Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
trial and death of Socrates
plato's trial and death of socrates
socrates unjust trial
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: trial and death of Socrates
In the spring of 399 BCE, A man named Socrates was put on trial in front of his native Athenians. Facing the charges of not acknowledging the gods the city acknowledges, and introducing other new divinities. In addition, He is also charged with corrupting the youth of Athens. The affidavit introduced by Meletus demands the penalty of death. These are very serious charges and the demand of death should not be taken lightly. Yet Meletus is ignorant about what he claims and his accusations can easily be rebutted.
In a legal case or trial such as the one Socrates found himself in, there is a terminology called precedent meaning “any act, decision, or case that serves as a guide or justification for subsequent situations.” There was a decree stating that it was prohibited to have disbelief in the gods of Athens. However it was not enforced, the unjust punishment of Socrates was a rarity, in fact there are documented cases of others mocking and showing greater disbelief in the gods who went unpunished. One such incidence is the case of Aristophanes who at religious festivals mocked not only Zeus, but Dionysus whom the festivals were held in the honor of.
What made Socrates the exception to the rule? Was it because so many people listened to what he had to say? Or because he was so persistent, that even in the face of death he still refused to stop spreading his thought? Either way, if there were others, who showed more disrespect, and outright mockery towards the gods, why were they not punished, what made Socrates so dangerous to the Athenians?
Meletus claims that Socrates is an atheist in the affidavit, that he teaches others to believe not in the typical Olympian gods but in other gods and demigods. However the defi...
... middle of paper ...
... corrupted testify against him? Unless the only people who consider these youth to be corrupted do not know what Socrates taught these people?
Works Cited
Plato The Apology http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/apology.html (accessed Septermber 24, 2011).
Colaiaco, James A. "Socrates Against Athens: Philosophy on Trial." By James A Colaiaco, 121-122. Taylor & Francis, Inc, 2001.
Plato. Early Socratic Dialogues. Penguin Classics, 1987.
Random House, Inc. Random House, Inc. 2011. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/precedent (accessed September 11, 2011).
Stone, I.F. The Trial Of Socrates. Little, Brown & Company, 1988.
Waterfield, Robin. Why Socrates Died: Dispelling The Myths. New York : W.W Norton & Company, 2009.
SparkNotes Editors. “SparkNote on The Apology.” SparkNotes LLC. n.d.. http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/apology/ (accessed September 23, 2011).
West, Grace S., Thomas West. Texts on Socrates: Plato and Aristophanes. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1998.
In fact, it’s I who can call what I think is a sufficient witness that I’m telling the truth, my poverty.” (Plato 661) Socrates also states “if I really do corrupt the young or have corrupted them in the past, surely if any of them had recognized when they became older that I’d given them bad advice at some point in their youth, they’d now have come forward themselves to accuse me and seek redress. Or else, if they weren’t willing to come themselves, some of their family members…would remember it now and seek redress.” (Plato 663) There was no one in the audience who stepped forward to speak on behalf of his accusers. Socrates consistently proved by words, how the accusations against him were false. In the end, he was accused of all of these things and put to death. This goes to show how much they truly hated Socrates and that no matter what they were told, it wouldn’t have mattered, they would have found a way to punish him in the
Socrates reaches a conclusion that defies a common-sense understanding of justice. Nothing about his death sentence “seems” just, but after further consideration, we find that his escape would be as fruitless as his death, and that in some sense, Socrates owes his obedience to whatever orders Athens gives him since he has benefited from his citizenship.
In his examination of Meletus, Socrates makes three main points: 1) Meletus has accused Socrates of being the only corrupter, while everyone else improves the youth. Socrates then uses an analogy: a horse trainer is to horses as an improver is to the youth. The point is that there is only one improver, not many. 2) If Socrates corrupts the youth, either it is intentional or unintentional. No one would corrupt his neighbor intentionally, because he would harm himself in the process. If the corruption was unintentional, then the court is not the place to resolve the problem. The other possibility is that he does not corrupt them at all. 3) In frustration, Meletus accuses Socrates of being "a complete atheist," at the same time he claims Socrates teaches new gods. Thus, Meletus contradicts himself. Socrates argues that fear of death is foolish, because it is not known if death is a good or an evil, thus there is no reason to fear death.
The main argument in The Apology by famous ancient Greek philosopher Plato is whether, notorious speaker and philosopher Socrates is corrupting the youth by preaching ungodly theories and teaching them unlawful ideas that do harm to individuals and society. In his words Socrates quoted the prosecution’s accusation against him: “Socrates is guilty of corrupting the minds of the young, and of believing in supernatural things of his own invention instead of the gods recognized by the state.” 1 Further Socrates consistently introduces tediously compiled number of examples to provide valid and sound arguments to prove that he is innocent of the charges brought up against him to the court.
Socrates, in his conviction from the Athenian jury, was both innocent and guilty as charged. In Plato’s Five Dialogues, accounts of events ranging from just prior to Socrates’ entry into the courthouse up until his mouthful of hemlock, both points are represented. Socrates’ in dealing with moral law was not guilty of the crimes he was accused of by Meletus. Socrates was only guilty as charged because his peers had concluded him as such. The laws didn’t find Socrates guilty; Socrates was guilty because his jurors enforced the laws. The law couldn’t enforce itself. Socrates was accused of corrupting Athens’ youth, not believing in the gods of the city and creating his own gods. In the Euthyphro, Socrates defends himself against the blasphemous charges outside the courthouse to a priest Euthyphro. Socrates looks to the priest to tell him what exactly is pious so that he may educate himself as to why he would be perceived as impious. Found in the Apology, another of Plato’s Five Dialogues, Socrates aims to defend his principles to the five hundred and one person jury. Finally, the Crito, an account of Socrates’ final discussion with his good friend Crito, Socrates is offered an opportunity to escape the prison and his death sentence. As is known, Socrates rejected the suggestion. It is in the Euthyphro and the Apology that it can be deduced that Socrates is not guilty as charged, he had done nothing wrong and he properly defended himself. However, in the Crito, it is shown that Socrates is guilty only in the interpretation and enforcement of Athens’ laws through the court system and its jurors. Socrates’ accusations of being blasphemous are also seen as being treasonous.
