The Innocence In Plato's The Apology Of Socrates

After reading “The Apology of Socrates”, I feel very strongly that Socrates was innocent in the allegations against him. “The Apology of Socrates” was written by Plato, Socrates most trusted pupil, who in fact wrote everything for Socrates. Numerous times in his defense, Socrates points out ways that what he is being accused of is false. The point of this paper is to show how Socrates did this, and to explain how he proved his innocence by using these quotes. He uses a lot of questions to the accusers to prove his points and is very skilled in speech and knowledge. This essay’s purpose is to explain why I think Socrates was innocent, and how he proves that in his speech.
The first thing Socrates is accused of is being a busybody. Socrates

uses the expression “Socrates commits injustice and is a busybody, in that he investigates the things beneath the earth and in the heavens, makes the weaker argument the stronger, and teaches these things to others.” (Plato 650) This is what Socrates’ accusers say he has done, and have noted as the first charge against him.

Aristophanes wrote a comedy about this accusation and Socrates does refer to this in his trial. The comedy portrays him as someone who “swings around claiming he’s walking on air and talking a lot of other nonsense on subject that I know neither a lot nor a little but nothing at all about.” (Plato 650) Socrates goes on to explain that he has “acquired this reputation because of nothing other than a sort of wisdom.” (Plato 651) He goes deeper into this explanation by saying he possesses “human wisdom. For it may just be that I really do have that sort of wisdom, whereas the people I mentioned just now

may, perhaps, be wise because they possess superhuman wisdom. I don’t know what else to call it, since I myself certainly don’t possess that knowledge, and whoever says I do is lying and speaking in order to slander me.” (Plato 651) Socrates himself never claimed to have superhuman wisdom, he even goes so far as to state “For I’m only too aware that I’ve no claim to being wise in anything either great or small.” (Plato 652) Socrates tells of how he approached different people who are “thought to be wise” (Plato 652) and found that the different types of people questioned, politicians, poets, and craftsmen, all had the same problem. He states here “I’m wiser than that person. For its likely that neither of us knows anything fine and good, but he thinks he knows something he doesn’t know, whereas, I, since I don’t in fact know, don’t think that I do either. At any rate, it seems that I’m wiser than he in just this one small way; that what I don’t know, I don’t think I know.” (Plato 652) Due to the fact that he asks these questions to these types of people, it caused hatred towards him. This caused people to provide false accusations that he “commits injustice and is a busybody, in that he investigates the things beneath the earth and in the heavens, makes the weaker argument the stronger, and teaches these things to others.” (Plato 650) In other words, the people he questioned were angry at him so they made these false allegations about Socrates.
Socrates moved on to the second accusation against him which was “Socrates is guilty of corrupting the young, and of not acknowledging the gods the city acknowledges, but new daimonic activities instead.” (Plato 654) The first part of this I want to discuss is his corruption of the young. Meletus is the person accusing Socrates of corrupting the young. Socrates questions Meletus around other citizens and how they would not want to corrupt the young. He ends his argument with the fact that, based on how Meletus answered his questions, “But then it seems that all the Athenians except for me make young people fine and good, whereas I alone corrupt them. Is that what you’re saying?” (Plato 655) Meletus answers “Most emphatically, that’s what I’m saying.”(Plato 655) It is highly unlikely that everyone in Athens does good for the young, except for Socrates. Socrates goes on to note to Meletus “it has been adequately established that you’ve never given any thought to young people – you’ve plainly revealed your indifference and that you care nothing about the issues on which you bring me to trial.” (Plato 655) After reading this comment, it really stuck with me that all Meletus cares about is accusing Socrates of something, no matter what it is, or whether he is guilty or not. Meletus wants to see Socrates in jail or worse. Socrates points out that if he did corrupt them, he did so unintentionally. He states “either I’m not corrupting the young, or if I am corrupting them, its unintentionally, so that in either case what you say is false. But if I’m corrupting them unintentionally, the law doesn’t require that I be brought to court for such mistakes – that is, unintentional ones – but that I be taken aside for private instruction and admonishment.” (Plato 656) However, the courts didn’t do this, they brought Socrates to trial.
The second part of his second accusation was that “of not acknowledging the gods the city acknowledges, but new daimonic activities instead.” (Plato 654) Socrates starts out by asking Meletus “Is it that I teach people to acknowledge that some gods exist – so that I, then, acknowledge their existence myself and am not an out-and-out atheist and am not guilty of that yet not, of course, the very ones acknowledged by the city, but different ones? Is that what you’re charging me with, that they’re different ones? Or are you saying that I myself don’t acknowledge any gods at all, and that that’s what I teach others?” (Plato 656) Meletus responds with “That’s what I mean, that you don’t acknowledge any gods at all.” (Plato 656) Socrates does acknowledge the sun and moon are gods. (Plato 656) Socrates then goes into an argument with Meletus about human activities. He asks if there is anyone who “doesn’t acknowledge that human activities exist, but doesn’t acknowledge human beings? Is there anyone who doesn’t acknowledge horses but does acknowledge equine activities? Or who doesn’t acknowledge that musicians exist but does acknowledge musical activities?” (Plato 657) Basically he is saying that they can’t acknowledge some and not all. Since he has acknowledged some, he absolutely acknowledges all. Socrates accusers said he doesn’t believe in gods but he participates in daimonic activities. (Plato 654) How is this the case when daimonic activities requires you to believe in gods also?
At the end of his “apology”, Socrates makes one final notation, “But, as it is, you can plainly see for yourselves that my accusers, who so shamelessly accused me of everything else, couldn’t bring themselves to be so utterly shameless as to call a witness to say that I ever once accepted or asked for payment.

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

end.