Refleversical Analysis Of Socrates's Views Of Accusers

At the age of seventy, the philosopher Socrates was confronted with accusations, then charged and put on trial before an Athenian jury containing 500 people, and was later sentenced to an unpleasant death after a convicted verdict. During the trial, Socrates had two different sets of accusers: the early accusers, and the immediate accusers. Through various years, the earlier accusers, which were the people of Athens, charged Socrates with deception and bias views. The immediate accusers, which were Meletus, Anytus, and Lycon, charged him with the reason of corrupting the youth and not believing in the gods that the city believed in. Yet Socrates was only worrisome with his earlier accusers than his immediate ones, because they have been slandering towards him throughout the prior years, putting preconception toward many of the jurymen since he was in his youth: “I have been accused before you by many people for a long time now, for many years in fact, by

His assumptions are just sheer thoughts that contain no authentic result. So why was he guilty for just trying to understand? The approach Socrates character and tone set out during the trial, presumably irritated the jury which consisted of 500 people, vexing them to make him blameworthy. In that sense, his arguments were successful in trying to get out his message, but unsuccessful in getting the reaction he hoped for. In conclusion, Socrates defended himself reasonably and knowledgably of all charges that were against him. But his demeanor, actions, and tone against the 500 jurors motivated them to dish out a guilty verdict and denounce him to an unpleasant death. However, to base the verdict on the actions, demeanor and tone of Socrates is most definitely inequitable. Socrates carried out a strong defense argument which held no deceit, which makes the verdict of these 500 jurors unjust, because he died for the wrong