Nullification Crisis of 1832 Precursor to Civil War

The nullification crisis arose in 1832 when leaders of South Carolina advanced the idea that a state did not have to follow federal law and could, in effect, nullify the law. The state passed the South Carolina Act of Nullification in November 1832, which said in effect that South Carolina could ignore federal law, or nullify it if the state found the law to be damaging to its interests or deemed it unconstitutional. This effectively meant the state could override any federal law. The idea that states rights superseded federal law was promoted by South Carolinian  John C. Calhoun, vice president in Andrew Jacksons first term as president, one of the most experienced and powerful politicians in the country at the time. And the resulting crisis was, to some extent, a precursor to the secession crisis that would trigger the Civil War 30 years later, in which South Carolina also was a primary player. Calhoun and the Nullification Crisis Calhoun, who is most widely remembered as a defender of the institution of slavery, became outraged in the late 1820s by the imposition of tariffs that he felt unfairly penalized the South. A particular tariff passed in 1828 raised taxes on imports and outraged Southerners, and Calhoun became a forceful advocate against the new tariff. The 1828 tariff was so controversial in various regions of the country that it became known as the Tariff of Abominations. Calhoun said he believed the law had been designed to take advantage of the Southern states. The South was largely an agricultural economy with relatively little manufacturing. So finished goods were often imported from Europe, which meant a tariff on foreign goods would fall heavier on the South, and it also reduced demand for imports, which then reduced demand for the raw cotton the South sold to Britain. The North was much more industrialized and produced many of its own goods. In fact, the tariff-protected industry in the North from foreign competition since it made imports more expensive. In Calhouns estimation, the Southern states, having been treated unfairly, were under no obligation to follow the law. That line of argument, of course, was highly controversial, since it undermined the Constitution. Calhoun wrote an essay advancing a theory of nullification in which he made a legal case for states to disregard some federal laws. At first, Calhoun wrote his thoughts anonymously, in the style of many political pamphlets of the era. But eventually, his identity as the author became known. In the early 1830s, with the issue of a tariff again rising to prominence, Calhoun resigned his position as vice president, returned to South Carolina, and was elected to the Senate, where he promoted his idea of nullification. Jackson was ready for armed conflict―he got Congress to pass a law allowing him to use federal troops to enforce federal laws if necessary. But ultimately the crisis was resolved without the use of force. In 1833 a compromise led by the legendary Sen. Henry Clay of Kentucky was reached ​on a new tariff. But the nullification crisis revealed the deep divisions between the North and the South and showed they could cause enormous problems―and eventually, they split the Union and secession followed, with the first state to secede being South Carolina in December 1860, and the die was cast for the Civil War that followed.

Essay on Letter from Birmingham Jail by Martin Luther King...

Letter from Birmingham Jail by Martin Luther King Jr. Martin Luther King Jr.s Letter from Birmingham Jail, was very persuasive to a wide variety of audiences. Not only did he directly address the writers of the newspaper article, but included fellow African Americans with their struggle to gain acceptance. What makes this letter persuasive, is the amount of examples and situations described by Martin Luther King Jr. King also gains credibility by citing these sources without a history book, using only his own intellect that shows that he is not just your average man. Martin Luther King Jr. directed his letter to the white clergymen of Birmingham, in a response to their newspaper article criticizing him for his actions. At the†¦show more content†¦Martin Luther King uses historical examples to prove his point, using logos which most intellectuals can understand, and then uses examples for any African American can understand. In paragraph 16, King talks about St. Thomas Aquinas and his definition of an unjust law. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.(King, Pg.3) In Paragraph 21, In the refusal of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego to obey the laws of Nebuchadnezzar, on the ground that a higher moral law was at stake.