Plato's Apology: The Persecution Of Socrates

644 Words2 Pages

The Apology is an account by Plato of the prosecution of Socrates who was brought to face prosecution for the first time in Athens in front of an open Athenian court comprised of approximately 500 juries (Plato, Tredennick, & Tarrant, 2003, p.33). As Socrates begins his defense, he names his accusers Meletus, Anytus and Lycon who represent the grievances on behalf of various sections of the population. Meletus represents the grievances of the poets, Anytus represents the professional men and politicians, and Lycon represents the grievances of the orators (Plato, Tredennick, & Tarrant, 2003, p.47). Socrates states to the jury that he is not well versed in the language of the court, and asks that they both accommodate his manner of speech, and …show more content…

In my opinion, Socrates utterly destroys Meletus argument in his accusation when he stated that everyone in Athens, but Socrates has a refining effect on its youth and that it was ludicrous to claim that Socrates did not believe in Gods if he merely taught people to believe in different Gods (Plato, Tredennick, & Tarrant, 2003, pp. 49-51). Socrates argument is essentially stating that Meletus argument is essentially a non sequitur due to the fact that by definition, believing in the supernatural means believing in …show more content…

Democracy in the simplest sense means ruling by a majority, and the majority of Athenian juries voted for Socrates punishment. The real question seems to be; why did they take so long to bring Socrates to trial? Socrates stated to the jury that there are many people who have been accusing him for years (Plato, Tredennick, & Tarrant, 2003, p.41). I believe that since Socrates had outlived most of his friends, he became an increasingly lonely voice outside of his followers. As his influence grew upon the youth of Athens, the state decided that it was probably time to stop Socrates from having too much influence that would upset the

Show More
Related

  • The Readings of The Apology of Socrates and Crito

    966 Words  | 2 Pages

    Throughout the readings of The Apology of Socrates and Crito I have found that Socrates was not a normal philosopher. It is the philosopher's intention to question everything, but Socrates' approach was different then most other philosophers. From one side of the road, Socrates can be seen as an insensitive, arrogant man. He did indeed undermine the laws so they fit his ideals, leave his family, and disregard the people's values. On the other side he can be seen as an ingenious man who questioned what many thought was the unquestionable. As he can be criticized for disregarding the many's ideals he can also be applauded for rising above the daily ways of popular thought. He questioned the laws that he thought were wrong and, to his death, never backed down in what he believed in. People may see that as stupidity or as heroism, the beauty of it is that either way people saw it, Socrates wouldn't care.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Xenophon And The Apology

    1209 Words  | 3 Pages

    Socrates then questions him again about whether or not he alleges that he corrupts the youth intentionally or unintentionally. Meletus’ reply was that he does intentionally. Socrates begins to argue with Meletus about his previous statement and, what seems to become, more and more agitated with the fact that Meletus goes back and forth with his argument for the simple facet that he wants Socrates to face the death penalty which is evident in several occasions throughout Plato’s apology. Also, throughout Plato’s version of The Apology, he also makes sure that it is known that his first charges arose from general prejudices that surrounded him over the

    Read More

  • Comparison Between Crito And Apology by Plato

    1631 Words  | 4 Pages

    Plato's The Apology is an account of the speech. Socrates makes at the trial in which he is charged with not recognizing the gods recognized by the state, inventing new gods, and corrupting the youth of Athens. For the most part, Socrates speaks in a very plain, conversational manner. He explains that he has no experience with the law courts and that he will instead speak in the manner to which he is accustomed with honesty and directness. Socrates then proceeds to interrogate Meletus, the man primarily responsible for bringing Socrates before the jury. He strongly attacks Meletus for wasting the court¡¦s time on such absurd charges. He then argues that if he corrupted the young he did so unknowingly since Socrates believes that one never deliberately acts wrongly. If Socrates neither did not corrupt the young nor did so unknowingly, then in both cases he should not be brought to trial. The other charge is the charge of impiety. This is when Socrates finds an inconsistency in Meletus¡¦ belief that Socrates is impious. If he didn¡¦t believe in any gods then it would be inconsistent to say that he believed in spiritual things, as gods are a form of a spiritual thing. He continues to argue against the charges, often asking and answering his own questions as if he were speaking in a conversation with one of his friends. He says that once a man has found his passion in life it would be wrong of him to take into account the risk of life or death that such a passion might involve.

    Read More

  • The Apology and Crito

    345 Words  | 1 Pages

    Plato’s "Apology" gives the substance of the defense made by Socrates to the Athenians at his trial. Meletus, Anytus and Lyncon brought Socrates to court on charges of corrupting the morals of the youth, leading the youth away from the principals of democracy, neglecting the Gods of the State and introducing new divinities.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Socratic Depiction In Socrates's 'Apology To The Jury'

    1368 Words  | 3 Pages

    On the one hand, if there are others who interpret and mediate divine messages -then rationally- the question of Socrates’ impiety becomes absurd because he does nothing different by account of this logic. On the other hand, however, Socrates simultaneously calls into question the premise that informs rust in the divine; specifically, the “...dubious premise that no one could trust to anything expect a god to be able to trust that his predictions [are accurate]” (Pangle 118). Indeed, consider how Socrates affirmation that he is “more truthful and more pious” (13.3); he posits as evidence of this the fact that he has benefited those who seek his counsel by never having spoken falsely (13.9). If everyone can trust that Socrates’ are predictions are accurate and thereby repetitiously seek and trust in his counsel, then the aforementioned premise can easily/equally be attributed to Socrates, and his daimonion. Hence, whilst Socrates affirmation is informed by the very same premise that informs the Athenians’ trust in the conventional divine, an acceptance of that affirmation as proof of Socrates’ piety requires a critical questioning of both that very premise, and of Socrates’ actual belief in it.

