In ancient Athens, a man was put on trial for corrupting the youth and impiety.
This man was known for his unique way of thinking and questioning the world around him. He was charged with not recognizing the gods recognized by the state and inventing new deities.
But instead of apologizing for his actions, he chose to defend himself and his conduct. This man’s defense, recorded in a work titled “The Apology,” has become one of the most famous speeches in history.
So, what was Socrates’ defense? Let’s take a closer look.
What Was Socrates Defense
Socrates’ defense was not an apology in the modern sense of the word. Instead, he attempted to defend himself against the charges of corrupting the youth and impiety.
He argued that he did not corrupt the youth intentionally, but rather that his questioning and teaching were meant to improve their understanding of the world. He also claimed that he did not believe in new deities, but rather in a divine voice that guided him in his actions.
Socrates then proceeded to interrogate his accusers, exposing their lack of knowledge and understanding of the charges they had brought against him. He likened himself to a gadfly stinging the lazy horse which is the Athenian state, arguing that without him, the state would drift into a deep sleep.
When asked to propose a penalty for his actions, Socrates jokingly suggested that he should be honored with a great meal for being of such service to the state. However, when the jury rejected his suggestion and sentenced him to death, Socrates stoically accepted the verdict.
He warned the jurymen who voted against him that in silencing their critic rather than listening to him, they had harmed themselves much more than they had harmed him. Socrates’ defense was not just about defending himself, but also about exposing the flaws in the Athenian justice system and encouraging people to think critically about their beliefs and actions.
The Charges Against Socrates
Socrates was charged with two crimes: corrupting the youth and impiety. The charge of corrupting the youth stemmed from his habit of questioning people in public and exposing their ignorance. His accusers claimed that by doing so, he was teaching the youth to question authority and undermining the values of Athenian society. Socrates argued that his questioning was meant to improve people’s understanding of the world and that he did not intentionally corrupt the youth.
The charge of impiety was more serious, as it accused Socrates of not believing in the gods of Athens and introducing new deities. The Oracle at Delphi had declared that there was no wiser man than Socrates, which led him to question everyone he met to find someone wiser than himself. This questioning eventually led him to believe that he had a divine mission to question people’s beliefs and actions.
Socrates’ defense against the charge of impiety was based on his belief in a divine voice that guided him in his actions. He argued that he did not believe in new deities but rather in a higher power that spoke to him directly. He also exposed the ignorance of his accusers by showing that they did not understand the nature of the charges they had brought against him.
Socrates’ Philosophy And Way Of Life
Socrates’ philosophy and way of life were deeply intertwined. He believed in the importance of questioning everything, including one’s own beliefs and assumptions. He famously claimed that “the unexamined life is not worth living,” and he lived his life according to this principle.
Socrates did not believe in accumulating wealth or material possessions, and he often lived a simple and austere lifestyle. He also believed in the importance of living a virtuous life, which he saw as essential for achieving happiness and fulfillment.
Socrates’ philosophy was focused on the search for truth and wisdom. He believed that knowledge could only be attained through questioning and examining one’s own beliefs and assumptions. He saw himself as a midwife, helping others to give birth to their own ideas and understanding.
Socrates’ way of life was also characterized by his commitment to speaking the truth, even in the face of opposition or danger. He believed that it was more important to uphold one’s principles than to avoid punishment or harm.
Socrates’ Defense Strategy
Socrates’ defense strategy was multifaceted. He first attempted to refute the charges brought against him by arguing that he did not intentionally corrupt the youth or introduce new deities. He then proceeded to interrogate his accusers, exposing their lack of knowledge and understanding of the charges they had brought against him.
Socrates also used his defense as an opportunity to challenge the beliefs and values of Athenian society. He argued that his questioning and teaching were meant to improve people’s understanding of the world and that his actions were guided by a divine voice.
Furthermore, Socrates likened himself to a gadfly stinging the lazy horse which is the Athenian state, arguing that without him, the state would drift into a deep sleep. He warned the jurymen who voted against him that in silencing their critic rather than listening to him, they had harmed themselves much more than they had harmed him.
The Content Of Socrates’ Defense
During his defense, Socrates argued that he did not corrupt the youth intentionally, but rather that his questioning and teaching were meant to improve their understanding of the world. He also claimed that he did not believe in new deities, but rather in a divine voice that guided him in his actions.
Socrates then proceeded to interrogate his accusers, exposing their lack of knowledge and understanding of the charges they had brought against him. He likened himself to a gadfly stinging the lazy horse which is the Athenian state, arguing that without him, the state would drift into a deep sleep.
When asked to propose a penalty for his actions, Socrates jokingly suggested that he should be honored with a great meal for being of such service to the state. However, when the jury rejected his suggestion and sentenced him to death, Socrates stoically accepted the verdict.
He warned the jurymen who voted against him that in silencing their critic rather than listening to him, they had harmed themselves much more than they had harmed him. Socrates’ defense was not just about defending himself, but also about exposing the flaws in the Athenian justice system and encouraging people to think critically about their beliefs and actions.
The Verdict And Aftermath Of The Trial
After the jury deliberated, Socrates was found guilty by a narrow margin of 280 to 221. Meletus, the prosecutor, had proposed the death penalty, and Socrates was given the opportunity to suggest an alternative form of punishment. However, true to form, Socrates did not ask what penalty he would like to pay, but rather what penalty he deserved.
Despite his belief that he had not intentionally wronged anyone, Socrates rejected most of the penalties that the jury might consider acceptable. Imprisonment would leave him at the mercy of whichever magistrates were in charge of the prisons, and banishment would only result in him being expelled from town to town. Socrates also refused to give up his philosophizing, as it was through this pursuit that he could do his duty to God and pursue goodness.
In the end, Socrates suggested that if he must pay a fee, it be set at one hundred drachmae, a small fee barely within his limited means. However, at the last minute, several young admirers offered some of their own money, raising the fine to three thousand drachmae.
After the verdict was delivered and Socrates was sentenced to death by drinking hemlock, he accepted his fate with stoic calmness. He warned his accusers that their decision to silence him rather than listen to him would ultimately harm themselves more than it would harm him.
The aftermath of Socrates’ trial and execution had a profound impact on philosophy and intellectual discourse. Socrates’ teachings and methods were continued by his students Plato and Xenophon, who recorded their own accounts of the trial and execution. The trial also raised questions about the nature of justice and the role of intellectual inquiry in society that continue to be debated today.
The Legacy Of Socrates’ Defense
Socrates’ defense had a profound impact on philosophy and the Western intellectual tradition. His commitment to truth and his willingness to challenge authority and convention became a model for subsequent generations of thinkers.
His questioning and dialectical method, which involved asking questions to arrive at universal definitions, became a cornerstone of philosophical inquiry. This method was later developed by Plato, who believed that universal knowledge could be attained through a process of recollection.
Socrates’ belief in the importance of examining one’s life and seeking wisdom and virtue also became a central theme in Western philosophy. His famous dictum, “The unexamined life is not worth living,” has been quoted and referenced by countless philosophers and thinkers throughout history.
Furthermore, Socrates’ defense highlighted the importance of critical thinking and the dangers of blindly accepting authority and tradition. His willingness to challenge the Athenian justice system and expose its flaws served as a reminder that justice should be pursued with reason and fairness, rather than blind adherence to the law.
Overall, Socrates’ defense left a lasting legacy on philosophy and intellectual thought. His commitment to truth, critical thinking, and ethical inquiry has inspired generations of thinkers to pursue wisdom and virtue through reason and inquiry.