(King, Pg.4) He discusses Nebuchadnezzar and how people in that time refused to obey his laws because they were unjust, just as he did in Birmingham. Socrates, the Boston tea party, early Christians who gave their lives for their religion. These historical events gave King an edge in his persuasiveness. Now he isnt just someone who has broken laws, now he is now just like all other famous ancient historical figures. However he also addresses his Negro brothers in paragraph 14, when he describes what its like to have to tell your children that they cant go somewhere or do something because they are black, or what it is like to watch as your family is beaten or lynched in front of your eyes. He is directing this at theShow MoreRelatedMartin Luther King Jr., â€Å"Letter f rom Birmingham Jail†3011 Words   |  13 Pages[Date] Martin Luther king Jr., â€Å"Letter from Birmingham Jail† Outline 1. Introduction i) Argument about â€Å"Justice and injustice† ii) Religious appeals in King’s latter iii) Paragraph fourteen of King’s latter 2. Discussion 3. Conclusion Introduction The pressure of racial segregation was reaching a boiling point in 1963 in Birmingham, Alabama. After being arrested for his part in the Birmingham Campaign, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. wrote an open letter in responseRead MoreMartin Luther King Jr : Letter From Birmingham Jail Essay1678 Words   |  7 Pages Martin Luther King Jr: Letter from Birmingham Jail Hao Ran Hu SUNY Broome Hao Ran Hu Global History Professor St.Clair 2016 Martin Luther King Jr: Letter from Birmingham Jail One of the interesting Documents in World History is the ‘Letter from Birmingham Jail’ by Martin Luther King Jr who was born as Michael King in 1929 in Atlanta. His parents were partRead MoreLetter From Birmingham Jail By Martin Luther King Jr.1259 Words   |  6 PagesLetter from Birmingham Response The Letter from Birmingham jail was written on April 16th, 1963 by Martin Luther King jr. Martin was a prominent leader and protester in the fight against racism. King was put in jail for protesting in the streets without a permit and that is where he read the letter. The letter was written as response to the Letter from the Eight Clergymen. Their letter called for the end of the peaceful protests which were lead by King and his supporters. During the time the letterRead MoreThe Letter From Birmingham Jail By Martin Luther King Jr.990 Words   |  4 PagesThe Letter from Birmingham Jail by Martin Luther King Jr. is written to the injustices of the African Americans by the white man supremacy, and to address the direct actions African Americans were making to change the people’s perspective. The books that have been read in this class reflect the same injustices that Martin Luther King Jr is addressing in his letter. The main point of this letter is to address the direct actio n being taken by the African Americans and how they sacrificing everythingRead MoreLetter From A Birmingham Jail By Martin Luther King Jr.920 Words   |  4 PagesIn his â€Å"Letter from a Birmingham Jail,† Martin Luther King Jr. makes appeals to ethos, logos, and pathos to convince the clergymen that colored people have been waiting for too long for political, economic, and social justice and freedom. He argues that it’s unfair to promise someone, or a group, for a change and not fulfill that promise. Along with demonetizing and/or belittling a person to the point where they don’t feel as important or as worth as they should; making them feel hatred and angerRead MoreLetter From Birmingham Jail By Martin Luther King Jr. Essay1683 Words   |  7 PagesIn â€Å"Letter from Birmingham Jail†, Martin Luther King Jr. wrote a response to clergymen defending his actions that placed him in a jail in Birmingham, Alabama. King did not respond to all the criticis m that crossed his desk, but this time King felt he was compelled to respond. This obligation King felt was due in part to men with good will and intentions stating that his actions were â€Å"unwise and untimely† (Pg. 835). King’s purpose in writing â€Å"Letter from Birmingham Jail† was to defend the strategyRead MoreLetter From Birmingham Jail By Martin Luther King Jr. Essay1211 Words   |  5 PagesA Letter’s Purpose In â€Å"Letter from Birmingham Jail† by Martin Luther King Jr. writes specifically to southern clergy men but also expands to anyone who opposes the civil rights movement. He informs his audience about the purpose of the civil rights movement and its importance to black and white people in terms of living as equals in a more peaceful society. King urges the public to understand the purpose of peaceful protests and the civil rights movement. He also wants people to understand the hardshipsRead MoreLetter from Birmingham Jail, by Martin Luther King Jr. Essay938 Words   |  4 Pages Is it not ironic that Martin Luther King Jr. s, â€Å"Letter from Birmingham Jail†, which testifies to his struggle for Civil Rights; not only contradicts the time Martin Luther King wrote it in, but also echoes the same sentiments of today’s moral causes and laws? . Dr. King (*) then known as Baptist minister Martin Luther King Jr. wrote the Letter to Birmingham in response to his fellow clergymen’s criticisms of him being locked up for his actions in Birmingham’s Civil Rights protest. The letter’sRead MoreMartin Luther King Jr. s Letter From A Birmingham Jail1157 Words   |  5 PagesMartin Luther King Jr.’s â€Å"Letter from a Birmingham Jail† is directed towards the clergymen, although America is his audience, King had come to Birmingham to address the segregation problem in the United States. He refuses to stay silent, even though people told him to wait for the change to happen. King is a part of the Southern Christian Leadersh ip Conference that has many organizations across the South. He felt that he has a right to be in Birmingham because his organizations have connections withRead MoreEssay on Letter From Birmingham Jail, by Martin Luther King Jr.742 Words   |  3 PagesDr. Martin Luther King Jr. one of many great influential speakers wrote a life changing letter after being arrested for peacefully protesting African American rights. While sitting in jail Dr. King received a letter from clergymen questioning his motives and timings for being in Birmingham. In a response Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. writes a â€Å"Letter from Birmingham Jail† vividly expressing physical and emotional purposes for his presence in Birmingham, AL. First, in the â€Å"Letter from Birmingham Jail†

