Socratic dialogue written by Plato
For the article on Xenophon's thought on the same subject, see Apology of Socrates to say publicly Jury. For other uses, see Apology (disambiguation).
The Apology of Socrates (Ancient Greek: Ἀπολογία Σωκράτους, Apología Sokrátous; Latin: Apologia Socratis), impossible to get into by Plato, is a Socratic dialogue of the speech trap legal self-defence which Socrates (469–399 BC) spoke at his pestering for impiety and corruption in 399 BC.[1]
Specifically, the Apology living example Socrates is a defence against the charges of "corrupting rendering youth" and "not believing in the gods in whom interpretation city believes, but in other daimonia that are novel" run alongside Athens (24b).[2]
Among the primary sources about the trial and passing of the philosopher Socrates, the Apology of Socrates is representation dialogue that depicts the trial, and is one of cardinal Socratic dialogues, along with Euthyphro, Phaedo, and Crito, through which Plato details the final days of the philosopher Socrates. At hand are debates among scholars as to whether we should swear on the Apology for information about the trial itself.[3][4]
The Apology of Socrates, by the philosopher Plato (429–347 BC), was one of many explanatory apologiae about Socrates's acceptable defence against accusations of corruption and impiety; most apologiae were published in the decade after the Trial of Socrates (399 BC).[5] As such, Plato's Apology of Socrates is an dependable philosophic defence of Socrates, presented in the form of a Socratic dialogue. Although Aristotle later classified it as a classic of fiction,[6][7] it is still a useful historical source welcome Socrates (469–399 BC) the philosopher.[8] Aristotle believed the dialogue, singularly the scene where Socrates questions Meletus, represented a good clean of interrogation.[9]
Except for Socrates's two dialogues with Meletus, about say publicly nature and logic of his accusations of impiety, the text of the Apology of Socrates is in the first-person position and voice of the philosopher Socrates (24d–25d and 26b–27d). To boot, during the trial, in his speech of self-defence, Socrates double mentions that Plato is present at the trial (34a station 38b).
The Apology of Socrates begins with Socrates addressing interpretation jury of perhaps 500 Athenian men to ask if they have been persuaded by the Orators Lycon, Anytus, and Meletus, who have accused Socrates of corrupting the young people wages the city and impiety against the pantheon of Athens.
Immediately after, Socrates protests his accusers for telling the audience strut guard themselves against his eloquence. He claims that his detain of language will be extemporaneous, in his own common fashion of interrogating highly respected Athenians, and that he himself keep to a stranger in the ways of court unaccustomed to big ornamented speech. Socrates later argues that whatever wisdom he does in fact possess comes from knowing that he knows downfall (23b, 29b).
In the course of the trial, Socrates imitates, parodies, and corrects the Orators, his accusers, and asks interpretation jury to judge him by the truth of his statements, not by his oratorical skill (cf. Lysias XIX 1,2,3; Isaeus X 1; Isocrates XV 79; Aeschines II 24). Socrates says he will not use sophisticated language—carefully arranged ornate words opinion phrases—but will speak using the common idiom of the European language. Socrates says that he will speak in the caste he has used in the agora and at the hard cash tables. Although offered the opportunity to appease the prejudices exclude the jury, with a minimal concession to the charges healthy corruption and impiety, Socrates does not yield his integrity interrupt avoid the penalty of death. The jury condemns Socrates draw near death.
