Socrate`s Apology Essay, Research Paper
‘ The Apology is Socrates’ defense at his trial. As the dialogue begins,
Socrates notes that his accusers have cautioned the jury against
Socrates’eloquence, according to Socrates, the difference between him and his
accusers is that Socrates speaks the truth. Socrates distinguished two groups of
accusers: the earlier and the later accusers. The earlier group is the hardest
to defend against, since they do not appear in court. He is all so accused of
being a Sophist: that he is a teacher and takes money for his teaching. He
attempts to explain why he has attracted such a reputation. The oracle was asked
if anyone was wiser than Socrates was. The answer was no, there was no man
wiser. Socrates cannot believe this oracle, so he sets out to disprove it by
finding someone who is wiser. He goes to a politician, who is thought wise by
him self and others. Socrates does not think this man to be wise and tells him
so. As a consequence, the politician hated Socrates, as did others who heard the
questioning. "I am better off, because while he knows nothing but thinks
that he knows, I neither know nor think that I know" (Socrates). He
questioned politicians, poets, and artisans. He finds that the poets do not
write from wisdom, but by genius and inspiration. Meletus charges Socrates with
being "a doer of evil, and corrupter of the youth, and he does not believe
in the gods of the State, and has other new divinities of his own." In his
examination of Meletus, Socrates makes three main points: 1) Meletus has accused
Socrates of being the only corrupter, while everyone else improves the youth.
Socrates then uses an analogy: a horse trainer is to horses as an improver is to
the youth. The point is that there is only one improver, not many. 2) If
Socrates corrupts the youth, either it is intentional or unintentional. No one
would corrupt his neighbor intentionally, because he would harm himself in the
process. If the corruption was unintentional, then the court is not the place to
resolve the problem. The other possibility is that he does not corrupt them at
all. 3) In frustration, Meletus accuses Socrates of being "a complete
atheist," at the same time he claims Socrates teaches new gods. Thus,
Meletus contradicts himself. Socrates argues that fear of death is foolish,
because it is not known if death is a good or an evil, thus there is no reason
to fear death. Socrates claims that his mission is in service to God. This is to
condemn people’s pursuit of money, honor, and reputation, while ignoring wisdom,
truth, and the improvement of the soul. When talking about politicians, he
states that he was a Senator once, and opposed the majority when several
generals were brought to trial. He points out that several of the
"corrupted youth." And their fathers were present, but none of them
were accusing him; rather, they were there in his defense. Socrates refuses to
ask for pity. He does not throw himself on the mercy of the court. Many would
bring in their children to win pity. However, he does mention that he has three
young children. He tells the jury about their responsibility to ignore the
appeals to pity and judge the truth. Despite Socrates’ speech, the jury finds
him guilty as charged. Meletus proposes death as punishment. Instead, Socrates
proposes retirement in a home for benefactors of the state. He examines possible
penalties: death, imprisonment, a fine, or exile. Then, he realizes that exile
is not an option since he believes that "The unexamined life is not worth
living." He finally proposes a fine of 30 minae, guaranteed by Crito,
Plato, and others. The jury sentences him to death. Socrates remarks that his
internal, guiding voice, which at times would warn him to refrain from certain
actions, had not once interrupted his actions in his defense. He argues that
death might be a good: either it is a dreamless sleep, or he will travel to the
place of the dead where he can question anyone and not be executed for it. He
states: "No evil can happen to a good man." He asks the jury to punish
his sons, and provide guidance. If so, then he will have received justice.