Tree of Knowledge Free Essays

The Tree of Knowledge It is important for society to find a reliable source of knowledge, as it is a powerful factor which helps society to attain success. As a good example of the significance of knowledge for society, the Tree of Knowledge from the Garden of Eden represents, not just a source of absolute knowledge, but how desperately human nature seeks that perfect source. However, the Tree of Knowledge does not exist in the real world. We will write a custom essay sample on Tree of Knowledge or any similar topic only for you Order Now Thus, society is facing a problem of finding the most effective way to produce accurate knowledge because mistaken knowledge has no value. In his essay â€Å"The Hive,† historian and writer Marshall Poe points out two sources for knowledge: social consensus and experts. In the past, it was hard to gather knowledge efficiently due to equivocation, and experts were considered to be the most reliable source of knowledge. But today, the Internet has provided society with the convenient environment for finding and storing information. In his essay, Poe discusses the phenomenon of the web-site Wikipedia as an example of a successful effort in collaborative knowledge, which is produced during the process of communication and negotiation by society and experts concerning the information regarding an object of study. A professor at Harvard University and author of â€Å"Reporting Live from Tomorrow,† Daniel Gilbert suggests relying on the experiences of others, whom he calls â€Å"surrogates,† in order to obtain more reliable knowledge. Collaborative knowledge is based on society’s collective experiences. It is meant to accumulate and constantly update information from society. On the other hand, experts are a key for progress in society as they perform deeper research about a subject. Therefore, in order to produce reliable knowledge, society must consult with experts, while experts should consider the experiences of other people when conducting their research. It might seem at the first sight that the only reliable source of knowledge are experts, as they have more intense and prolonged experiences through practice and education in a particular field. Therefore, it is a common belief that in order to obtain true knowledge, society has to rely on the competence of experts. In his essay, Poe says that one of the criticisms of Wikipedia in its early stage was the point that â€Å"unless experts were writing and vetting the material, the articles were inevitably going to be inaccurate† (Poe 275). However, human history provides evidence that refutes this statement by proving that what once was considered as absolute knowledge was later questioned. For example, in the 18th century, Isaac Newton’s laws of motion became a revolution in a scientific world and for the next 200 years they remained incontestable until Albert Einstein introduced his ideas that revealed shortcomings of Newton’s theory. Thus, society cannot blindly rely on the conclusions of experts because, at their core, they are like all other people who â€Å"pass along [their] beliefs in an effort to create people whose minds think like [theirs]† (Gilbert 171). According to Gilbert, â€Å"almost any time we tell anyone anything, we are attempting to change the way their brains operate – attempting to change the way they see the world so that their view of it more closely resembles our own† (Gilbert 171). Experts attempt to do same thing, but their reputation in society gives their ideas an advantage to be successfully transmitted and accepted as knowledge. Still, accuracy of this knowledge might be questionable in the future. In order to understand how society decides if a certain idea or belief can become knowledge, it is important to look at the process of producing knowledge. Individuals generate personal beliefs from their own views. However, these views are based on already existing socio-cultural knowledge. Afterwards, using shared language, individuals bring their ideas and beliefs to society by making public statements. Further, these beliefs may become knowledge through social interaction, communication, discussion, clarification, and negotiation. According to Gilbert, â€Å"any belief †¦ that increases communication has a good chance of being transmitted over and over again† (Gilbert 173). Therefore, social interaction is a medium that allows ideas to become a part of collaborative knowledge. However, in his essay, Gilbert points out that while â€Å"accurate beliefs give [society] power, which makes it easier to understand why they are so readily transmitted from one mind to another,† false beliefs have a great chance to be propagated if they â€Å"happen to promote stable societies †¦ because people who hold these beliefs tend to live in stable societies, which provide the means by which false beliefs propagate† (Gilbert 173). Thus, even false ideas may become knowledge if society decides so. Such decisions might lead to absurd conclusions that have no value for society. According to Poe, â€Å"the community decides that two plus two equals four the same way it decides what apple is: by consensus †¦ [but] if the community changes its mind and decides that two plus two equals five, then two plus two does equal five† (Poe 275). In other words, society has an ability to make judgments of truth and falsehood, and knowledge produced by social consensus can