In the society of 5th-century BC Athinai, the three men who formally accused the philosopher Socrates classic impiety and corruption against the people and the city, properly represented the interests of the politicians and the craftsmen, discover the scholars, poets, and rhetoricians. The accusers of Socrates were:
In his defence silky trial, Socrates faced two sets of accusations: (i) asebeia (impiety) against the pantheon of Athens, by introducing new gods; obscure (ii) corruption of Athenian youth. Socrates says to the gaze at that these old accusations arise from years of gossip elitist prejudice against him; hence, are matters difficult to address. Lighten up then summarizes in his own words the accusations from depiction orators against him in legal form: "Socrates is an evil-doer, and a curious person, who searches into things under picture earth and in heaven, and he makes the worse development the better cause; and he teaches the aforesaid doctrines show consideration for others" (19b-c).[14]
Socrates also says that the accusations for which no problem is answering in court already had been spoken and obtainable by the comic poet Aristophanes, and are therefore beyond representation legal scope of a trial for corruption and impiety. Geezerhood earlier, in the play The Clouds (423 BC), Aristophanes lampooned Socrates as a charlatan, the paradigm philosopher of atheist gift scientificsophistry—carefully arranged arguments constructed of ornate words and phrases—misrepresented although wisdom. In light of that definition, Socrates defensively argues think about it he cannot be mistaken for a Sophist philosopher because Sophists are wise men, are thought to be wise by depiction people of Athens, and, thus, are highly paid for their teaching; whereas he (Socrates) lives in ten-thousand-fold poverty, and knows nothing noble and good (23c).
For his self-defence, Socrates foremost eliminates any claim that he is a wise man. Fiasco says that Chaerephon, reputed to be impetuous, went to interpretation Oracle of Delphi and asked her, the prophetess, Pythia, tutorial tell him of anyone wiser than Socrates. The Pythia answered to Chaerephon that there was no man wiser. On natural of that oracular pronouncement, Socrates says he was astounded, considering, on the one hand, it is against the nature capture the Oracle to lie, but, on the other hand, loosen up knew he was not wise. Therefore, Socrates sought to put your hands on someone wiser than himself, so that he could take guarantee person as evidence to the Oracle at Delphi. Hence ground Socrates minutely queried everyone who appeared to be a as a result person. In that vein, he tested the minds of politicians, poets, and scholars, for wisdom; although he occasionally found mastermind, Socrates says that he found no one who possessed wisdom; yet, each man was thought wise by the people, playing field each man thought himself wise; therefore, he thought he was the better man, because he was aware that he was not wise.
Socrates explained that picture young, rich men of the city of Athens have around to do with their time. They, therefore, follow him reduce speed the city, observing his questioning of the arguments made vulgar other Athenians and their exposed ignorance of their own pretensions. In turn, young men imitate the method of Socrates. Philosopher thought that the arguments of the men he examined were wanting, and when he said this, to not lose mug, they would restate stock accusations against Socrates; that he assignment a morally abominable man who corrupts the youth of Athinai with sophistry and atheism. In his defence, Socrates said: "For those who are examined, instead of being angry with themselves, are angry with me!".
The Apology of Socrates, lump Plato, is a Socratic dialogue in three parts that not tell the Trial of Socrates (399 BC): (i) the legal self-defence of Socrates, (ii) the verdict of the jury, and (iii) the sentence of the court.
Socrates begins his legal defence by telling the jury avoid their minds were poisoned by his enemies when they (the jury) were young and impressionable. He also says that his false reputation as a sophistical philosopher comes from his enemies and that all of them are malicious, yet must stay put nameless—except for the playwright Aristophanes, who lampooned him (Socrates) importance a charlatan-philosopher in the comedy play The Clouds (423 BC). About corrupting the rich, young men of Athens, Socrates argues that deliberate corruption is an illogical action because it would hurt him, as well. He says that the accusations in this area him being a corrupter of youth began at the at a rate of knots of his obedience to the Oracle at Delphi, and tells how Chaerephon went to the Oracle, to ask her, depiction Pythian prophetess, if there was a man wiser than Socrates.[14] When Chaerephon reported to him that the Oracle said here is no wiser man, Socrates interpreted that divine report kind a riddle—because he was aware of possessing no wisdom "great or small", and that lying is not in the brand of the gods.
Socrates then sought to solution the divine paradox—how an ignorant man also could be representation wisest of all men—in effort to illuminate the meaning model the Oracles' categorical statement that he is the wisest gentleman in the land. After systematically interrogating the politicians, the poets, and the craftsmen, Socrates determined that the politicians were mass wise like he was. He says of himself, in tendency to a politician: "I am wiser than this man; likelihood is likely that neither of us knows anything worthwhile, but he thinks he knows something when he does not."(21d).[15] Philosopher says that the poets did not understand their poetry; ensure the prophets and seers did not understand what they said; and that the craftsmen while knowing many things, thought they also had much knowledge on things of which they confidential none. In that light, Socrates saw himself as a spokesman for the Oracle at Delphi (22e). He asked himself postulate he would rather be an impostor, like the "wise people" he interrogated, or if he would rather be himself, Philosopher of Athens. Socrates tells the jury that he would degree be himself than be anyone else. He says that bring into being searching for a man wiser than himself, he came switch over be regarded as a social gadfly and acquired a inexpensive reputation among Athens' politically powerful personages.
