APOLOGY
INTRODUCTION
Etymologically the term apology is derived from the Latin word ‘apologia’ which means ‘defense or justification’ and from the Greek word ‘apologia’ which means ‘a speech in defense’. Apology of Socrates is a dialogue by Plato about the legal defense of Socrates when he was legally charged and convicted of the crimes of impiety and corruption. In this defense Socrates is addressing a jury of 500 Athenians who, according to Socrates, were poisoned and biased by the prejudices and gossips against him by the enemies namely, Lycon, who represented the professional rhetoricians as an interest group. Socrates says that Lycon joined the prosecution because he was ‘vexed on behalf of the rhetoricians’[1]. Anytus, a rich and socially prominent Athenian who opposed the sophists on principle. Socrates says that Anytus joined the prosecution because he was ‘vexed on behalf of the artisans and politicians’[2]. Meletus, who was tool of Anytus and he joined the prosecution because he was ‘vexed on behalf of poets’[3], says Socrates. In this trial Socrates faces two sets of accusations namely, i) impiety and ii) corrupter of the Athenian youth.
THE DEFENSE
Socrates begins his defense by critically pointing at his enemies that they have hardly uttered a word of truth and requesting the jury to allow him to speak in his native tongue, without using any kind of systematically well-organized ornate language, as he used to speak in the agora. Then he makes a distinction between the accusations and classifies them into two namely’ i) recent and ii) ancient and he is very much interested to begin with the latter. Then he starts addressing the accusations one by one.
The first and foremost accusation that was made against Socrates as the ‘corrupter of the Athenian youth’. The enemies says that, ‘Socrates is an evil-doer, and a curious person, who searches into things under the earth and in heaven, and he makes the worse appear better course and he teaches the aforesaid doctrines to others’[4]. But in response Socrates says, ‘Meletus is a doer of evil, and the evil is that he makes a joke of a serious matter and is too ready at bringing other men to trial from a pretended zeal and interest about matters in which he really never had the small interest’[5]. While 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. The matter of moral corruption is important for two reasons; i) the accusation is that Socrates corrupted the rich, youth of Athens by teaching them atheism and ii) that if he is convicted of corruption, it will be because of the playwright Aristrophanes already had corrupted the minds of his audience when they were young, by lampooning Socrates as the sophistical philosopher in his play ‘The Clouds’, a comic play produced twenty-four years earlier. And according to Socrates his ultimate mission was to practice philosophy that is to fulfill the desire of God, for he says ‘there is no greater good has happened to the state than my service to God’[6]. And Socrates first and chiefly care about the ‘great improvement of the soul’[7], which in no ways corrupted the youth.
The Wisest man; an Evil Name!
According to Socrates this accusation had a long root. And he explains it. Socrates knew himself that he is ignorant. But being heard from the Pythian prophetess at the Oracle of Delphi that, there is no man wiser than him, illuminated him to reflect. After hearing this, Socrates wanted to solve this Divine paradox- how an ignorant man also could be the wisest of all men. Socrates reflected on this riddle, that if he could only find a man who is wiser than him, then he might go to God with a refutation in his hand and he would say to God that, here is a man who is wiser than him. Accordingly Socrates went in search of a man who is wiser than him. First of all he approached a politician. While interrogating him Socrates could not help thinking that he was not really wise, although who was thought as the wisest by many and wiser still by himself. Later Socrates approached another politician who had more philosophical pretention but the result was exactly the same. Then he examines a poet thinking that he would teach him something but the conclusion was tragic that even the poets could not interpret and understand the meaning of their own works. Then he approaches the artisans but the fate repeated the same. Artisans were well equipped many angles but they were ignorant in many other areas. And he himself witnessed and proved that the Oracle was right, because Socrates at least knew that he knew nothing and he was ready to admit that.
Socrates then addresses the second accusation- impiety against the pantheons of Athens- by which Meletus says that Socrates is an atheist. In cross- examination, Socrates leads Meletus to contradict himself, that Socrates is an atheist also believes in spiritual agents and demigods. Socrates tells the judges that Meletus has contradicted himself and asks if Meletus has designed as a test of intelligence for identifying the logical contradictions.
Then Socrates proceeds to say that ignorance is the inability to distinguish between what is good and what is evil. Then he connects it with death, saying that people who fear death are showing that they are ignorant because death might be a good thing, yet people fear it as evil, even though they cannot know whether it is good or evil. Then he speaks about the authority. As the civilians, people are bound to respect the law of the state made by humans. But there is another law that is the divine law. So if there occurs a conflict between them, Socrates urges, obeying divine authority supersedes the human authority. In a way he defends himself that he is called by God to practice philosophy and thus proclaims himself as the spokesperson of the Oracle of Delphi. So he says that he will not stop practicing philosophy because he owes a greater obedience to God.
SOCRATES’ PROPOSAL FOR HIS SENTENCE
The jury finds Socrates guilty and then Socrates makes a proposal about his sentence. The prosecution proposed a death penalty. They probably expected a counter proposal for exile, but instead, Socrates audaciously proposed the jury that he be rewarded, not punished. According to Plato, Socrates asked for a free meal in the Prytaneum, a public hall in the center of Athens. Socrates’ proposed punishment angered jury and they went on to vote overwhelmingly for death.
SOCRATES’ COMMENT ON HIS SENTENCE
In the trial of Socrates, the judgment of the court was death for Socrates and most of the jurors voted for the death penalty. After being condemned by the jury, Socrates makes the departure remark. He responds by addressing the jury who condemned him to death. More than being a mere remark it was actually a prophecy. He warns them in two ways, i) he asks them to be prepared to accept the criticisms of his followers for having sent him to death before the old age and ii) his death will cause the youngsters to come forward and replace him as social gadfly, spurring the ethical conduct from the citizens of Athens, in a manner more vexing than him. At the end Socrates realizes that the death might be a good thing, either death is an annihilation, a kind of release from the earthly worry and not to be feared or death is a migration to the higher plane of existence in which resides the souls of personage and heroes. He steps back by warning the Athenians to correct his three sons if they value material wealth more than living virtuously or if they become too prideful and in doing that justice will finally be served.
[1] Plato, Apology, trans. Jowett Benjamin, 4
[2] Plato, Apology, trans. Jowett Benjamin, 4
[3] Plato, Apology, trans. Jowett Benjamin, 4
[4] Plato, Apology, trans. Jowett Benjamin, 2
[5] Plato, Apology, trans. Jowett Benjamin, 4
[6] Plato, Apology, trans. Jowett Benjamin, 4
[7]Plato, Apology, trans. Jowett Benjamin, 4