be misleading and inaccurate. Nevertheless, inaccurate knowledge, sooner or later, will be revealed and questioned by society because the primary purpose of knowledge is to serve the needs of society and help it to improve and grow. Individuals, as well as the whole society, can only attain success and progress if they have a reliable source of knowledge. It is a strong incentive that makes people search for truth. In his essay, Poe points out that people who contribute into Wikipedia have â€Å"no interest other then truth in doing all this work† (Poe 277). Today, the vast interconnectedness of the Internet makes it possible for individuals from all over the world to share their experiences and ideas on the global level. Thereby, collaborative knowledge can be constantly negotiated, updated, and renegotiated, and its quality may improve just like â€Å"the quality on articles [in Wikipedia] generally increases with the number of eyeballs† (Poe 276). As the process of producing collaborative knowledge improves its reliability, efficiency, and fecundity with the new era of Internet technologies, it creates a very valuable database for experts, who can use collaborative knowledge as a resource of information and experiences collected by society for expertise. According to Gilbert, â€Å"humanity is a living library of information about what it feels like to do just about anything† (Gilbert 171). Every individual possesses a great deal of unique accumulative knowledge that he or she gained throughout life. That is why experiences of other individuals should be taken into account by experts in order to produce more accurate and objective knowledge. Today, in the Internet environment, it has become much easier to find surrogates with particular experiences. Experts should consider these experiences during their research and constantly update their data and information based on collaborative knowledge. On the other hand, the fact that the Internet has gained so much popularity in society might make people neglect the role of experts in the process of producing knowledge. Since it has become relatively easy to find surrogates in the virtual environment and ask them directly about their experiences, collaborative knowledge might be sufficient enough to fulfill society’s needs as a dependable source of knowledge. In his essay, Poe points out that given the right technology, large groups of self-interested individuals will unite to create something they could not produce by themselves† (Poe 267). Wikipedia is a good example of this phenomenon. â€Å"Instead of relying on experts to write articles according to their expertise, Wikipedia lets anyone write about anything† (Poe 264). Based on a large number of individuals who are constantly working on improving articles and people’s tendencies to strive for truth, Wikipedia could become the end of the search for a reliable source of knowledge. However, it is important not to underestimate the role of experts in society. In his essay, Gilbert noticed that, if you ask a child what to do when an individual is hesitating about making some decision, the child will say that â€Å"[he or she] should ask the teacher† (Gilbert 170). Throughout all human history, experts were called in for advice on their respective subject because of their extensive knowledge or ability based on research, experience, or occupation in a particular area of study. Their knowledge and experiences are already unique, simply because experts spend more time studying the subject than an average person. It explains the fact that most innovations in human society were made by experts. Moreover, by collecting and systematizing experiences of other individuals, experts serve as surrogates for society as well. Overtime, results of their research projects accepted as knowledge become a part of social consensus. Thereby, expertise is still very important and must be taken into consideration by society as a source of knowledge. In order to be completely reliable, knowledge requires absolute certainty, as opposite to belief or opinion about which there is more doubt. However, as a process of social communication, knowledge is never absolute. Although its character is to be taken as final truth, knowledge remains as a subject of possible future questioning, reinterpretation, and negotiation. The Tree of Knowledge, as a source of true knowledge, is an unattainable aim for society. Neither expertise nor collaborative knowledge alone can be considered as the best way to produce knowledge. Only their collaboration can bring the most reliable results. Today, the Internet helps to speed up the processes of communication, storage, and negotiation of information that play a significant role in producing collaborative knowledge and positively affecting its quality. Thus, referring to society’s collaborative experience, experts can produce more objective and reliable knowledge. Works Cited Gilbert, Daniel. â€Å"Reporting Live from Tomorrow. † Emerging: Contemporary Readings for Writers. Ed. Barclay Barrios. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2010. 169-189. Print. Poe, Marshall. â€Å"The Hive. † Emerging: Contemporary Readings for Writers. Ed. Barclay Barrios. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2010. 264-277. Print. How to cite Tree of Knowledge, Papers

Truth and Socrates free essay sample