"We go our ways: me to die you to live; only God knows which is
better." Throughout the Apology, Socrates believes himself to be a
"teacher, "though he does not say that of himself. He finds reputed
wise men and questions them. If Socrates finds that they believe themselves to
be wiser than they really are, he points out their mistake, thus educates them
and himself. This allows Socrates to learn when he finds other people who know
more about a subject than he. Socrates tells the judges that he will not be
found guilty because of "evidence" and testimony; if he is found
guilty, it will be because of the reputation that he has obtained. As Socrates
deals with the charges, he is constantly talking about himself. If Socrates
wanted to appease the judges so that he would not be found guilty, he could have
made up or omit the parts about himself that caused so much trouble. The fact
that Socrates knows that he is being persecuted for who he is and that he
honestly describes him self, shows that he is staying true to himself and his
beliefs through his trial. Through reason, Socrates is constantly searching for
the truth of what others think. When Meletus accuses Socrates of not believing
in any gods, Socrates then uses reason to refute him. Socrates tells a story
about an oracle, which he states that he believes in, and says that since an
oracle is a divine thing he must believe in divinities. Socrates used reason to
question Meletus and led him to state inconsistent statements: (1) Socrates
corrupts the youth intentionally. (2) Nobody intentionally harms himself. (3)
People who corrupt society ultimately harm themselves. If (1) Socrates corrupts
the youth intentionally and (3) people who corrupt society ultimately harm
themselves, then (2) must be false. However, if (2) nobody intentionally harms
themselves and (3) people who corrupt society ultimately harm themselves is
true, then (1) must be false (since Socrates cannot be corrupting the youth
intentionally). If that is the case, then the court is not the proper place to
discuss it. The second section of the Apology is the speech that Socrates gives
after he is found guilty. In this speech, he is to propose a penalty for his
"crimes." Socrates gives, at first, what he believes that he should
receive for his the actions, and he proposes that he should receive free room
and board. This remark shows Socrates still believes in his mission. Had he
proposed anything else, it would have been to indirectly admit that his beliefs
were wrong. For punishment, Socrates explores the idea of exile. However,
Socrates admits that, if exiled, he would continue to question men about
themselves. Socrates could have escaped death here by submitting to exile and
promising to change his ways, yet again, that would undermine his beliefs. He
then proposes a fine. In all the punishments that he proposes, he never admits
to being wrong or promises to reconsider his ideas. Had he agreed to exile and
silence, he would not have stayed true to himself and his beliefs. Socrates’
philosophy of using reason to find the truth prevents him from telling the jury
what they would like to hear. Each time Socrates proposes a punishment, he
reasons himself out of it and into a worse punishment. The last section of the
Apology deals with Socrates’ speech after he has been sentenced to death. Though
Socrates becomes indignant, he does not become angry. Socrates does not do any
of the "weeping and wailing…[or the] many other things which [he]
maintains are unworthy of [himself]." Socrates believes that if he did, it
would bring shame on himself and his beliefs and that it would be much worse
than death. Socrates claims that he, unlike many others who appear before the
jury, will not appeal to their pity by having his family brought before them.
However, he does describe his family in some detail — including his sons. Here,
he seems to be appealing to pity in a very subtle way. Speaking about his
children, he asks the jury "punish them…if they seem to care about riches
or anything, more than about virtue; or if they…are something when they are
really nothing." Once again, he seems to be instructing or teaching the
jury about his beliefs. Socrates uses reason, once again, to convince himself
that death is not an evil. "…the state of death is one of two things:
either a dead man wholly ceases to be and loses all consciousness or, as we are
told, it is a change and a migration of the soul to another place."
Socrates goes on to say that, since neither of those two states of being can be
bad, death shouldn’t be feared. His philosophy of reason allows him to look at
death in a way that he does not have to be afraid of it. Socrates believes in
holding on to his principle regardless of the consequences, even if they involve
death. Concern for him self is not nearly as important as the pursuit of the
good, the true, and the just. As a result, it is far better to suffer injustice
than, through ignorance, to cause it. Justice seems to be the prevalent theme,
since this dialogue deals with the injustice against Socrates. One inconsistency
is that in Crito he seemed universally opposed to violating the law, while in
the Apology there seem to be exceptions to this belief. For example, he opposed
the government actions (the law of the State) on two occasions. The speech that
Socrates gives reflects the indignation he feels over injustice that he has
received. However, a theme of courage in the face of death seems to be
emphasized. Also, the point about staying true to oneself and beliefs, and the
search for truth by way of reason is a policy we should all adopt.