Socrates' Trial
In 399 B.C., Socrates, a seventy year old man, was brought to trial. He faced several accusations of different sorts. Initially, the court had pronounced Socrates guilty. However, because the law had no penalty ordained for his offense, it was required of Socrates to propose his own penalty, or to take the one suggested by Meletos, the death penalty. When the time had come for Socrates to state his defense, he addressed each of the accusations made against him, one by one, in attempt to absolve himself from wrong doing. The first accusation Socrates chose to contest declared that he was a student of natural philosophy. This meant that Socrates was believed to be one who sought to replace mythical explanations of events in the physical universe with rational and scientific explanations. A religious fundamentalist of the ancient world, on the other hand, adamantly opposed this idea. Meletos, the prosecutor of Socrates, was one of these religious fundamentalists who preferred the literal interpretations of Greek mythology over the logical ones. For example, Meletos would interpret a roll of thunder as an outburst of anger from the great god, Zeus, whereas Socrates would explain it meteorologically. Because of these conflicting interpretations, Socrates was charged with impiety against the gods of the city. Meletos declared that Socrates "sought things under the earth and up in the heavens, and made the weaker argument the stronger". To try to use scientific reason to explain any occurrence during this time period was disregarded, as it showed disrespect to the gods and to the Greek religion. Not only was Socrates condemned for this, but for, later, discussing his discoveries, thoughts, and beliefs with others...
... middle of paper ...
...to make its final decision, Socrates was given the death penalty. However, because this man had faced death many times before, he was not fearful of his fate. He believed that it would be good for him because the internal oracle had given no sign of opposition. And so, Socrates was put to death for the violations he had committed. Because Socrates was able to maintain his composure throughout the trial, and was able to truthfully discuss his tactics with the court even though it went against the common practices of the ancient world, I feel that he was a very honorable man. Even at the brink of death, Socrates did not modify his defense to what he thought the court would want to hear. He did not apologize for his way of thinking or for the way he went about doing things, but he, essentially, apologized for the fact that others were unable to understand his virtues.
After having been sentenced to death, Socrates states that there is no good to come out of his death, as he is already of old age and does not have much longer to live anyway (Apology, 38b - c). He also states that by killing him the jury and the accuser have asserted that Socrates is indeed wise (Apology, 38c).
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.
There are times in every mans life where our actions and beliefs collide—these collisions are known as contradictions. There are endless instances in which we are so determined to make a point that we resort to using absurd overstatements, demeaning language, and false accusations in our arguments. This tendency to contradict ourselves often questions our character and morals. Similarly, in The Trial of Socrates (Plato’s Apology), Meletus’ fallacies in reason and his eventual mistake of contradicting himself will clear the accusations placed on Socrates. In this paper, I will argue that Socrates is not guilty of corrupting the youth with the idea of not believing in the Gods but of teaching the youth to think for themselves by looking to new divinities.
The Importance of Individuality (Three Lessons from Plato’s Dialogue, The Apology) The trial of Socrates in the year 399 B.C. is a very important piece of history that teaches many lessons. Socrates was accused of being an atheist as well as corrupting the young men in his community. He was tried in a court and found guilty; then consequently required to propose his own penalty, as an alternative to Meletos’ penalty.
	Thus, in conclusion I believe that Socrates was correct to disregard the opinion of the majority. Socrates accepts his fate, for this reason alone he is not a coward. Socrates disagrees with retaliation and has faith in the government of Athens. Although Socrates may not agree with the decision of the assembly to put him to his death, he realizes that he was done wrongly by the assembly rather than the laws of Athens themselves. I believe Socrates feels this way because he has lived under the laws of Athens for 70 years and he has raised his children under the same principles. Socrates accepts the fact that being a member of society demands a certain respect and obedience. Without the rules and punishment system Athens would not be able to function properly. As Socrates decided to become a citizen of the state of Athens he also takes along with him the responsibility of being a citizen of that state. In following the more reasonable people I believe Socrates is merely following the path in which the Gods intended.
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.
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 is accused of impiety and for corrupting the lives of youths through his interactions with them and his teachings. Socrates defends his position on all charges believing he is doing just cause and in doing so is steadfastly abiding by his moral standards. Socrates believes that what matters is life and living it well. Socrates believes he should be rewarded rather than punished for his beliefs. He thinks he should be given free meals in the Prytaneum, where the Olympic athletes are celebrating or to pay a small sum of money which his friends raise to three times what Socrates proposes. In the end, Socrates accepts the judgment bestowed on him by the courts, the sentence of death. He accepts this verdict because he believes it is morally just to abide by the decision handed down by the state.
that it is because of the gods that things are as they seem to be. "Do you
In his play, The Clouds, Aristophanes lampooned Socrates by presenting him as the paradigm of atheistic, scientific sophistry. Yet it is unlikely that Aristophanes would have intended these charges to be taken seriously, since Plato depicts Aristophanes and Socrates as being on very good terms with each other in the Symposium. "For those who are examined, instead of being angry with themselves, are angry with me!" This is the essential reconciliation for why Socrates is considered wise, and, at the same time, acquired a bad reputation among the most socially powerful
Putting an innocent man on trial for a crime that he did not commit and throwing the death penalty at him, is what happened in Athens Greece around 339 B.C. A seventy year old Socrates was held in court in front of 501 jury members where it was decided that poisoning himself with hemlock would be the only solution for the old man. The people of Greece decided to send Socrates away to prison where he would wait until his time to face death would come. Knowing his friend had done nothing wrong, Crito proposes a plan of escape, but the great philosopher refuses to take any sort of action. After Crito approaches Socrate and tells him that he fears he will lose a friend in Socrates death, his own reputation throughout Greece will be ruined, and
After studying Plato’s Apology, an account of Socrates’s defense at his murder trial, I have concluded that Socrates is not guilty.
Although deeply illuminating, in my view, the philosophy behind Socrates and all of his actions in response to the accusations brought forth against him, as depicted in Plato’s “The Apology”, is ironically quite straightforward. To understand Socrates’ actions or rather lack of it to prevent a probable severe punishment, as far as this case goes, it is important to analyze two specific believes of him; his believe regarding death, and his belief about living. To begin with, Socrates clearly shows his complete acceptance of death as an innocuous end that should not justify any means, “if you suppose that a man who is of even a little benefit should take into account the danger of living or dying, but not rather consider this alone whenever he acts: whether his actions are just or unjust, and the deeds of a good man or a bad” (West, p. 28b) demoting an argument that would ease a
Socrates will be praised for his wisdom and contributions to western thinking for a very long time. Some of his ideas prevail today among philosophers, and his thinking has shaped modern science. Perhaps we should throw out the book, considering his botched defense. Socrates claims to know nothing and we should take his word for it. Socrates did a poor job in defending his own life in court, so why should we use his tools and devices to this day in our persuasive arguments? It seems clear that Socrates did nearly everything in his power to have himself executed. Going through his arguments there are many glaring issues, had contemporary individuals been his jury, his fate would not likely change. While some argue, he had no intention of getting
Socrates mentioned that Meletus, Anytus and Lycon who have brought the present charges to the court are the latest accusers who have accused him of anything. He has older accusers, which he has more reasons to fear than these recent accusers because the older ones have been speaking out against him from the time of their youth and their accusations has gotten to a more extent level than the second. The first accusers accused Socrates of two acts, which they were: believing in spiritual things and corrupting the young ones by teaching them how to make weaker arguments overcome stronger arguments.