Did Socrates Really Have To “Apologize”

In Socrates’ Apology, Socrates demonstrates and defends his ideologies of practicing philosophy. However, he was accused of corrupting the youth and being impious. Socrates then proceeds in a calm manner to demonstrate that 1.) he is someone who tries to improve others, and 2.) he is not an atheist since Meletus claim that he does not believe in any gods but in fact, he does believe in some kind of gods. My questions towards Socrates’ Apology comes as follow, does Socrates aim to apologize to any extent or whether he had other intentions. I believe Socrates aims not to live his life but rather to withhold his own beliefs since he himself knows that the society will not compensate for his philosophical practices. Why did Socrates have to die? Could he have survived if he acted differently? Was it ethical for him to do such a thing?

Before we look at the dilemma Socrates is facing, we have to look at the Apology and I would like to propose some of my own insights and analysis into some of his rhetoric and specific quotes. Firstly, Socrates starts off his defense by clarifying his position and gives an introduction to his defense. A point to note is that Socrates himself claimed that he will be speaking in a regular, conversational manner (17b-c). Throughout his “apology”, he conversed in a regular and logical rhetoric which is rarely seen in the instance. This is due to the fact that people would bring their families along with them to wail in order to plead for their lives – as Socrates directly referenced from his speech (38d). Another interesting point was that he even cared to make jokes in such circumstance (36d). He claimed that his works for the society should be rewarded by having meals at the Prytaneum instead of facing death. Aside from his rhetoric, some of the arguments that Socrates makes also does not seem that he is trying to achieve the intention of saving his life. For example, “either obey Anytus or not, and either let me go or not, since I would not do otherwise, not even if I were going to die many times (30b).” Socrates straight up does not take any compromise if he is to be restricted from practicing his beliefs. In reasoning for his faith, he even denounces those that tried to harm him. “For Meletus or Anytus would not harm me—he would not even be able to—for I do not suppose it is sanctioned that a better man be harmed by a worse (30c).” He proposes a sort of just and divine in his actions and it would be worse than death to be restricted from practicing it.

In my perspective, Socrates is a martyr that is wise and thoughtful. He had a character that was firm and he withheld his values even before he was to face death. I believe it is very difficult to find individuals that are willing to give up their lives for what they believe in since a lot of people see death as a something matter. However, was it really a wise thing for him to do? Socratic philosophy is radical to the Athenian society and it suffered from heavy political pressure – which likely led to his death trial. His methods of interrogating the public have irritated others and held the accusations on him being impious and corruptive. In response to his accusations, he did not legitimately refute them. He mainly just redefined the accusations according to his own and manipulated the use of wordplay, such as his defense to Meletus’ charges – to prove him illiterate. Despite him believing in the “good” as a god, it ultimately is still considered impious in that he does not properly acknowledge the Greek gods. Fundamentally, Socrates would be convicted legally according to the laws of Athens and it was a dilemma between either he continues to live but not practice his philosophy – by becoming the Sophist (20a), or by living to his morals and values to refuse to change – what he decides to do. From the analysis of Socrates’ speech, I could see his determination and for him, it would be the wise thing to do. He treats as if it was philosophy or nothing, living for him would not be meaningful if he could not practice his philosophy. Hence, it would be the right thing for him to do.

To put into contrast, what inspired me to write this blog post on Socrates’ Apology is the recent events from these few years on radical extremists delivering their opinions and beliefs. Were Athens right or were Socrates right? Well, from the main matters that Socrates critiqued about, Aristophanes claim that a society must have a sense of order to operate. Who is right? Aristophanes or Socrates? I believe there would be an array of answers depending on political opinion and to say who is right or wrong is difficult. Although Socratic philosophy stems his philosophy from identifying the roots and achieve the most virtuous goals, Aristophanes does have a point in that us humans are not perfect and that we have to have authority in order to maintain peace, or else our society will escalate into violence. In spite of the multiple perspectives possible on matters, I believe that ultimately Socrates was killed legally despite me agreeing to his ideologies. His thoughts are harmful to society and question the practices that fundamentally structure society. Hence, in order for Athens to function as it were to be, Socrates has to be killed. Whether this is ethically correct, is another question. However, political reform would be seen as a threat to any form of government. Nowadays, we have extremist groups such as ISIS or Al-Qaeda that voice their opinions in terrorizing methods. They were considered harmful to societal practices as in order to demonstrate their beliefs, they adopt terrorization. This is comparable to Socrates’ “corrupting” practices. These might seem the right thing to do for Socrates, but for someone that believes in Greek gods and have them heavily questioned on their faith. It would just be an act of terrorization, trying to manipulate one’s belief. However, the only difference is that Socrates’ method corrupts the mind instead of kills one another. Again, in this context, it would seem that these extremist groups have to be taken down by the government since they engage in socially harmful practices. However, whether they are ethically right is another issue.

Source:

• Plato, et al. Four Texts on Socrates: Plato’s Euthyphro, Apology, and Crito, and Aristophanes’ Clouds. Cornell University Press, Ithaca [N.Y.], 1984.