    Read More

  • Socrates In The Apology And 'The Allegory Of The Cave'

    1145 Words  | 3 Pages

    If Socrates were put on trial today it would be much like his trial in Athens, most likely put on trial for the same reason of some citizens resenting him for his deeds of making them seem foolish. Upon living within our society, he would have had a grasp of what we value and want from life. Knowing about what his view of our society would most likely be, I believe that Socrates would defend himself and make a statement to our society by explain to us, are we only resent him due to our arrogance as found in the Apology and The Allegory of the Cave, how we must change our ways as a society by properly prioritizing our efforts to seek wisdom as seen in his conversation with Meno, and will refute how any punishment we could give him will not

    Read More

  • Plato's Apology: The Argument For Corrupting The Youth Of Plato

    785 Words  | 2 Pages

    In Plato’s Apology, when Socrates is pleading his defence, he makes a good argument against the charges of corrupting the youth of Athens. This is evident when he states that, firstly, Meletus, the man who is trying to get Socrates executed, has never cared about the youth of Athens and has no real knowledge on the subject. Secondly, Socrates states that if he was in some way corrupting the youth, then he was doing it unintentionally or unwillingly, in which case he was brought to court for no reason. Finally, Socrates brings to light the fact that Meletus doesn’t have a single witness to attest to Socrates’ corruption. This is how Socrates proves his argument that he isn’t responsible for corrupting the youth of Athens.

    Read More

  • Socrates Was NOT Guilty

    1660 Words  | 4 Pages

    Socrates was not guilty as charged; he had done nothing wrong, as seen in the Apology. Not even a priest could tell Socrates what he had done wrong religiously, Euthyphro wasn’t even able to give Socrates a precise definition of piety. It is then questioned by Crito why Socrates would remain to face a penalty for a crime he did not commit. In the Crito, it is explained why, although innocent, Socrates must accept the penalties his peers have set upon him. It is his peers that will interpret and enforce the laws, not the law which will enforce it. Even if the enforcers don’t deserve attention and respect because they have no real knowledge to the situation, Socrates had put himself under their judgment by going to the trial. Therefore, Socrates must respect the decisions made by the masses because the decisions are made to represent the laws, which demand each citizen’s respect.

    Read More

  • Socrates and His Innocence

    907 Words  | 2 Pages

    Socrates starts by speaking of his first accusers. He speaks of the men that they talked to about his impiety and says that those that they persuaded in that Socrates is impious, that they themselves do not believe in gods (18c2). He tells the court of how long they have been accusing him of impiety. He states that they spoke to others when they were at an impressionable age (18c5). These two reasons alone should have been good enough to refute the first accusers of how they were wrong about him but Socrates went on. He leaves the first accusers alone because since they accused him a long time ago it was not relevant in the current case and began to refute the second accusers. Socrates vindicates his innocence by stating that the many have heard what he has taught in public and that many of those that he taught were present in the court that day.

    Read More

  • Aristotle And Plato's Apology: Plato And Aristotle

    1797 Words  | 4 Pages

    According to Aristotle, a virtue is a state that makes something good, and in order for something to be good, it must fulfill its function well. The proper function of a human soul is to reason well. Aristotle says that there are two parts of the soul that correspond to different types of virtues: the appetitive part of the soul involves character virtues, while the rational part involves intellectual virtues. The character virtues allow one to deliberate and find the “golden mean” in a specific situation, while the intellectual virtues allow one to contemplate and seek the truth. A virtuous person is someone who maintains an appropriate balance of these two parts of the soul, which allows them to reason well in different types of situations.

    Read More

  • An Apology From Socrates

    1717 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • The Trail Of Socrates And The Apology Of Plato

    1011 Words  | 3 Pages

    The accuser believes that Socrates corrupted the minds of the children by introducing new concepts. Socrates is trying to teach and involve the minds of the youth by getting them to ask questions. It is very important that people are always asking questions about why things are happening. The next question that needs to be addressed is what does not believe in the gods mean? Socrates believes in God, but that is one God that rules the world, not multiple gods who together rule.

    Read More

  • Socrates was a Wise and Harmless Man

    1122 Words  | 3 Pages

    Socrates was also put on trial for being an Atheist. In the argument Socrates has with Meletus, Socrates gets Meletus to admit that Socrates is Atheist and theist. Considering that both of these practices are totally incompatible, and Meletus admits to both of theses, maybe Meletus does not really understand what he is accusing Socrates of. I understand that back then; not believing in religion was considered a crime but to actually sentence someone to death for being different is totally uncalled for.

    Read More

  • Plato's Apology

    807 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the retelling of his trial by his associate, Plato, entitled “The Apology”; Socrates claims in his defense that he only wishes to do good for the polis. I believe that Socrates was innocent of the accusations that were made against him, but he possessed contempt for the court and displayed that in his conceitedness and these actions led to his death.

    Read More

  • The Charges Against Socrates

    634 Words  | 2 Pages

    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 ...

    Read More

More about Plato's Apology: The Persecution Of Socrates

Open Document