Socrates’ Defense: Analyzing Plato’s ‘Apology’
The Apology of Socrates, written between 393 and 389 BC, is a Platonic dialogue that gives a version of the defense of Socrates, who was accused of corrupting youth and despising the gods. The Apology of Socrates reflects the defense before the jury of the city of Athens. The word apology is the original meaning of formal defense of one’s views, from the Latin “apologia” which in turn comes from the Greek apologia, meaning “defense”, “justification”, and also “praise”. The text, part of the early Socratic works of Plato, rescues the text of the apology (defense) of Socrates to the court and constitutes an apologia (praise) of his teacher Plato.
Introduction
Socrates begins by saying he does not know whether the Athenians (general assembly) have already been persuaded by those who accuse him. This beginning is crucial to establish the theme throughout the speech, as Plato often begins his Socratic dialogues by giving the thrust of the text. In this case, the dialogue opens with “Citizens of Athens, I do not know what impression you have awakened in the words of my accusers.” This I do not know suggests that the philosophy expressed in the Apology will consist entirely of an honest admission of ignorance, for all his knowledge comes from his not knowing anything, “I only know that I know nothing.”
Socrates asks the jury not to judge him by his oratorical skills, but for the truth that they convene. In turn, he ensures that he will not use carefully prepared phrases or rhetorical ornaments, but will say aloud what is passing through his head, the same words used in the agora and in the meetings. Despite this, he proves to be a master of rhetoric, and he is not only eloquent and persuasive, but he can also play with the jury. The speech, which has put readers on his side for over two millennia, fails to win the trial. Socrates was condemned to death and was admired for his calm acceptance of it.
The Indictment
The three men bringing charges against Socrates are:
- Anytus, son of a prominent Athenian, Anthemion. Anytus appears in Meno, where Socrates appears unexpectedly while Meno (who is visiting Athens) discusses whether virtue can be taught. Socrates argues that it cannot, and offers as evidence that many good Athenians have had children less virtuous than their parents, after which he proceeds to give names, including Pericles and Thucydides. Anytus is offended and warns that disparaging Socrates (“kakos legein”) to those people will someday bring problems. (Meno 94e-95a).
- Meletus, the only one of the three to speak during the defense of Socrates. He is also mentioned in another dialogue, Euthyphro, although not in person. It says that Meletus is a young, unknown man with a large aquiline nose. In the Apology, Meletus presents his charges, allowing Socrates to reply. Without paying much attention to the charges being asserted, he accuses Socrates of atheism, believing in daimonia, and corrupting the youth through his teachings.
- Lycon, of whom little is known. According to Socrates, he was a representative of the orators.
The Charges Against Socrates
Socrates says he has to rebut two different types of accusations: the old charges that he is a criminal and a curious questioner of heaven and earth, and the latest legal charges of corrupting youth and believing in supernatural things of his own invention, rather than the gods of the polis. On the old charges, he says they are the result of years of rumors and prejudice, and therefore cannot be answered. Socrates undermines these “informal charges” by giving them a veneer of legality by saying: “Socrates commits a crime by investigating celestial phenomena and caves, because, they say, he makes the weaker argument the stronger, instructing it to others, and not believing in the gods, i.e., he is an atheist.” He also says these allegations arose from the mouth of a comic poet, namely Aristophanes.
The passionate defense of Socrates against being accused of sophistry (and being funny) is just a distraction from other, more serious accusations, as the sophists were not sentenced to death in Greece. In contrast, they were often sought by parents to be guardians of their children. So Socrates says he cannot be confused with a sophist, as they are wise (or think they are) and are well paid, while he is poor (although often seen in the tables) and says he does not know anything.
Dialogue
The Apology is divided into three parts. The first is Socrates’ own defense, and it contains the most famous parts of the text, like the memory of his visit to the Oracle at Delphi and his rebuttal to Meletus.
Part One
Socrates begins by telling the jury that their minds have been poisoned by his enemies while they were young and impressionable and that his reputation for sophistry has been imposed by his enemies, who are malicious and jealous. He says, however, they are going to remain anonymous, except for Aristophanes, the comic poet. He then answers the charge of corrupting the youth by arguing that intentionally corrupting is an incoherent idea. After explaining that all his problems began with a visit to the oracle, he recounts the story. Chaerephon visited the Oracle at Delphi to ask whether anyone was wiser than Socrates, to which the god replied that there was not. When Chaerephon referred this to Socrates, he took it as a riddle, for he did not possess wisdom, great or small, but it was contrary to the nature of the gods to lie.
