Plato’s Apology: Discussion and Analysis Essay Example

The Athenian judicial system of the time bore little resemblance to the system currently in use in the United States. The jury and the defendant took on the primary roles in judicial proceedings, and there were neither prosecution nor defense attorneys. If a citizen of Athens believed someone had committed a crime, that citizen could petition a magistrate to bring charges against the accused. Juries consisted of citizens who served voluntarily for a period of one year, and these juries heard many cases during this period.
The charges against Socrates at the time of this trial wer5e not the first charges that had been levied against him, though the “old charges” were really accusations of improper behavior rather than actual criminal charges. Because Socrates was not afraid to speak his mind, when he spoke out against powerful figures in the community or expressed ideas that some thought were dangerous, the young people of Athens often listened to what he had to say. He was accused of corrupting the youth of Athens, and of acting as a teacher, though he denied both accusations.

Accused defendants typically addressed the jury themselves, and this is what the title of the Apology refers to. In this context, the term “apology” refers to the manner in which the defendant explains his own actions and defends himself against the charges. The “apology” that Socrates makes in Plato’s work is not an “apology” in the sense that the term is currently used, but is simply Socrates’ explanation to the jury about his actions and behavior, and is also his appeal to the jury that he is innocent of the charges against him.

There were likely a number of reasons why Socrates had earned a bad reputation among some Athenians. He was known as a gadfly, one who did not hesitate to express himself even when that meant saying negative things about important members of the community. Socrates was also portrayed as a buffoon or a ridiculous figure in the play Clouds, and this portrayal may have had an effect on the way he was perceived by the public. Socrates also did not seem to show the proper respect to the deities that were worshipped by the Athenians; this charge of “asebeia,” or impiety, may not have meant that Socrates did not believe in the gods, but may have simply meant that he did not show what some considered the proper respect.

Asebeia is a term for the impiety that Socrates was accused of. According to the charges against him, Socrates did not show the proper respect to the deities. Socrcates denied this charge, and made the argument that it was actually his accusers who did not properly respect god.

During Socrates’ speech to the jury, he discusses how Chaerephon asked the Oracle of Delphi if anyone was wiser than Socrates, and the answer was that there was none wiser. The Oracle was considered to be the absolute truth, and Socrates could be seen as lacking humility for describing Chaerephon’s encounter. At the same time, however, Socrates claims to be humble, and to possess a type of wisdom that might be described in contemporary terms as “common sense.” Socrates makes a point of saying that his wisdom is not “superhuman,” but is instead a very human, normal sort of wisdom. In fact, Socrates makes a point of describing his own “ignorance,” in the sense that he readily admits to having many questions but few answers
8. The statement that Socrates was wise prompted him to explore the nature of wisdom itself. He visited with various members of Athenian society, including artisans, poets, politicians, and others who had “a reputation for wisdom.” What he found in these explorations was that these people did ot seem as wise as he would have expected, or at least wanted, them to be. Although they were thought of as wise by many members of society, and they thought of themselves as wise, Socrates realized that those who thought they had all the answers were far less wise than someone who realizes how little he actually knows.

Socrates was obviously a very wise man, but part of his wisdom was in understanding the limits of his own knowledge of the world. Socrates professed to be ignorant about many things; at the same time, this was a part of his method for making an argument; by arguing his own ignorance in this context, he was also arguing in favor of his own definition of wisdom.

When Socrates refers to the “voice” he hears that admonishes him not to do some things he is “intent on doing,” he implies that it is the voice of god, but it also seems as if he is simply speaking of his own conscience, as he describes how his own form of wisdom makes him feel both superior and humble at the same time. It is clear that Socrates believes himself to be wise in a sense, but it is that very wisdom that prevents him from entering the realm of politics, or of trying to tell the state or the government leaders what to do. Instead he chooses to share his message on a more personal level, as he speaks to his followers (many of whom were the “youth of Athens” that he supposedly corrupted).

Because Socrates simply refused to show any remorse for his actions or admit to any wrongdoing, the jury practically had no choice but to convict him. The death penalty was also the only seeming choice they had, as Socrates practically insisted that if he was found guilty that death was the only punishment he would accept. Of the 501 jurors, it seems that they were almost evenly divided on his conviction, with only 30 votes making the difference between acquittal and guilt.

As Socrates discusses the possibility of receiving the death penalty, he makes it clear that his views on death give him no reason to fear it. If he is too old and frail to enjoy life any longer, then death would be a welcome relief. If death is a final end, and just leads to nothingness, then he will not exist to feel negatively about it; he will simply cease to exist. And if death is the first step towards the next phase of existence, then he welcomes that possibility, which is perfectly in keeping with his lifelong interest in learning new things and having new experiences.

Socrates discusses his children as he addresses the jury regarding his possible penalty. According to Socrates, many people would bring their children in front of the jury to beg for mercy or leniency. Socrates refuses to do so, because he does not feel as if he has done anything wrong, and begging for leniency would be like admitting his own guilt.

It is difficult for me to say whether or not I would have voted to convict Socrates if I were a member of the jury. I like to believe that I would have admired him so greatly that I would have voted for acquittal, but it is possible in the context of the times that I would have agreed with those who believed that he was a danger to society. It seems most likely, however, that Socrates was mostly admired by the younger generations of Athens, and I would probably have sided with those who felt he should be acquitted of the charges against him.

References

Navia, Lewis E. (2007). Socrates: A life examined. Prometheus Books. Amherst, NY.

Navia, Lewis E. (2002). Socratic testimonies. University Press of America. Lanham, MD.