The Unjust Execution of Socrates
In the vortex of life, many evils have transpired. Vices such as plagues,
unforeseen deaths, and corruptness. Among the tragic acts of malefic proportion
was the death of the Greek philosopher, Socrates. He tried to prove and
invalidate many theories through reasoning, and he was murdered for his beliefs.
His execution was not justified because the charges that were brought against
him were false and unfounded.
The fist crime that Socrates was charged with was that of impiety. This
charge was invented primarily to discredit him and make him unpopular with the
citizens. The charge was that of not acknowledging the same gods that the state
believed in. Throughout the book, Socrates refers numerous times to the fact
that it is because of the gods that things are as they seem to be. "Do you
suggest that I do not believe that the sun and moon are gods, as is the general
belief of all of mankind?" (57). The fact that Socrates did not publicly speak
about the gods attributed to the fact that the charge was heresy. Socrates
maintains that he is not like other philosohers. He is a free-thinker, and his
beliefs are those of private and intimate thoughts of Gods. Socrates also states
that he is not a teacher, however he was not at all happy with the analogy, but
took it as a compliment and used it in his defense. He used these accusations
to his advantage by saying that he never charged charged anyone for believing or
listening to them. The combination of these arguments should have cleared
Socrates of the charge of heresy.
The second charge brought against Socrates was that of corrupting minors.
Socrates battled this charge through the use of the same arguments. The
argument that he did not consider himself a teacher, the fact that he never
accepted any money for talking or listening to people, and the fact that he
believes in gods are what Socrates used to defend himself. By confronting the
accusation that he was corrupting the minors, Socrates tried to clear himself by
manipulating his arguments so that Meletus, Anytus, and Lycon (the men who
brought both charges against Socrates) had to answer questions about these
charges. When the questions of Socrates were placed before Meletus, his answers
seemed to have proven that Socrates was innocent. However, when the verdict was
announced, it demonstrated the opposite.
Upon hearing the verdict, GUILTY, it was plain to see that the Greek
assembly was like every other political assembly, corrupt.
"I should never have believed that it would be such a close thing; but now
“Am I asking him to look me in the eye to show me the respect I deserve, or do I truly want my student to gain the adequate social skills to interact with others?”
Socrates was a great Philosopher and thinker who were able to take his knowledge to greater heights from Ancient Athens. Due to Socrates great thinking and open-mindedness he was accused by many but persecuted with two charges, which were brought against him. In Plato’s Euthyphro, Socrates challenged Euthyphro for a solid definition of ‘what is piety’. In Apology Plato goes on to state the charges which had been set against Socrates, but while doing so Plato juggles the readers mind whether Socrates was guilty of any of these charges. Plato brings the reader to and argument between Socrates and Crito in the Crito dialogues. This argument is to determine whether Socrates should run away or face the death penalty/during the argument Socrates
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.
In the book one of Republic Socrates was concerned about what is justice. He forms a complex analysis of justice by discussing it with Polemarchus, Cephalus, and Thrasymachus. He refutes each proposition said by them, presenting implicit contradictions coming out of these man's arguments. All of this is to reach to, the Sophist, Thrasymachus. According to what's discussed in book one; Socrates sees that the Cephalus's and Polemarchus's common thinking for justice is insufficient. By entering into the dialogue in an aggressive way, Thrasymachus says that he can better explain the issue of justice. The right thing to do here is disregard justice. He blames Socrates for saying nonsense and for just questioning individuals' answers. Thrasymachus
is mention of only one God, a being that created the earth and skies, as
Socrates lived such a private life that it lead to the most important revelation of his entire life. He would go about his life doing nothing but self-examination. In examining his life so strenuously others would come to him to be taught, or to have their children be taught by Socrates. They would offer him money and he would refuse. They would do whatever they could to learn anything Socrates had to teach. What they did not know is that Socrates was not teaching anyone he was simply going about his usual life and people just happened to learn from it. This was also why Socrates was put on trial. He was brought up on two charges, one of impiety and the other of corrupting the youth. These two charges set the course for the last month of his life.
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.
Socrates was accused of being a sophist because he was "engaging in inquiries into things beneath the earth and in the heavens, of making the weaker argument appear the stronger," and "teaching others these same things." (Apology, Plato, Philosophic Classics page 21) Socrates is also accused of denying the existence of the gods, and corrupting the youth. Socrates goes about trying to prove his innocence. The jury that Socrates was tried by was made up of 501 Athenian citizens of all classes of society. While he fails to convince the Athenian jury of his innocence, he does a wonderful job in this effort. I personally believe that Socrates is innocent, and that the Athenian jury made the wrong decision.
