The Trial of Socrates
The trial of Socrates is an excellent source of events during the period in which Socrates lived and died. Athens was a democratic city with much pride in their freedom. Especially their freedom of speech. Socrates was a political philosopher who did not agree with these freedoms provided by the Athenic democracy. However, it is his trial in which both the democracy of Athens and Socrates himself show their hypocrisy. It is this hypocrisy that makes the trial and death of Socrates quite ironic.
Athens, the city in which Socrates resided, was a free democratic city that was governed by all citizens in a fair democracy as seen in apology. It was said to be an association of free men with no single leader or king. The town prided itself on the freedom of its citizens and, especially, its freedom of speech. Most all citizens prided themselves on these views, although they respected the views of other people because of their own freedom of speech.
This was the society in which Socrates lived. Socrates was a philosopher who believed that only those who are wise should rule the people. In other words, the people are not capable of government participation because they do not have the knowledge According to this philosophy; democracy is not a capable government. Other than his time spent fighting for Athens, Socrates rarely took part in any democratic actions. He spent most of his life preaching his philosophical views
Socrates had many pupils to his preaching, although he denied being a teacher of philosophy. He proved this by showing them as witnesses in the court. He boasted about many topics. He also attacked the opinions of many others. He believed that one should give specific definitions o...
... middle of paper ...
...ny listeners and pupils that agreed with his philosophy. He did not make any actions against the democracy that he despised so greatly.
Throughout the events of the trial, both sides were quite hypocritical, although Socrates willingly became hypocritical in order to expose the hypocrisy of the government. Throughout the trial, Socrates did not deny the accusations exactly , because he actually wanted to be convicted. We can also see this in Socrates’ dialogues with his accusers. He made them talk and answer his questions which most of them were not exactly questions. His questions were as if they were answers. These are all the proofs of what he wanted to do in the trial.
Finally, as for the question “Should Socrates have been convicted”, if I were the trial’s judge, I would have decided him to be guilty although he wasn’t. I think I would have awarded 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.
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
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.
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 other accusations made against Socrates but I believe that I have covered the major ones. I also believe that as far as the mentioned charges are concerned, I have proved that Socrates is indeed innocent. I personally do not know how he was still found guilty, and I regret that Athens lost such a great man
Socrates’ indirectly attacks democracy in ancient Athens when he discusses the differences between opinion an...
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.
Though Socrates has been unjustly incarcerated, he refuses to escape due to his implied agreement with the Athenian legal system. This paper serves to argue that Socrates’ line of reasoning to Crito does not properly address actions committed under an unjust legal system.
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.
Living in a democracy, everyone is exposed through television and other various forms of media everyday to numerous trials by jury. Usually they are rarely given a second thought, but every once in a while along comes a specific trial which captures the attention of the entire country. This goes the same for trials throughout centuries in our past. Although they did not have the same forms of media as in this, modern era, there were still specific trials in which everyone knew about. One trial that stands out is the one against the great philosopher Socrates. Accused of corrupting the youth, being an atheist, and believing in other gods, Socrates faced trial by jury. The early forms of democracy were not as sophisticated and complex as they are now. The outcome of the trial was that Socrates was found guilty and sentenced to be put to death by hemlock poisoning. The question is whether Socrates was truly guilty or just another person fallen to the early form of democracy of a people who were possibly jealous and afraid of Socrates. However, by understanding Socrates intentions, it is clear that he was in fact innocent of the above charges, and was wrongly accused and executed.
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.
(37) The problem is that many of the citizens of Athens who wanted Socrates dead, lacked that emotional intelligence and thought highly of themselves. So of course they become defensive when Socrates sheds light on the idea that they may be wrong. As someone who cared most about the improvement of the soul, Socrates would have made a constructive role model to the criminals of Athens, as he would go on saying, “virtue is not given by money, but that from virtue comes money and every other good of man…”(35) Socrates was able to benefit everyone alike as he had human wisdom- something that all the Athenians could relate
...litical figure came close to challenging Socrates' unique philosophical plan. In the Republic, Socrates' ideas of how ignorant a democracy is, is portrayed in the Apology when Socrates' proclamation resulted in death. A democracy is supposed to be about individuality and freedom, however it was contradicted when Socrates was put to death because he had ideas for a better system of ruling. He wanted a ruler to be somebody who would see truth, not shunning certain ideas and keeping others solely because it is not understood. These ideas are portrayed in both excerpts.
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 ...
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...