Introduction
This paper explores the remarks of the journal entry entitled “Commentary on the Apology,” which discusses the accusations by Meletus against Socrates based on Plato’s Apology. The setting is Socrates’ trial for the accusations of corrupting the youth with false wisdom and of not believing in the gods of Athens but in other new spiritual things.
This paper contains a description of the proceedings of the trial, explanations of Socrates’ unofficial accusations, the official charges against him by Meletus and his corresponding responses, and a discussion of the verdict of his trial and Socrates’ response to it.
Unofficial Accusations Against Socrates
At the start of his defense, Socrates disclaimed himself as an accomplished speaker. He claimed to only seek truth and thus, admitted that he may be a skillful speaker if “skillful speaking” meant “to speak the truth.” He asked for pardon on his language and manner of speaking throughout the trial. Later, he would explain this further among the accusations against him.
Before defending himself against the official charges, Socrates thought it important to defend himself against accusations that contributed to his being brought to trial. One accusation was that he busied himself studying things in the sky and below the earth (Plato 23). Socrates invited the jury and his prosecutors to present evidence of this – that he had spoken about such scientific matters.
He continued to state that this is a lie, claiming he knew nothing nor did he attempt to know anything about scientific wisdom concerning the world. He also did not teach these to others. His evidence was that he did not charge any fee.
Another accusation of him stemmed from so long ago, he claimed. He stated it difficult to deal with this accusation since his enemies would speak to others, often at an age when they were easiest to influence. Socrates argued that they “won their case by default as there was no defense” (Plato 22). This accusation was of him making the worse argument seem the stronger, a trait common of sophists.
Socrates explained that the God of Delphi through the Delphic oracle, a seer who received the god’s messages, claimed him wise. Puzzled by this proclamation, Socrates sought men who were considered wise in order to understand. He questioned politicians, poets, and craftsmen in this pursuit and recognized that they were not at all very wise as they claimed to be.
Socrates recognized that he must be wiser if only because he knows that he knows nothing while the ‘wise’ men he interviewed thought they know something. Socrates thought it his duty to expose their falsehoods through his method of question, which produced contempt from these ‘wise’ people. He cites this as the reason for his being put to trial.
Sophists were professionals who taught argument skills useful in any situation, but especially in law, for a price (Athabasca 15). The author gave an example of how politicians frame their arguments. They do so by suppressing important facts, arguing with a less informed or less intelligent person, attacking the opponent’s reputation instead of his argument, and confusing the opponent with language and words.
Socrates was being accused of sophistry, of exploiting people’s weaknesses and ignorance to manipulate their opinions. Not only did he deny the accusations against him, Socrates also showed that they cannot be true. First, he distinguished himself from the sophists claiming he does not charge fees and merely seeks the truth.
Next he had the audience examine how he came to be known as a sophist – through people’s misunderstanding of his method of truth-seeking. Socrates would question people known to be wise in their field in a way that revealed that they were not really experts. He realized that these people think they know something when in fact they do not. By this method, the people he angered accused him of sophistry.
Unlike the sophists though, who promoted skills in argumentation, Socrates claimed to only seek wisdom. He would admit that he does not know everything while others would delude themselves their knowledge. He explained this to illustrate his motives with his manner.
The youth of Athens took to imitating Socrates’ method, resulting in more people being ridiculed. These embarrassed people blamed Socrates for the behavior of the youth. Socrates defended himself by stating that he did not teach the youth in exchange for fees and that they acted of their own free will, thus he cannot be held responsible for their actions.
Charges Against Socrates by Meletus
Socrates was brought to court after charges were made against him by Meletus. Meletus is one of many whom Socrates, in his usual perch in the marketplace, questioned and revealed to be not so knowledgeable about his field. It is Meletus who charged and persecuted Socrates in this trial.
The charges against Socrates were that he studied things concerning the earth and the sky, corrupted young minds with false wisdom and believed in the gods of Athens but in other spiritual things.
For corrupting the youth’s minds, Socrates showed that this cannot be true. He did this by questioning Meletus in his usual method. Socrates claimed Meletus was unreasonable by making this accusation.
He accused Meletus of acting frivolously about serious things, of being irresponsible in bringing Socrates to court, and of pretending to care about the welfare of the young people. Socrates presented his counter-assessments towards these in reverse order, showing the last argument refuting the next.
Socrates showed, through questioning Meletus, that Meletus was not really concerned about the welfare of the youth despite claiming to be so. Socrates asked him questions that led to the conclusion that Meletus claimed only Socrates out of everyone present in the court corrupted the minds of the youth.
Socrates countered this accusation with a metaphor concerning horses – that not all men improve horses. One or only a few improves them. He concluded on this note that Meletus was indifferent with the welfare of the youth and gave no thought whatsoever to the subject.
Next, Socrates showed that it is not possible that he willingly corrupts the youth’s minds. He stated that it is either he does not corrupt their minds, or he does so unwillingly. He claimed that corrupting the youth’s minds unwillingly was not grounds for bringing him to court.
The solution to this would simply be to instruct and exhort him, not to punish him. Socrates claimed that if Meletus did think that Socrates was teaching the wrong ideas to the youth, Meletus did not seek Socrates out to instruct him.
In conclusion to his defense on corrupting the youth’s mind, Socrates stated that Meletus was frivolous, accusing Socrates of corrupting those who, of their own free will, follow him about.
For his defense against the accusation of not believing in their gods, Socrates showed that this too cannot be true. He first asked Meletus to clarify the charges against him.
Socrates pointed out that Meletus meant that Socrates did not believe in gods at all, instead of his accusation that Socrates did not believe in the same gods. Meletus contradicted his own charges against Socrates when he accused Socrates of not believing in the gods but believing in their actions.
Socrates stated that it is impossible not to believe in entities’ actions and not believe in the entities themselves! He gave examples of other beings besides gods, such as horses, flute players, and spirits, to further illustrate this point.
It is here that the unofficial accusations against Socrates that he mentioned and defended himself against before were important to note, because he believed the official charges against him were unjust. They were merely used to put him to trial. Socrates claimed that the real reason these men, Meletus and the others, hated him for embarrassing them before, which is not against the law.
The Court’s Verdict and Socrates Response
In the end, the jury voted by a small margin a verdict of guilty against Socrates and Meletus proposed the death penalty. In counter assessment, Socrates did not propose an alternative form of punishment for himself but gave an account of what penalty he deserves.
Because he believed that he occupied himself with discouraging the youth from pursuing selfish ambitions and urged them instead toward mental excellence, he stated that he should deserve a reward instead of a penalty.
Socrates excused what would seem a joke to the jury and claimed he cannot give an appropriate penalty for himself since he simply does not believe he wronged anybody intentionally and claimed also that because of this, penalties the jury would consider to be appropriate would be unjust to him.
He believed people cannot harm themselves knowingly. Thus, he stated that imprisonment and banishment would be pointless penalties for him since he considers it his duty to God that he pursue his philosophical lifestyle.
He added that he would accept the death penalty because he did not know if death would be harmful to him. Lastly, Socrates stated that if he were to pay a fee as penalty, he suggested it be at one hundred drachmae. One hundred drachmae was small to others, but to a poor man as Socrates, it would be sufficient.
After his assessment, the jury voted again and gave him the sentence of death, to which Socrates stated that he does not resent for at seventy he should not.
Works Cited
Athabasca, University. “Philosophy 231 – Introduction to Philosophy-West and East.” Study Guide (2000): 14-19. Print.
Plato. The Trial and Death of Socrates: Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Death Scene from Phaedo. Trans. G. M. A. Grube. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Pub, 2000. Print.