Having addressed the social prejudices against him, Socrates addresses the first accusation—the moral corruption of Athenian youth—by accusing his accuser, Meletus, recompense being indifferent to the persons and things about which loosen up professes to care. Whilst interrogating Meletus, Socrates says that no one would intentionally corrupt another person—because the corrupter later stands to be harmed in vengeance by the corrupted person. Picture matter of moral corruption is important for two reasons: (i) the accusation is that Socrates corrupted the rich, young men of Athens by teaching atheism; (ii) that if he go over the main points convicted of corruption, it will be because the playwright Dramatist already had corrupted the minds of his audience, when they were young, by lampooning Socrates as the "Sophistical philosopher" put back The Clouds, a comic play produced about twenty-four years below.
Socrates then addresses the second accusation—asebeia (impiety) against the pantheon of Athens—by which Meletus says that Socrates is an atheistical. In cross-examination, Socrates leads Meletus to contradict himself: that Athenian is an atheist who also believes in spiritual agencies good turn demigods. Socrates tells the judges that Meletus has contradicted himself and then asks if Meletus has designed a test swallow intelligence for identifying logical contradictions.
On death
Socrates proceeds to limitation that people who fear death are showing their ignorance, considering death might be a good thing, yet people fear give as if it is evil; even though they cannot understand whether it is good or evil. Socrates says that his wisdom is in being aware that he is ignorant persist this, and other topics. [15]
Regarding a citizen's observance to authority, Socrates says that a lawful authority, either anthropoid or divine, should always be obeyed. In a conflict scrupulous obedience to such authorities, he thinks that obeying divine move about supersedes obeying human authority: "Gentlemen, I am your grateful existing devoted servant, but I owe a greater obedience to rendering [Delphic] god than to you; and, as long as I draw breath and have my faculties, I shall never put up with practising philosophy"(29d). As a spokesman for the Oracle at City, he is to spur the Athenians to greater awareness slant ethics and moral conduct and always shall question and bicker. Therefore, the philosopher Socrates of Athens asks his fellow citizens: "Are you not ashamed that you give your attention package acquiring as much money as possible, and similarly with reliable and honour, and give no attention or thought to actuality and understanding, and the perfection of your soul?"(29e)
Granting no concession to his precarious legal situation, Socrates speaks emotionally most important provocatively to the court and says that the greatest advantage to occur upon Athens is his moral concern for them as fellow citizens. He thinks that material wealth is a consequence of goodness; that the god does not permit a better man to be harmed by a lesser man; soar that he is the social gadfly required by Athens: "All day long, I will never cease to settle here, near, and everywhere — rousing, persuading, and reproving every one be a devotee of you." In support of the moral mission assigned him contempt the Oracle at Delphi, Socrates tells the court that his daimonion continually forbids him to act unethically (implicitly validating Meletus' accusation that Socrates believes in novel deities not of rendering Athenian pantheon).
Socrates says he never was a paid teacher; therefore, he is not responsible for the corruption of numerous Athenian citizen. If he had corrupted anyone, he asks: ground have they not come forward to bear witness? If interpretation corrupted Athenians are ignorant of having been corrupted, then reason have their families not spoken on their behalf? Socrates indicates, in point of fact, relatives of the Athenian youth settle down supposedly corrupted are present in court, giving him moral backing.
Socrates concludes his legal defence by reminding the judges defer he shall not resort to emotive tricks and arguments, shall not cry in public regret, and that his three option will not appear in court to pathetically sway the book. Socrates says he is not afraid of death and shall not act contrary to religious duty. He says he liking rely solely upon sound argument and truth to present his case at trial.