The trial of Socrates in Athens is both similar and different from the trial of Jesus of Nazareth. The trials could be compared in three main areas: the evidence and reasons provided for their executions, their last messages to their accusers, and the two leaders’ thoughts about their impending deaths. For both figures, there is no evidence to support their convictions and they are convicted for similar reasons, though Jesus is given less time to defend himself. Both Jesus and Socrates warn their accusers that they will suffer for their actions. However, Jesus views his accusers as ignorant and Socrates views his as vengeful. Both men conclude that it is G-d’s will for them to die. However, Socrates is more secure about death than Jesus. Despite the differences that exist between the two trials, Socrates and Jesus face similar predicaments and deal with death in comparable ways.
Socrates was a revolutionary thinker. He brought new ideas and processes of thought to Athenian society and his work still has its place in the world today. However during his time, his ideas were not always thought of as a good thing. Many viewed him as a corrupting influence on other people and accused him of forcing his ideas upon others. Perhaps most frequently the center of controversy was his thoughts on theocracy and piety as seen in the Plato’s Euthyphro. Socrates also appears at the butt end of Aristophanes’ comedy Clouds, where he is satirically ridiculed and seemingly corrupting the youth of Athens in his school, the Thinkery. Although virtually completely seen as a positive influence now, in ancient times, Socrates may have done more harm than good for his society.
Imagine the time just after the death of Socrates. The people of Athens were filled with questions about the final judgment of this well-known, long-time citizen of Athens. Socrates was accused at the end of his life of impiety and corruption of youth. Rumors, prejudices, and questions flew about the town. Plato experienced this situation when Socrates, his teacher and friend, accepted the ruling of death from an Athenian court. In The Last Days of Socrates, Plato uses Socrates’ own voice to explain the reasons that Socrates, though innocent in Plato’s view, was convicted and why Socrates did not escape his punishment as offered by the court. The writings, “Euthyphro,” “The Apology,” “Crito,” and “Pheado” not only helped the general population of Athens and the friends and followers of Socrates understand his death, but also showed Socrates in the best possible light. They are connected by their common theme of a memoriam to Socrates and the discussion of virtues. By studying these texts, researchers can see into the culture of Athens, but most important are the discussions about relationships in the book. The relationships between the religion and state and individual and society have impacted the past and are still concerns that are with us today.
In 399 BC, Socrates, the great philosopher in ancient Greece, was put to death under the hands of his Athenian fellow-citizens to whom he had a strong attachment, after a final vote with over two-thirds of jurymen against him. We cannot experience the situation where Socrates gave his final argument in the court of law. From Plato’s Apology, we admire Socrates’ brilliant rhetoric and rigorous logic, while at the same time feel pity for him and indignant with those ruthless jurymen. However, the question of what exactly caused his death and why was Socrates, such a remarkable thinker sentenced to death in the very society that valued democracy the most is not easy and straightforward to answer. There are multiple elements involved that finally caused this tragedy in which “a person of high moral principle is confronted step by step with a situation from which there is no escape” (38). First of all, the moral principle and belief in divinity held by Socrates are inconsistent with those of the Athenian society, implying the very crimes charged upon Socrates were not completely groundless. Secondly, the imperfect juridical system of Athens played a role in causing this tragedy. What’s more, Socrates himself, could have offered better defense in the court, also had a hand in his own death by his stubbornness regarding to his own interpretation of wisdom and piety. His rebuttal, though brilliant and insightful, was not persuasive enough to move the fellow-citizens for his wrong approach and sophistry in his cross-examination on Meletus.
The charges against Socrates were brought upon him by a man names Meletus. Meletus was a young man that Socrates did not know very well. These charges brought on by Meletus caused the indictment of Socrates. One of the charges in the affidavit written by Meletus against Socrates is that he is "corrupting the youth." Another charge that is brought upon Socrates is that of he is making up new Gods and disregarding the old Gods the Athenians believe in. These were the charges brought on Socrates.
Plato’s “Defense of Socrates” follows the trial of Socrates for charges of corruption of the youth. His accuser, Meletus, claims he is doing so by teaching the youth of Athens of a separate spirituality from that which was widely accepted.
- So you do not believe that what I do is true? Do not you believe in the power that the ancient gods have conferred on me?