Thus, Socrates went on a “divine mission” to solve the paradox (that an ignorant man could also be the wisest person in town) and tried to prove that God was wrong. After this, proclaiming himself the voice of the oracle (23e), he proceeds to systematically question the politicians, poets, and craftsmen, determining in the end that the former are imposters, the latter did not understand their own works as visionaries and prophets do not understand their visions, and that the third group are not spared from being pretentious. For his part, he asks himself if he would prefer being an imposter, like the people he is talking about. Again speaking as the voice of the oracle, he says no, preferring to be himself.
Socrates says that these indiscriminate questions earned him the reputation of being nosy or curious, but from there he interprets his life mission as proof that true wisdom belongs exclusively to the gods and that human wisdom has little or no value. Having disproved the prejudices, Socrates begins to fend off possible indictment for corruption of youth and atheism.
The first thing that Socrates does is to question the accuser, Meletus, whose name means “the one who cares”, no matter what he says he cares about. While interrogating Meletus, he says no one intentionally corrupts another, because then he would risk harming them in the future. This issue of corruption is important for two reasons: first, it appears to be the most serious charge against him, the corrupting of the youth by teaching a version of atheism, and second, because Socrates claims that if Meletus is convinced, it must be because Aristophanes corrupted the minds of his audience when they were young (with his play The Clouds, written 24 years earlier).
He must then defend against the accusation of atheism, setting a trap for Meletus until he is contradicted by saying that Socrates is an atheist and believes in demigods and spirits. Socrates humiliates Meletus by asking the court if it has passed a test that shows if he can identify logical contradictions.
In one of the more controversial parts of the play,
Socrates argues that there has been no greater good for Athens than his concern for his fellow citizens, that wealth is a consequence of goodness, and the gods do not allow a good man is damaged by a worse than him. Claims to be a gadfly and lazy was a great horse that needs to be awakened.
To test this, Socrates reminds the jury of his daimon which he sees as a supernatural experience. Recognizes suspect this will actually invented many gods but makes no concessions in this regard, despite being aware that this would raise suspicions. Proclaims Socrates never been a teacher, since he has not given his knowledge to others. For this reason he is not guilty of doing what other citizens. If someone has corrupted says, why not attend as witnesses?, If they are corrupt, why has not the family interceded on their behalf? many of these relatives also attended the trial in defense of Socrates.
To conclude this part, Socrates reminds jurors will not use the common tricks of crying, or bring their three children to bring their compassion. He claims not to fear death and says he does not act in ways contrary to their religious duty, as fully rely on their strong arguments and the truth to earn the verdict. The jury, however, finds him guilty by 281 votes to 220.
Part Two
Socrates proposes an alternative punishment that does not generate popularity. As a benefactor of Athens offers free meals in the Prytaneion, one of the buildings which housed members of the assembly, which was an honor reserved for athletes and other important citizens. Takes after prison followed by a fine of 100 drachmas, not having enough money to pay a higher fine. The jury, considering a very small sum compared to the punishment proposed by the prosecution, opt for the death sentence. Socrates’ friends are preparing to increase the initial amount to 3,000 drachmas, but the assembly does not see this as an alternative, as are decided by the penalty of death by drinking hemlock.
Part Three
The alternative proposal by Socrates angered the jury. 360 voted for the death sentence, and only 141 voted for the fine of 3,000 drachmas. Socrates, then, responds to verdict, referring first to those who vote for his death. He claims that is not the absence of argument on their part which has reacted to his sentence, but lowered their revulsion at the usual sentimental practices that could be expected of anyone who faces a death sentence and insists, again, that the approach of death does not absolve one from following the path of goodness and truth. Prophesies that younger and harsh critics follow their steps, subjecting them to a more rigorous examination of their own lives.
For those who voted in favor said that his “daimon” would not stop him in his speech as he considered was the right way to act. As a result, the death must be a blessing for, or be the annihilation (bringing peace to all your worries) or a migration to another place where knowing the souls of people as famous as Hesiod and Homer and heroes like Odysseus, with the can continue its work to question everything.
Apology Socrates concludes by saying that no hard feelings against those who have been charged and convicted, and in an act of total trust asked to care for her three sons as they grow, ensuring that they bring good things ahead of their own interest .
At the end of everything, Sócatres says: “It’s time to go, I to die and you to live. Who among us is going to a better life, no one knows, only the gods know”