Euthyphro is a dialogue between Socrates and a traveling cleric. The two men meet at court, where the cleric, Euthyphro, claims to have a clear definition of piety. Socrates exclaims that he wishes to know the definition of piety so that he may better defend himself in his upcoming trial. Euthyphro agrees to teach Socrates, and so they begin to discuss. Early on, Socrates makes clear his desire for a universal truth, or a definition of piety that will be true in every case. Euthyphro makes several attempts to define piety in a way that satisfies Socrates. The first attempt at a definition does not satisfy Socrates because it is merely an example. In trying to define piety, Euthyphro merely states that his current undertaking at court is pious. While Socrates does not disagree outright, he presses Euthyphro for a universal definition of piety that could be used in every situation. We will write a custom essay sample on Truth and Socrates or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Euthyphro’s second definition, â€Å"what is dear to the gods is pious, what is not is impious,† pleases Socrates because it is a universal statement. This definition is general enough to be widely applicable, and seems to outline the defining characteristics of piety. Upon closer inspection, however, Socrates finds the definition unsatisfying. Because the gods disagree about so many things, and act in contradiction to each other, it would be foolish to assume they would all agree upon the definition of piety. Euthyphro points out in his defence that all the gods would agree that Euthyphro’s current action of bringing his father to trial is pious. Socrates dismisses this, as it is not a universal definition and is essentially just another example. Euthyphro attempts to satisfy Socrates by amending his definition slightly. Piety, says Euthyphro, is what all the gods love, and the impious is what all the gods hate. Socrates is not satisfied by this definition, either, and so he tries a different tack to extract a definition from Euthyphro. Socrates does this by asking: â€Å"Is the pious being loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is being loved by the gods? † When Euthyphro seems unsure, Socrates simplifies his question with an analogy. He asks Euthyphro if something is â€Å"carried† because it is â€Å"a thing carried,† or if it is â€Å"carried† because something is carrying it. Both men agree that the action confers the state of being. That is, a thing loved is so because someone loves it, and the thing itself is not creating a state of â€Å"loving† within the people around it. Likewise, being loved is not a state inherent to the thing loved, but is the result of the love others bear for the thing. Moving from his analogy back to Euthyphro’s definition, Socrates shows the fallacy in Euthyphro’s statement. Being god-loved cannot confer piety, as it confers â€Å"god-loved-ness† instead. Therefore, in Euthyphro’s statement, all the gods loving something would make that thing universally god-loved, but in no way makes it pious. An act is loved by the gods because it is pious, and not the other way around. Socrates, presumably tired of Euthyphro’s poor definitions, takes a stab at defining piety himself. He muses to Euthyphro that piety is a species of the genus justice, and that perhaps starting there would help the two men to agree on pious qualities. Socrates uses a poem as an example: â€Å"You do not wish to name Zeus, who had done it, and who made all things grow, for where there is fear there is shame. † While surely, says Socrates, those who feel shame also feel fear for their reputation or good name, those who feel fear do not necessarily feel shame as well. Being fearful of disease or poverty is not shameful, and is quite understandable. Shame is a smaller part of fear, covering a smaller area, just as piety covers a smaller area than justice, although the two entirely overlap. With a newfound agreement on the properties of piety, Socrates again asks Euthyphro to define piety by what part of justice it constitutes. Euthyphro states that â€Å"the godly and pious is the part of the just that is concerned with the care of the gods, while that concerned with the care of men is the remaining part of justice. † Socrates seems pleased by this new definition, but has one area that must be further defined – namely, the term â€Å"care for. † Socrates points out that the term â€Å"care for† means to benefit the object of care. Caring for the gods would then benefit them and make them better, an impossible act of hubris that flies in the face of the religion of the day. Euthyphro quickly enhances his definition: it’s the kind of care that a slave gives to his master. Socrates continues to press Euthyphro and demands to know what goal the gods intend to achieve by way of human service. Euthyphro gives a long-winded answer that Socrates immediately reduces to two independent clauses. The first is that the gods achieve, by way of human servitude, piety on earth in their servants’ actions. The second is that piety is the knowledge of how to sacrifice and pray. Socrates points out that Euthyphro’s latest definition reduces piety to a sort of commerce between gods and men, where pious men are the best bargainers and most skillful traders. Euthyphro agrees, although he would prefer grander wording. Socrates then asks: If pious men are trading with the gods, and the gifts from gods to men are obvious, then what are the gifts from men to gods? Euthyphro answers that the gods desire from men pleasing attitudes such as honour and reverence. Socrates once again reduces Euthyphro’s statement to a simpler form: â€Å"The pious is once again what is dear to the gods. † The argument has come full circle, back to a