1. Introduction to Philosophy
Paper

2. 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

3. Writing the Introduction
5 points
125 words or less.
Content
Thesis
Summary Statement
Position Statement
Argument Statement
Minimal Background

4. Writing the Summary 45 points Objective: summarize the text Clearly
Concisely
Accurately
In your own words.

5. Writing the Summary Outline Charges The Corrupter of the Youth
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

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. 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?

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. 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)

12. 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.

13. Writing the Conclusion
5 points
125 words or less.
Content
Thesis
Summary Statement
Position Statement
Argument Statement
Final Relevant Remark