Having been brought forth to the halls of justice by Lycon, Anytus and Meletus, Socrates stands before a jury of Athenian men defending his innocence. While the charges against him are officially not believing the gods and corrupting the Athenian youth, Socrates must really defend his lifestyle, his pursuit of knowledge and philosophy, to the jury. To do so, he first establishes that he will only tell the whole truth, and follows by giving justifications to his actions. Similarly on how he has a “conversation” with the laws Athens in the Crito (50a-54d), Socrates takes on the role of the Jury, and asks himself questions that a jurymen might ask. Socrates then asks himself, “Are you not ashamed, Socrates, to have followed the kind of occupation that has led to your being now in danger of death?” (28b). …show more content…
He openly questions the beliefs of men held in high esteem in Athens, and thus has made him a controversial figure. For this very reason, he was indicted. Socrates responds, claiming “You are wrong sir, if you should think that a man who is any good at all should take into account the risk of life or death…”. A good man does not consider his physical well being when taking action, rather he looks “whether what he does is right or wrong, whether he is acting like a good or bad man” (28c). Socrates distinctly uses the word “acting” instead of “being”. What he has essentially said is that good men only act like good men. Which is to say, that men only aim to be good. Additionally, a man’s life is not what matters, rather his honor, or the health of his soul is what matters. Actions guided by the idea of a “good man” determine a man’s worth. I find this is beautifully reflected in Aristotle 's divisions of the soul. Just as all “good” men aim to act like good men, Aristotle theorized that all activities of men are aimed at a type of good
Many people have gone through their lives conforming their beliefs and practices for the sake of fitting in or for the happiness of others, but Socrates was not one of these people. In “The Apology” Plato shows Socrates unwillingness to conform through a speech given by Socrates while on trial for supposedly corrupting the youth of Athens and believing in false gods. Although the title of the dialogue was labeled “The Apology,” Socrates’ speech was anything but that, it was a defense of himself and his content along his philosophical journey. At no time during the trial was Socrates willing to change his ways in order to avoid punishment, two reasons being his loyalty to his God and his philosophical way of life.
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.
Socrates enters into his trial acknowledging the fact that he is going up against a jury of men, many of whom already have a biased, negative view towards him. He explains that many of them, though not knowing him personally, feel as though they do based solely on word of mouth, weakening the validity of the trial against him. As Socrates states in the account of his defence;
During this essay the trail of Socrates found in the Apology of Plato will be reviewed. What will be looked at during this review is how well Socrates rebuts the charges made against him. We will also talk about if Socrates made the right decision to not escape prison with Crito. Socrates was a very intelligent man; this is why this review is so critical.
In the opening of The Apology, Socrates informed the jurors how he intends to address them, what they should pay attention to in his remarks, and what he sees as his greatest obstacle in gaining an acquittal. How does he intend to address the jury? Socrates’ approach towards addressing the jury is way different than what you would see a normal defendant doing. Socrates does not stand in front of the jury and beg that he doesn’t get charged. Instead, Socrates believes that you shouldn’t have to cry and beg for the right to live in court if the defendant has done nothing wrong. The first thing that he says when speaking to the jury was to basically hear him out, and listen to even if he started to talk in his language of habit. He then said they should excuse that because he is seventy years old and has never appeared in court. “I must beg of you to grant me one favor, If you hear me using the same words in my defense which I have been in habit of using, and which most of you may have heard in the agora, and at the table of the money-changers, or anywhere else, I would ask you to not be surprised at this, and bot to interrupt me (Dover p. 19).”
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.
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.
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.
(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
In today's times many people believe the world lacks virtue, justice, and morals. People believe that the world is a miserable and horrible place. With so many killings shootings, wars, and terrorist attacks happening every day in the world, it is easy to see why so many people believe the world is so evil. An important example that can be looked at is the recent terrorist bombing and shooting in Paris, France. On November 13, 2015, Paris, France experienced a series of coordinated terrorist attacks. That day Paris experienced suicide bombings and mass shootings at several locations. In the end, 130 Paris citizens killed and 368 other were injured. Authorities killed seven of the attackers and are still searching for the other accomplices.
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 ...
Socrates states that men should never concern themselves with living or dying, but whether what they are doing in life is right or wrong. Socrates spent his life coercing answers out of society in pursuit of truth, with the belief that discovering truth was the correct way to live. Socrates did not burden himself with the idea of death, because he believed he was doing the right thing. Furthermore, in The Apology, Socrates expresses that men should remain where they are placed by their commander, and should think about the duty at hand rather than death, even when clenched firmly in danger’s grasp. Socrates’ was consistently victimized for his tendency to ask pestering questions, and he was eventually executed for it. However, Socrates continued to question others until the very end because he saw it as his duty. When Socrates’ stated that the unexamined life was not worth living, he truly meant he would rather live a life in constant pursuit of knowledge while facing persecution and the awareness of his imminent death than to be an ignorant fool and live a lengthy, peaceful
In the reading, it explains that Socrates is wealthy, educated, has a high status and honored, but Socrates believes all of it is worthless, harmful and damaging to the soul. The soul is all that matters because it is eternal. When he was on death row, he didn’t really fight to save his life. He knows his potential and is refusing to take control and live up to it. He truly doesn't care whether he dies and is willing to throw hi...
For instance, were I to possess the ring of Gyges during a final exam, it would certainly be possible to use its power to learn the answers either before or during the exam. In a situation like this, where no one is being physically harmed, it can be easy to see this unjust action as being neutral, rather than actively malevolent. I admit to being susceptible to my desires, however, I believe that – even when fulfilling our desires in what Socrates would consider to be unjust ways – I can still be moral. For me, injustice towards those who are unjust themselves is acceptable. While the saying goes that two wrongs don’t make a right, reality shows that wrongdoings go unpunished all the time, and that committing an act of injustice against such unjust people may not actually make things any worse.
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...