind of means or goal to be achieved, and any miss of the mark would be vice (Aristotle 1106b 25-27). This poses a problem for Aristotle because high-mindedness would be considered.