Why Was Socrates Guilty

In this paper I will examine why Socrates did not attempt to appease the jury in his Apology. Socrates is put on trial for corrupting the youth and believing in gods other than the gods of the city. I believe he chose not to appease the jury for three reasons: he is a man of pride, he does not fear death and additionally finds it shameful to fear death.

Like many scapegoats, Socrates was blamed and hated for having a different outlook on life. He questioned the status quo of society creating an upheaval that Greek citizens felt they had to handle. In 399 B.C, Socrates was killed with hemlock because he corrupted society with his intense questioning. Due to his wisdom, Socrates became a scapegoat for the Greeks simply because they were not prepared to face the reality of knowledge (Fieser). Similarly, all scapegoats like Socrates are faced with blame, hatred, and punishments in order to keep society from realizing they are actually inferior. Because of humans’ unwillingness to admit failure and ignorance, society needs scapegoats to protect their own egos.

The Apology was written by Plato, and relates Socrates’ defense at his trial on charges of corrupting the youth and impiety. Socrates argues that he is innocent of both charges. Plato reports the contents of three speeches delivered by Socrates in his own protection in court which has been arranged over him by the Athenian democrats and has terminated in the death sentence to the great philosopher. The word "apology" in a literal translation means "justification". Plato's purpose when writing "Apology" was to acquit posthumously Socrates from false accusation. In the Apology Socrates defends himself against the charges brought against him by his prosecutor Meletus in two ways. In the first way Socrates describes his method and

A man being executed for simply having different beliefs from his society is quite shocking in this current time period, though the Trial of Socrates depicts just that. In analyzing the Apology and Crito it is important to applaud and recognize how Plato’s use of rhetorical devices depict the law system of Athens in a negative light. In the Crito, Socrates states that he is choosing to die because he does not want to undermine the laws of Athens by fleeing, since he believes that the laws are just even if his sentence is not. Nevertheless, through using ethos to establish Socrates’ moral authority in the Apology and Crito, Plato leads his reader to draw the opposite conclusion about the Athenian judicial system. Leading the reader to question

Socrates is guilty of corrupting the youth, telling us lies, and not believing in the god. As we go through this trial Athenians, I will prove to why Socrates is guilty. I will show you why he should be put to death.

It is challenging to lead a private life while truly fighting for justice. A man can fight for justice through examining the greatest issues in human nature that Socrates found essential to the private life. However, this knowledge can have the biggest effect when brought into the public life such as through teachings. These two things can then combine to reflect how the state should be changed. Socrates sometimes crossed this line himself, even if unknowingly. Through becoming a teacher of the young men who followed him in Athens, Socrates effectively began to enter the public life. He was able to influence others through sharing his conclusions of justice, self-examination, and piety, and by asking relentless questions. Socrates effectively showed that an individual can live a private and a public life, even if Socrates was not directly involved in the policy-making in Athens. An individual can combine these two aspects of life in a productive way allowing her/him to live a full existence. These individuals can become teachers, politicians, and activists who use their focus on justice and piety in their private lives to advocate and create laws that promote true justice for the rest of the

Socrates should remain in prison after evaluating Critos arguments although Socrates’s were stronger. I’ll begin with Crito’s argument and what makes them strong, and what doesn’t. Next, I’ll focus on Socrates arguments and what makes them good and what makes them weak, mainly his focus that living with a bad soul isn’t worth living when you have a bad soul.

Socrates started his life as an average Athen citizen. His parents worked, making an honest living. But as Socrates grew up, he began to realize that his mind questioned things and wondered how come no one else questioned the same things or at least think about the answers to the questions that were not answered. So, as his mind kept wandering, he began to acknowledge the questions that were not answered and sought for those answers. He ended up believing and teaching things to other people, whether it went against the way the Athen government or not, he still continued his work. Making enemies and becoming the topic of conversation, the Athenians began to view Socrates as a threat to their beliefs and way of life and sought to end it. In order to end this, Socrates was accused of blasphemy (Mod1SlideC7). Socrates’s accusers took him to court and after Socrates did not play their game by asking to be sent into exile, and in the end, he was sentenced to death. After reading the textbook and Plato’s writing influenced by Socrates, I realized that in the period of his life Socrates was indeed truly a threat to the Athens society, because he looked for answers that no one else bothered to find which challenged their culture.

To be just or to be served an injustice and obey, this is the very basis of the philosophical dialogue between Socrates and Crito. The Crito begins as one of Socrates’ wealthy friends, Crito, offers Socrates a path to freedom—to escape from Athens. Through the ensuing dialogue, Socrates examines, as a man who is bound by principles of justice, whether an unjust verdict should be responded to with injustice. In the dialogue between Socrates and Crito, Socrates outlines his main arguments and principles that prevent him from escaping under such circumstances.

Socrates sees himself as wiser than other men including the politicians, craftsmen, and poets because he did not go around thinking he knew what he did not know. As a result of this, his character reflected someone who saw himself as superior to others and instead of feeding that ego, he could have been a joined politics and have an influence on the Athenian democracy. If he had done this, people like Meletus and his later accusers would have taken his criticism in a positive way.

Reasoning is all the positive and opposing arguments that support or critique the thesis by using logic. Socrates was accused and charged with being a corruptor of the youth and denying the gods of the city but introducing other divinities. Socrates defends his case by using reasoning and logic. Socrates said that if every Athenian improved the youth while only he corrupts them, then is influence should not have a greater effect than all the Athenians. Socrates didn’t corrupt the youth. Meletus tells Socrates that he does not believe in gods at all. Socrates shows that a person cannot believe in divine activities but not in divinities. He cannot be contradicted; he cannot believe in the gods and not believe in the gods. Socrates uses reasoning and logic throughout his trial.

After wars, disease, political turmoil and superfluous conflicts, Athens had a weak democracy, little morale, but plenty of blame that needed to be place to ease the nerves of suspicious Athenians. Athens, a polis known for its democracy, technological advancements, and accepting environment was the same city-state who sentenced a great philosopher to death for speaking his mind. Socrates was sentenced to death in a supposedly democratic city state because of the thirty tyrants and the betrayal by Alcibiades were all associates with Socrates, who was used as a scapegoat by the suspicious and conservative citizens of Athens who disliked his annoying habit of questioning others and democracy. Socrates was put to death because he

He also had a wife and three young boys who now no longer have a father. He believed the gods to be omnipotent. The city council members charged him of being a theist because he believed in gods, just not the Olympian gods. He was monotheistic, he believed in his personal spirit guided him to follow and believe in nature spirits, also known as the Daimon. His religion influenced other people, mostly children, to think about their religion and why they believed in their twelve gods. As all Greek people know we believe in the Olympian gods which were “The Big Three”, Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades. Socrates did not make his beliefs silent and personal as he spoke freely about them in public. Socrates was asking why the people of Athens followed the gods, which aggravated the people because they were not used to thinking this

The trial and death of Socrates is a book with four dialogues all about the trail that leads to the eventual death of Socrates. The four dialogues are Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, and Phaedo. It will explain the reasoning that brought Socrates to trial in the first place and give us a glimpse into the physiological thought of this time, and in this paper will describe some of the differences today.

In Ancient Greece, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle were all trying to figure out their view of how society should be and each had a slightly different version of their ideal version of the good life. The different versions of these philosophers are going up against the views of Ancient Greeks through the works of Plato’s Apology and Allegory of the Cave. In the Apology, Socrates is on trial for corrupting the youth of Athens, not believing in the Gods, and going against the sophists and their ideals version of the good life. Socrates even