The Apology

The Apology Study Question #1: Socrates defends himself against two sets of accusations.

1. What is the first set?
1. Who are the accusers?
2. What three responses does he present to these accusations?
2. What is the second set of accusations?
1. Who are the accusers?
2. Who does Socrates cross-examine? In what four ways does Socrates attack this man’s accusations?

In “The Apology” by Plato, Plato retells the defense – the apology – of Socrates used at the trial that resulted in his death sentence. Socrates has been accused of several crimes against the State, and defines his accusers as “two kinds; one recent, the other ancient”. (Plato 2)

Socrates is accused of being a corrupter of youth; a non-believer in the state-sanctioned Gods, one who questions the common beliefs and teaches that questioning is what one should do. He answers to the “ancient” accusers first, which is public opinion. People have heard for years that “Socrates is an evil-doer, and a curious person, who searches into things under the earth and in heaven, and he makes the worse appear the better cause; and he teaches the aforesaid doctrines to others.” (2). More concisely, he is accused of dabbling in natural philosophy (perhaps magic), of being a teacher who takes money from students but doesn’t teach “good” things, and of saying he is a wise man. The logic behind these accusations is simple: since so many people say he is “evil”, he must be guilty of such.

To the accusation of dabbling in “natural philosophy,” he simply states he does not do this, and that there are many in the room to attest to this. To the accusation of being a teacher who takes money from students, he again states that it is simply not true and goes on to name several teachers who do take money from students, often luring them to move to other cities. He defends himself also by saying that it is not his fault that young people – often from rich families – like to hear him talk and question people, and that by their doing so, they being to ask questions themselves. He does not encourage such disrespectful behavior in the young directly, just by example, and it is not his fault or responsibility that people follow his example.

He is also accused of saying he is a wise man, which he doesn’t entirely refute, since he does believe that he has a “kind of wisdom…wisdom such as may perhaps be attained by man” (2). His defense to this accusation is simple: the oracle at Delphi, when questioned who was the wisest man, said “Socrates,” and when asked if any man was wiser than Socrates was, stated “no.”

Being true to himself, Socrates had to question the Oracle’s pronouncement and searched for a wiser man than he. He talked with and questioned numerous people who thought they were wise or had a reputation for wisdom, including politicians, poets, and artisans. While he found that many had much knowledge, he did not find any that he felt were wiser than he, even though he himself knows nothing. In fact, his questioning of these people about their wisdom caused them to become angry with Socrates, which is the root of much of the public opinion about him. Ultimately, Socrates answer to his being wise is that he knows nothing, and “that God only is wise” (4).

The second set of accusers are individuals, including Lycon, Anytos, Meletos who he cross-examines. Their accusations are that “Socrates is a doer of evil, who corrupts the youth; and who does not believe in the gods of the state, but has other new divinities of his own” (5).

In Socrates’ cross-examination of Meletos, he attacks his accusations in four ways. First, he asks Meletos if he is the corrupter of youth, then who is the improver of youth. Meletos responds that “the laws” are the improver, which Socrates considers a non-answer, and asks for a person that is an improver (6). Meletos then states that the judges, senators, members of the assembly, and in fact all Athenians with the exception of Socrates are improvers of the youth (6). Socrates, through some logic, counters this statement with an analogy about horses and horse trainers – if all were improvers of horses, then all would be trainers, but it is well-known that not all people are horse trainers (and doers of good to horses) that in fact some people cause injury to horses and are not good for horses. Using this logic, such could be said true of people – some are good for the youth, some are not, and that it would be a happy condition indeed if there was only one corrupter of youth (6).

Socrates also, again through logic, questions Meletos why would he want to corrupt youth – or anyone else – in the city, when he himself has to live with these same people (7). That it would only be causing himself harm to intentionally reduce the quality of the people he has to live with in the city.

Meletos has also accused Socrates of teaching people to not believe in the state-sanctioned gods, but instead to believe in some new divinities (7). When questioned, Meletos says that Socrates is a complete atheist, which Socrates counters by saying he cannot be a complete atheist if he believes in some gods but not others, that is a contradiction. He further counters Meletos’ accusation by saying that one cannot believe in the creations of man – or gods – without also believing in the existence of the creators of such creations (8). That one cannot believe in the sons of gods if one doesn’t also believe in the fathers of such gods.

The court does find Socrates guilty of the accusations against him and sentences him to death. How unfortunate for Socrates, for he has no desire to die, but if die he must, at least he dies knowing he remained true to his life, his life’s work, his beliefs and himself right up to the end. Ultimately, the only crimes Socrates was truly guilty of are that of being a man ahead of his time and one who had the audacity to not blindly follow the conventional wisdom and beliefs of his time without question.

Works Cited

Plato. The Apology. Trans. Benjamin Jowett. Project Gutenberg. Sue Asscher. February 1999. 6 October 2003. http://www.ibiblio.org/gutenberg/etext99/pplgy10.txt

Written for Professor Hartman's Survey of Humanities I class at Pikes Peak Community College, 13th October 2003