Socrates Legal Self-Defense In Plato's Apology

The Apology is Plato’s written account of the trial that ultimately decides the fateful verdict of Socrates. Depicted within this account is the Socrates’ legal self-defense as he addresses the reasons for which he has been charged, and provides logical and ethical support for his innocence. Important to acknowledge is how Socrates begins his defense by identifying his opposition as eloquent, clever and dangerously persuasive (17c). His accusers were members a class known as Sophists, who taught rhetoric skills that were meant to achieve effective coercion regardless of whether or not these skills led to a sound argument. By way of contrast, Socrates, was a philosopher that valued truth over anything else. Recognizing this threat to impartiality,

He informs the audience of an experience where the Oracle of Delphi proclaimed that there was none wiser than he. Skeptical of this revelation, Socrates began to interview members of the community who were allegedly wise. To his surprise, he began to realize that these highly regarded individuals actually knew little to nothing (22a). Similar to these individuals, Socrates lacked answers to the fundamental questions of life. However, distinctively, he was unlike these individuals in that he admitted his lack of wisdom.

Ultimately, Socrates found the oracle’s declaration to be irrefutable. Socrates also came to the realization that human wisdom is worthless and that only “the god” possesses genuine wisdom. In obedience to the god, Socrates has made it his duty to prove to those, who believe to be wise, to see otherwise (23b). Socrates’ critical evaluation of these individuals exposed their ignorance and, as a result, he began to receive a great deal of hostility and enemies (23a). Those who were exposed desired to harm him but had no legitimate reasons for such, causing them to form superficial claims against