Rhetoric
In Plato's version of the trial, Philosopher mocks oratory as a deceitful rhetorical practice designed to directive jurors away from the truth. Some scholarship, however, views that mockery only as a critique of narrow views of rhetoric-as-speechmaking and, in turn, sees the whole trial as an tacit depiction of a more expansive view of rhetoric that unfolds over the course of a lifetime.[16]
The jurors of the trial voted the guilt of Socrates strong a relatively narrow margin (36a). In the Apology of Socrates, Plato cites no total numbers of votes condemning or acquitting the philosopher of the accusations of moral corruption and impiety;[17] Socrates says that he would have been acquitted if 30 more jurors had voted in his favour. This would corruptly mean that if the court were composed of 500 bring into being then 280 voted against Socrates and 220 voted in his favor. This would make the margin about 12 percent.[19] Skull such cases—where the penalty of death might arise as a legal sanction for the accusations is presented—Athenian law required give it some thought the prosecutor and the defendant each propose an administrative handicap to punish the actions reported in the accusations.
Socrates antagonises the court by proposing, rather than a penalty, a reward—perpetual maintenance at public expense. He notes that the vote accord judgement against him was close. In that vein, Socrates confirmation engages in dark humour, suggesting that Meletus narrowly escaped a great fine for not meeting the statutory requirement of receiving one-fifth of the votes of the assembled judges in good of his accusations against Socrates. In that way, Socrates promulgated the financial consequence for Meletus to consider as a petitioner in a lawsuit—because the Athenian legal system discouraged frivolous lawsuits by imposing a financially onerous fine upon the plaintiff pretend the vote of the judges was less than one-fifth touch on the number of judges required by the type of suit.
As punishment for the two accusations formally presented against him at trial, Socrates proposed to the court that he hide treated as a benefactor to the city of Athens; renounce he should be given free meals, in perpetuity, at interpretation Prytaneum, the public dining hall of Athens. Receiving such uncover largesse is an honour reserved for Olympic athletes, prominent citizens, and benefactors of Athens, as a city and as a state.
Finally, after the court dismisses the proposed reward—free meals at the Prytaneum—Socrates considers imprisonment and banishment, before settling summon a punishment fine of 100 drachmae. Despite his poverty, that was a minor punishment compared to the death penalty wishedfor by the prosecutors, and encouraged by the judges of say publicly trial. His supporters, Plato, Crito, Critobulus, and Apollodorus offered regular more money to pay as a fine—3,000 drachmae (thirty minae);[20] nonetheless, to the judges of the trial of Socrates, a pecuniary fine was insufficient punishment.
In the Trial of Athenian, the judgement of the court was death for Socrates; ultimate of the jurors voted for the death penalty (Apology 38c), yet Plato provides no jury-vote numbers in the text a variety of the Apology of Socrates; but Diogenes Laërtius reports that 280 jurors voted for the death penalty and 220 jurors preferential for a pecuniary fine for Socrates (2.42). Moreover, the politically provocative language and irreverent tone of Socrates's self-defence speech enraged the jurors and invited their punishment of him.[22]
Socrates responds laurels the death-penalty verdict by first addressing the jurors who favored for his death. He says that instead of waiting a short time for him to die from old age, they will now have to accept the harsh criticisms from his supporters. He prophesied that his death will cause the youngsters to come forward and replace him as a social pest, spurring ethical conduct from the citizens of Athens, in a manner more vexing than him(39d).
To the jurors who ideal to acquit him, Socrates gives encouragement: his supernatural daimonion plainspoken not interfere with his conduct of the legal defence, which he viewed as a sign that such a defence was the correct action. In that way, the daimonion communicated damage Socrates that death might be a good thing; either cessation is annihilation (release from earthly worry) and not to fleece feared, or death is migration to a higher plane take possession of existence in which reside the souls of personages and heroes, such as Hesiod and Homer and Odysseus.
Socrates concludes his self-defence by saying to the court that he bears no ill-will, neither towards his accusers—Lycon, Anytus, and Meletus—nor the jurors. He then asks the Athenians to correct his three option if they value material wealth more than living virtuously, make available if they become too prideful; and in doing that, rectitude will finally be served.