point where an object is conferring an action upon actors, and logical analysis leads round and back again. Socrates points this out, eager to dive back into defining piety, but Euthyphro claims he is now in a hurry and must continue the conversation some other time. While Euthyphro is unable to define piety in a convincing way, Socrates himself takes up the challenge in The Apology. While he doesn’t come right out and say it in so many words, Socrates clearly details how a man should act throughout his life and care for his soul to ensure a pious existence. According to Socrates, a man who wishes to live a pious life, insofar as he wishes to take the greatest care of his soul and follow the purest pursuits on Earth, should seek the truth in any form, at any cost. This is most clearly expressed by the statement â€Å"The unexamined life is not worth living. † Socrates would presumably define piety as the pursuit of truth. Piety, in the religious world of Socrates, can be taken as a more all-encompassing trait than it might be in modern times. Because everyone in Socrates’s society participated in the same religion, piety was a universally positive trait. Good things came from the gods, and men who engaged in religious acts were generally also pillars of Athenian society. Today piety has a narrower definition. Because religion no longer holds the position it once did in the world, and because people follow so many different religions, piety has been relegated to a rather specific set of qualities, most of which involve devotion to the church. In Socrates’s time, goodness and godliness were so close as to be inseparable, and so to be pious was to be a multitude of positive adjectives that existed in the wide realm of goodness and godliness. Piety is a desirable trait in humans, spawning bravery, kindness, wisdom, and all manner of positive attributes in those who are considered to be pious. However, each of these positive attributes is directly connected with discovering truths. Bravery or courage, one of the most readily identifiable positive traits, is a special kind of knowledge (Plato, Laches 196. c). By understanding the risks and rewards of a particular action in a certain situation, brave people will risk themselves to a certain degree, presumably because they have calculated the rewards to be justifiably great. An equally courageous act, the admission of ignorance, would allow a general to withdraw his troops from a potentially compromising situation, probably to the disdain of his fellow generals. While scorn may be heaped on this general for â€Å"fleeing,† his courage and strength of character saves the lives of his soldiers to fight another day; a prouder or more ignorant general would foolishly stand his ground and lose. Prudence, it would seem in this situation, is part of bravery. The observance of the truth, that of the general’s previous ignorance of the current field of battle, allows the general to be courageous and brave. Truth is far more important than anything else. Truth is possessed by the gods, and occasionally discovered by man, perhaps by some design of the gods. When mathematics was discovered, and the objective truths of the hypotenuse and division were used, the gods were credited with the creation, or perhaps the release of, these intangible and indisputable truths. Men could not touch them, overturn them, or argue about them. They simply were. When the prophet at Delphi relayed a message from the gods, specifically that no man was wiser than Socrates, the truth of the matter was unquestioned by Socrates. Socrates, incredulous at this prophecy, began to pursue the meaning of the statement. Socrates refers to this as â€Å"my investigation in the service of god. † Wisdom, a desirable trait on its own, seems to be the knowledge of things. But how could Socrates be the wisest man? He had no knowledge of many things, such as politics, poetry, or craftsmanship. As he interviewed learned men in Greece, he began to realize an important difference. Many men in Greece had knowledge of things. They knew how to write, fight, or create, but these were not the truths Socrates sought. These were merely the men’s experiences, an amalgamation of experience. An objective truth, such as the use of a hypotenuse, was nowhere to be found. Socrates, in his staunch pursuit of truth, considered what he knew to be true in the same manner as geometry. He realized there was little he knew so well as his own ignorance – namely, the truth was that he did not know much at all. And so it became clear to Socrates that his wisdom was a by-product of the admission of his own ignorance, and that the pursuit of truth, no matter how damaging to the reputation of the seeker, was considered wise by the gods. Truth and piety became intermingled for Socrates, as he followed his divine mission in the pursuit of truth, no matter the cost to his reputation, or the danger it posed for him. Socrates’s willingness to die for the truth is an act of piety, as is his impoverished life and disregard for his reputation. When Socrates meets someone who thinks he is wise, Socrates believes he is coming to the assistance of the gods by showing that person his ignorance (Plato, Apology 23. b). Socrates devotes his whole life, and his death, to the pursuit of truth, no matter the cost. Because Socrates associates the notion of truth so closely with the gods, it could be said that his god is truth, and vice versa. When the notions of â€Å"god† and â€Å"truth† become synonymous, Socrates’s definition of piety becomes apparent.