|This article is a stub. You can help Assassin's Creed Wiki by expanding it.|
Sokrates (c. 470 BCE – 399 BCE), alternatively Socrates, was an ancient Greek philosopher from Athens who is credited as one of the founders of Western philosophy. He was the teacher of Plato and Alkibiades.
After the rebellion had overthrown the Athenian rule on the Silver Islands, Sokrates joined the celebrations, talking with interested citizens.
During the plague in Athens, Sokrates was observing the situation and people there. He witnessed the death of Perikles and decided to remain in the city in order to oppose the rhetoric of Kleon the Everyman, the new leader of Athens.
Later in around 425 BCE, Sokrates, alongside Aristophanes, assisted Kassandra in tarnishing the reputation of Kleon, a Sage of the Cult of Kosmos who had taken power following Perikles' death in 429 BCE.
Influence and legacy
Personality and characteristics
As an exceptional rhetorician who dominated political debates, Sokrates earned the respect of the intelligentsia of Athens. He was a fervent advocate of the democratic principles of his native state, and his prolific contributions to the philosophical tradition of Greece has left a lasting legacy which continued to reverberate as late as the days of the Ottoman Empire and beyond. Outspoken and courageous, he also boasted an extraordinary capacity for liquor.
Behind the scenes
Odyssey tries to recreate the man and his method and to a certain degree succeeds but the game often hamstrings the player's options with a black and white fallacy. An example of this is the quest On a High Horse. In it the player is confonted by the Heinz dillemma In this case a man steals a horse because otherwise his family would go hungry as his own horse, his source of income, has died. Should he be punished? 
The whole point of this excercise is twofold. One, to demonstrate that there is more to the crime as the player is not informed about the reason for stealing until he catches the thief. Secondly, that it isn't what is decided what matters mosts, but why one chooses a certain option. 
This quest is questionable in both respects as in the first case next to stealing the most obvious option for the thief was to ask the owner of the horse for the horse. Another option would have been to ask the community to help him out. Yet another is finding another source of income. The player never gets to argue these points and is thus forced into a black and white fallacy. 
On the second point the game fails as the whole excercise is not the judgement, but the reason one choses a certain option. The player is confronted with another black and white fallacy: give back the horse or let him have it. Another option could have been: let him have the horse, but promise to pay the owner. Or having him work for the owner and share earnins. However the possesion of the horse is not what was under discussion: should he be punished or not was. So, while initially an interesting dillemma is introduced, the whole flounders on a black and white fallacy. However, it is nice it is attempted to capture the spirit of the man.