Apology for Socrates: summary and analysis of Plato's work

Socrates' Apology It is a work of Plato, which is part of the first dialogues of this. Although there are no works of Socrates, his philosophical thought is known thanks to what his disciples wrote about him.

In this book, Plato reveals the dialogue that his teacher Socrates delivered before the Athenian judges when he was condemned for corrupting the youth and for not believing in the gods.

But who accused Socrates? How did you defend yourself against the charges you were charged with? Let us know the details of the Trial of Socrates by analyzing this work of Plato.

Resume

Socrates' apology can be divided into three parts.

Part one: the accusation

In the first part of Socrates' Apology, the decision of the judges is made known regarding Socrates' guilt.

On his part, the defendant makes it clear that the charges attributed to him are not accurate. He also responds to those who imply that he is a dangerous man by ultimately teaching in secret.

On the other hand, he affirms that if he is accused, all those who have followed his speeches should also be condemned.

Next, Socrates points out the order in which he will carry out his defense, thus he affirms that he will first respond to his accusers.

Later, the accusations to which Socrates tries to answer are revealed.

At the end of the first part, Socrates, by failing to convince the jury, states that he is not afraid of death and assures that he trusts his truth to win the trial. However, the prosecutors find him guilty by 281 votes against him to 220 for him.

Part two: acceptance and grief

After the verdict of the judges, Socrates assumes the conviction of him. Although he considers that they should have condemned him with more votes against him.

Socrates proposes that the death penalty be forgiven if he pays a fine of 30 mines.

Part three: the prophecy

Socrates' attitude defending his position increases his votes against. The jury does not accept the proposal of the defendant and, finally, imposes him to serve the death penalty.

Later, Socrates concludes his dialogue by alluding to the fact that he will not hold a grudge against those who condemn him. Then he says goodbye.

Analysis

The accusers

In his defense, Socrates distinguishes between two types of accusers, on the one hand the old or anonymous accusers, who have spread slander about him for years and, on the other hand, the new accusers, that is, those who have recently brought him to the judgment. The latest are three men who have brought charges against Socrates:

• Meleto: poet
• Scope: political
• Licon: speaker

The accusations

Although Socrates refers to anonymous accusers, the accusations that have brought him to trial have been those of the three new accusers. Who, curiously, represent the unions that Socrates had been criticizing: poets, politicians and speakers. Thus, through the mouth of Melito, the two accusations for which he has been sentenced to trial are made known, these are:

1. Impiety, that is, of not believing in the gods of the State, whom he supposedly substituted with demonic extravagances.
2. Youth corruptionFor many young people were following his discourse and had become his disciples.

The defense of Socrates

It is curious that in his defense Socrates does not try to apologize to anyone for his way of life. Rather, he uses the word to explain to the judges why his way of doing can be beneficial to everyone.

Although, finally, Socrates is condemned, probably because they considered his attitude to be arrogant, in reality the accused did not betray the principles that he defended in life. Also, at some point during the trial, he implies that he is not afraid of death.

But what are the retorts that Socrates uses in defense of him? These are some ideas that are perceived in the text:

Allusion to the sophists

One of the calumnies that were launched towards Socrates was precisely that of corrupting the youth through public teachings carried out in secret. They also accuse him of mixing divine things with earthly things. Therefore, for many Socrates he was a dangerous man.

In his defense, the accused admits that his teachings are not like that of the sophists, his contemporaries, who demanded payment for his teachings. Likewise, he claims that he has never been involved in divine matters.

The oracle and its wisdom

Socrates wonders what may be the origin of the calumnies that have been propagated against him. To which he answers, that his bad reputation is due to the wisdom that apparently exists in him. Although Socrates is not considered wise.

Instead, he takes as an example the oracle of Delphi. As he explains, his friend Cherephon asked the oracle if there was a smarter man than Socrates. The pythia answered no.

Later, Socrates convinced that he could not be the wisest decided to investigate among the guilds that represent wisdom. He dialogued with politicians, poets, and speakers. He then states that everyone "believed they knew more than they really knew." He thus establishes a comparison between them and himself:

But this is the difference, that he thinks he knows even though he doesn't know anything, and I, knowing nothing, I don't think I know.

Here we find the essence of Socrates' philosophical activity, at least that is how his disciple Plato expresses it. For Socrates, true wisdom lay in recognizing that nothing is known.

The method of this philosopher to achieve true knowledge is based on what is known as "Socratic irony", that is, a system that consisted of seeking the truth through dialogue. To do this, Socrates asked the interlocutors questions and, through these questions, helped them understand that, in reality, they did not know anything.

You may also like: I only know that I know nothing

Interrogation of Meleto

Later, Socrates goes directly to Meleto to examine the accusation in which he claims that the philosopher corrupts the youth. To do this, Socrates asks who makes the young better.

After a series of questions, they come to the conclusion that everyone makes young people better, except Socrates. To which, finally, the philosopher highlights:

It is not quite the other way around, that most do not know how to treat them and only a few are capable of making them better.

Socrates dialogues with Meleto, until he leaves him without answers and is in evidence. Through this speech the philosopher tries to defend his way of life. However, he did it by challenging the members of the great guilds of society, which did not benefit him at all.

Final thoughts

Probably if Socrates had begged for compassion from those who judged him, he would have escaped death or would have settled his penalty with exile. However, he did not, he preferred to reflect on why he did not fear death.

Thus, Socrates maintained a rational position in the face of his death. Rather than facing death as an evil, he preferred to accept it as a good:

But if death is like a transit from one place to another, and if, it is said, down there is the whereabouts of all those who have lived, what greater good can be imagined, my judges?

Finally, the jury determined his death, and Socrates before dying warned his accusers that he had no resentment towards them.

Possibly, Socrates with his speech upset his accusers even more, however, with his words he showed that he valued more defending his philosophical principles than preserving his own life.

If you liked this article, you may also be interested in:

• Plato
• Plato's Cave Myth
• Plato's Republic