Socrates was indicted to a court of law on the charges of impiety, and the corruption of the youth of Athens. Three different men brought these charges upon Socrates. These men represented those that Socrates examined in his search to find out if the Delphic Mission was true. In that search he found that none of the men that promoted what they believed that they knew was true was in fact completely false. This made those men so angry that they band together and indicted Socrates on the charges of impiety and the corruption of the youth. Socrates then went to court and did what he could to refute the charges that were brought against him.
For these two articles that we read in Crito and Apology by Plato, we could know Socrates is an enduring person with imagination, because he presents us with a mass of contradictions: Most eloquent men, yet he never wrote a word; ugliest yet most profoundly attractive; ignorant yet wise; wrongfully convicted, yet unwilling to avoid his unjust execution. Behind these conundrums is a contradiction less often explored: Socrates is at once the most Athenian, most local, citizenly, and patriotic of philosophers; and yet the most self-regarding of Athenians. Exploring that contradiction, between Socrates the loyal Athenian citizen and Socrates the philosophical critic of Athenian society, will help to position Plato's Socrates in an Athenian legal and historical context; it allows us to reunite Socrates the literary character and Athens the democratic city that tried and executed him. Moreover, those help us to understand Plato¡¦s presentation of the strange legal and ethical drama.
One of the reasons why Socrates was arrested was because he was being accused of corrupting the minds of the students he taught. I personally feel that it is almost impossible for one person to corrupt the thoughts and feelings of a whole group of people. Improvement comes form a minority and corruption comes from the majority. Socrates is one man (minority) therefore it is less likely the youth have been corrupted by Socrates than by some larger group of people (educators, council members, jurymen etc...).
Around the time of 469 to 399 A.D. Socrates existed as a stone cutter who had a passion for philosophy. He taught many pupils, including the well-known philosopher Plato, and created a method of teaching called the Socratic Method. This new method of thinking encouraged people to question everything around them and invest in critical evaluation. One day Socrates was accused of corrupting the minds of the Athenian youth. Was Socrates wrongly convicted, or was what the Athenians did just? In the present day many people see that his conviction was unjust, but there are some people, including people who existed during the time of the trial, who believed his accusers were right to judge Socrates as such. People
Socrates starts his defense by addressing the jury and telling them that his accusers had a prepared speech, while Socrates' speech will be completely improvised. Socrates continued to further disassociate himself from the opponents by telling the jury to forgive him for his conversational tone in his speech, for that's how he best speaks. He also asks the jury to keep an open mind and not concentrate on how his defense is delivered, but the substance of his defense. Socrates tells the jury that he is not a sophist. Sophists were known for charging fees for their work, and Socrates does not charge a fee for his words. His next decides to cross-examine Meletus. Basically Socrates turns the tables on his accuser and accuses Meletus of "dealing frivolously with serious matters." Socrates says that the youth he supposedly corrupts follows him around on their own free will, because the young men enjoy hearing people and things being questioned. In this line of questioning of Meletus, Socrates makes him look very contradictory to his statements in his affidavit. Socrates then moves on to the second part of his defense. Moving on to the second charge that he does not believe in the Gods accepted ...
The trial of Socrates and the trial of Jesus are related due to the fact that there is little real evidence in either trial. Socrates is accused by Meletus, Anytus, and Lycon for being an evil-doer who corrupts young people and does not believe in G-d (Plato, Apology 563). In spite of how serious these charges sound, Socrates explains that these men hold grudges against him and are only antagonizing him in order to seek revenge. Elaborating on this point, Socrates states, “Meletus…has a quarrel with me on behalf of the poets; Anytus, on behalf of the craftsmen and politicians; Lycon, on behalf of the rhetoricians…Hence has arisen the prejudice against me” (Plato, Apology 563). It is clear from this statement that Socrates has offended these people and that they do not view him in a positive light. It is also true that the witnesses selected t...
Socrates, according to Plato challenged the norms of society by questioning life and having others question it as well. He was labeled of “corrupting the youth” and for not believing in the Athenians gods. “Socrates is guilty of corrupting the young, and of not acknowledging the gods the city acknowledges, but new daimonic activities instead.” (The Apology, pp 654) Although, he was cast by being “corrupt”, Socrates had many followers that saw him as a wise man. Socrates trial was made up of thirty jurors, who were later known as “The Thirty.” The “Thirty” really wanted was to silence Socrates, rather than taking his life. However, Socrates did not want to disobey the laws, he did not want to be violated of his right to freedom of speech, nor did he did he want to be undermine his moral position. (The Apology, pp. 647) He stood against injustice acts several times while he was in counsel. “I was the sort...
Socrates was set to a trial in front of 500 males over the age of thirty who would decide his fate. He was accused on two charge, corrupting the youth and impiety. The young men of the wealthier class have been attracted to him because they enjoy listening to the way in which he exposes the ignorance of those who claim to be wise. This irritated the elders because they believed Socrates was exploiting the youth, even though Socrates did not entice the youth to listen to him. The other charge was impiety, lack of allegiance for a religion. He was charged for this because
When Socrates was brought to trial for the corruption of the city’s youth he knew he had done nothing wrong. He had lived his life as it should be lead, and did what he ne...