Innocence In Plato's Apology
In Plato's dialogue "Apology," Socrates is forced to defend his actions and beliefs to a jury against both official charges brought against him by Meletus and unofficial charges, which Socrates argues throughout the trial. Before the jury, Socrates attempted to justify himself and explain how this slander against him arose. This began with Chaerophon's trip to the Oracle at Delphi and conclusion the Pythian priestess gave that no one was wiser than Socrates. Socrates puzzled over this for some time and unsure whether the priestess was correct began a personal investigation by going to those who appeared to be wise and conversing with them with the expressed purpose of proving the oracle wrong. The charges came about after Socrates had been involved with many of the citizens of Athens over the years. While citizens engaged in discussions with Socrates, many had their beliefs and values questioned and cast into doubt. The response to this was most often confusion and anger. Over the years, this anger took the form of a general resentment against Socrates. Socrates could only conclude that he knew of no one who was wise, including himself, in that he believed his ignorance far outweighed the ignorance of others. These il
As one takes in these reasons for Socrates innocence, some members of the jury could have raised the objection that Socrates is using rhetorical tricks, such as rephrasing the issues, using literary illusions, and claiming from the start that he would not use the devices of a sophist to help his cause, in order to mislead the jury. Suppose for a moment that this was true. While Socrates never claimed to be a sophist, he was undoubtedly a truth seeker. Socrates lived his life seeking definitions and knowledge, not from his personal thoughts and ideas, but by asking others what they felt was, for example, justice and piety. While in the course of these actions Socrates may have in fact used devices such as literary illusions in order to open the eyes of the one he was conversing with in order to explain and demonstrate how another side of their definition or conviction could be viewed. This is hardly a rhetorical trick, or even a criminal action. Socrates was also not misleading the jury in any way, Socrates never apologized for his actions but defended them, in a way pronouncing his own guilt of these charges of which no guilt should befall him. He was extremely straightforward in telling them that yes, he discussed things with the youth, through their own free will, never forcing his own ideas and beliefs upon them. As stated earlier, Socrates did not think of himself as a wise man, he even went as far as to refer to himself as ignorant. Some might accuse him of using this statement as a rhetorical trick however; as stated earlier he did not deny the charges against him directly. Still one could accuse him of using these rhetorical tricks in order to lure the youth to listen to him, despite his claim that they listened to his teaching on their own free will. This could also be true, but one must put this idea into another perspective and decide for oneself if this is in fact the case. People in general enjoy being entertained go to great lengths in order to be entertained. These means of entertainment can be anything from plays to speakers that one finds personally interesting. One must also realize that there is not always truth in what they hear and learn from these modes of entertainment, but one should be able to attend these functions and walk away from them taking only what they feel is needed for growth in their personal lives. Socrates works in this same manner. He is, in a way an entertainer, speaking to those who want to hear, much like a play in which the audience realizes the content is fiction, yet attends despite that fact. No one accuses playwrights and actors of corrupting the youth when in fact they lure in the youth using what could be considered a rhetorical trick, acting. Socrates simply discusses his beliefs some feel that he uses these tricks to lure them into listening and there is nothing wrong in believing that. However, those who believe this are very insecure about how their own beliefs and can be carelessly shaped and molded. When someone overhears others involved in a discussion, for instance about the benefits of killing their family, they should be secure enough in their own beliefs to decide if there is merit to what is being discussed, despite the tricks used to lure someone into listening to them. These arguments should in themselves provide ample evidence to prove Socrates innocent of the biased and partially unfounded charges brought against him. The evidence set before the jury as well as the lack of evidence presented should give the jury no other choice but to find Socrates innocent. If however the jury is so biased and misled as to find him guilty, then a p
Some common words found in the essay are:
Apology Socrates, Socrates Socrates, Athens Socrates, charges brought, Oracle Delphi, citizens athens, guilty verdict, ideas beliefs, , penalty death, surrounded corrupt, rhetorical trick, argument worse, tricks lure, corrupting youth, official charges brought, tricks lure listening, using rhetorical tricks, charges brought meletus, charges brought socrates,
Approximate Word count = 2458
Approximate Pages = 10 (250 words per page double spaced)
|