Plato’s Apology is a detailed account of the trial of the great philosopher, Socrates, in Athens in 399 B.C. Socrates was brought to trial in front of a jury of 501 Athenians for charges of “corrupting the young” as well as impiety (p 28: 24c; p 31: 26c). All of these charges were false, particularly the accusation that Socrates was corrupting the youth of Athens.
As Socrates truthfully explains early in his argument, he is an elderly man and through the course of his life his quest for intellectual actualization and personal betterment has made him unpopular with many citizens of Athens (p 23: 18, 18c). Although Socrates is able to catch his chief accuser, Meletus, in several obvious contradictions through sinewy lines of questioning, he is ultimately unable to sway the majority of the sizable jury to vote in favor of his innocence. The verdict is guilty, and “Meletus asks for the penalty death” (p 39: 35d). Following Meletus’s request comes Socrates’s turn to recommend an alternative sentence. Socrates explains that he does not deserve to be put to death, but rather the life of selfless service to Athens and to the intellectual and spiritual betterment of Athenians should qualify him as worthy of “free meals in the Prytaneum” (p 40: 37).
The jury remains unsympathetic to Socrates, and he is sentenced to death (p 41: 37b). It is in relation to the death sentence that Socrates’s true brilliance becomes evident. In an eloquent and passionate monologue, Socrates explains that he, unlike the many, does not fear death (p 43; 40d). He asserts that he faces a guilty verdict because of the manner of the speech of the argument alone rather than because of factual evidence. Socrates tells the jury that if he, like his accusers, had preyed upon the emotions of the jurymen, he would have emerged as the clear victor. To Socrates, however, this would not have been a warranted victory. He states “I would much rather die after this kind of [factual] defense than live after making the other [emotional] kind” (p 42: 38e).
Socrates presents his most convincing argument regarding his impending death and why he does and should not fear or try to avoid death. This argument in itself is proof of his character. He says that to fear death would be to assume that we are aware of the particulars of the metaphysical things of which human beings cannot possibly be aware, and so “those of us who believe death to be evil are certainly mistaken” (p 43: 40c).
In the last few moments of his address to the jury, audience, and his accusers, Socrates explains that a good man should never fear harm “in life or in death” (p 44; 41d). If he has led a life of virtue and service to the gods and his fellow men no harm can come to him (p 44; 41d). To fear death, he says, would be synonymous with impiety: the very offense of which he is accused. (p 44; 41d) Such teachings cannot possibly be labeled as corruption; rather they are gems. Socrates should have been praised, not prosecuted.
During this heartfelt expression, one cannot ignore the aura of greatness surrounding this man. In the face of death, he does not beg or bargain as is the usual response to such a sentence (p 42: 39). Rather, Socrates presents the most powerful argument in the entire Apology and leaves the Athenians-and us, 2,400 years later-with potent words of wisdom. Socrates, even after having just lost his argument to the Athenian jury by only a slim margin of thirty votes, continues to teach us and challenge us to think in new and unconventional ways (p 39: 36b). He teaches us that we cannot regret the life we live, but rather we must simply strive to live the most virtuous life that we are able to live and accept whatever end result we are faced with with grace and humility. Socrates is right: “it is much more difficult to avoid wickedness [than to avoid death]” (p 42: 39b).
His final statements leave us with a sense of wonder and awe at his dignity. Socrates does not cease to teach, and we, too-as students of philosophy generations after his death-become his pupils. In this way, one can argue that Socrates’s recommended alternative sentence of feasts in his honor fell short of the eventual reality. Socrates has been proven worthy of the respect of mankind through the ages and transcending the test of time, and so, it becomes rather obvious that Socrates played no part in corrupting the youth of Athens. Rather, he has helped to nurture the youth of ancient times as well as the youth of today by challenging us to think critically and to never shy away from our quizzical natures.
