On trial for “corrupting the minds of the young, and of believing in supernatural things of his own invention,”(48) Socrates must defend himself in front of the jury, and acquit himself of Meletus’ allegations. If his conversation with Euthyphro was any indication, one can easily see that Socrates’ “improvised thoughts in the first words that occur”(39) to him may not absolve him of his charges.
Socrates claims to have “not the slightest skill as a speaker.”(39) He is, however, able to dissect the words of others to form a staunch argument that casts doubt onto the validity of his litigant’s accusations. A perfect example can be seen in the cross examination between Socrates and Meletus. Socrates defends himself by reasoning that all of the jurymen, Councillors, members of the assembly, and whole population may influence the youth, but Socrates alone corrupts them.
My question is why didn’t Socrates focus more on further advancing his defense as opposed to making a mockery of his accusers? Instead of insulting Meletus by saying he is “tongue-tied”(49) and accusing Meletus of insufficiently dedicating his attention to the youth, why didn’t Socrates provide an explanation for his role in society?
There is almost a demeaning quality to the way Socrates dismantles the words of those he speaks to. He remains calm, presents one side of an argument, and then follows with the opposing side of the argument. He seems to have a unique method of learning through discussion. By constantly questioning that which is submitted to him, he unearths several different viewpoints in order to arrive at the truth. Socrates considers himself “sent to this city as a gift from God.”(57) He humbly acknowledges his ignorance, but he is aware that he possesses a gift.
Why then, is Socrates as composed as he would be on any other day? He doesn’t show the faintest sign of agitation, nor does he fear death. Even if he is acquitted, Socrates states that he would continue philosophizing. He is content with his life, and the role he has played in society. Wouldn’t he wish to continue living his life, at least in private so hat he may continue thinking and uncovering new truths? When Socrates speaks to the members of the jury he speaks of the tranquility he believes one finds in death. Could it be that Socrates is simply at a point where he is ready to die?
My final question pertains to whether Socrates is indeed guilty. He is charged with corrupting the youth, so the question would be whether or not Socrates’ teachings were contributing to the excellence of the youth. If his teachings were contributing to fulfilling the youth’s personalities and an overall goal of achieving excellence, then it would seem Socrates was unjustly put to death. However, since his teachings were going against what was accepted at the time, was he in fact corrupting society? Does it matter that Socrates’ teachings were understood at a later time, or should he be judged based on what was accepted under he conditions in which he lived?
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
To answer the first string of questions:
The point of Socrates’ defense was not to make a mockery scene of his accusers, and it’s important to understand this. He is simply speaking on his own terms, which many people are afraid to do (even nowadays) for fear of what others will say or do in response. He is the perfect example of someone who speaks with no boundaries. It’s like the saying, “to speak without a filter.” Socrates’ role in society is to simply be himself and to question others to gain more knowledge for himself so he can help himself and others better understand the world. He is not going to change to fit anyone else’s rules or laws. Naturally, we all may think, “Well, that’s stupid! Socrates should just beg for his freedom and argue that he would discontinue his debates in order to live.” However, this is NOT what Socrates wants. He doesn’t believe that he has any reason to beg for his life, in fact, he argues that there is no point in being afraid of death. Just because he has not experienced death doesn’t mean he should be afraid to encounter it. He isn’t going to conform to sway the jury to get what he wants; he is going to tell it how it is, despite what the outcome may be.
To answer the second string of questions:
Of course Socrates wants to continue living, but as I said before, he will not conform in order to do so. He is ignorant to many things, and is still struggling to find the answers. However, if death comes to him now, then so be it. He is ready to embrace death, as is for all other things.
To answer the third string of questions:
I think the reason Socrates is so popular is because he has a trait that many people don’t—to acknowledge and completely examine all sides of the issue before making a decision as to how things are. The best part is that I believe Socrates’ teaching were, in fact, understood at the time. The fact that others understood them was the reason why he was sentenced. It made people angry when they realized that no one actually knew things as they were. Why? Generally, all people find comfort in knowing things. Why do you think most countries are all so eager to have excellent education systems? Why do we ask questions? There is a huge discomfort in NOT knowing things. A perfect example is why it is so easy to fall into a religion. If we believe in the afterlife it is so much easier to accept death. When people began to realize that the foundation behind all of their knowledge might be based on only certain material (and a lack of other material) they freaked out. They insist that they are right and do not want to know about other possibilities. Who does this Socrates’ guy think he is anyway? Execute him! They would rather believe in something that is false than acknowledge that they don’t actually know.
Dan, you raise an interesting point about whether Socrates is ready to die. Throughout the chapter, he seems to accept death and not accept it as something bad, but good. I think he does this to scare the jury. He mentions how he will be able to talk to all the others who were unjustly put to death and that his prosecution will haunt them.
Another part I found interesting was when he used God to defend his posiston by simply saying that God created him to spread his philosophical thoughts. If he were to be sentenced to death, there would'nt be anyone in the world to replace him. So he was basically trying to say that the jury is doing something unholy against God by destroying His creation. Who is the jury to determine whether someone should be put to their death bed or not? They cannot act as God. This is unholy. If Socrates is being sentenced to death because of his supposed teachings against god, which is unholy to the jury, then why isn't the jury's decision of killing someone holy? It doesn't make sense.
Overall, Socrates knows what he is doing. He may act ignorant, but it doesn't necessarily mean he is. His choice of words and the way he talks can easily trick someone and prove he or she wrong. Whatever tactic he pulled on Meleneus and Euthyphro, he pulled on the jury without them realizing. They sentence him to death becuase they simply do not like him and the fact that he sees the truth in everyone, by making them feel like they are not as wise as they thought they were. They fear Socrates and his philosophical views. His ideas are so powerful that it can change the society by breaking the relationship between religion and the law.
Your point about how Socrates remains calm in the midst of his argument for essentially life or death is one of importance. I find it interesting how Socrates can articulate him self in every which way that those listening find it hard to disagree. My question would be about his claim of ignorance. Is his lack of fear for death a truly ignorant trait or is it just a mear tactic he uses to suade those against him with his argument of being sent from the Gods? I personally believe that his claim of being sent from the Gods goes hand in hand with his lack of fear for death. If he was truly sent from the Gods then why should he fear death?
It almost seems that Socrates may have slipped a little from his cool calm collected ignorant self. At a point where he could have continued to do what he does best he insults Meletus with an almost frustrated comment. It seems the Socrates could have easily questioned his way in and out of the situation but was his attack at Meletus planned or was it a natural comment made by Socrates?
Language: English (change)
In response to Andrea's comment.I completely agree with you that Socrates is not trying to back down in fear and is speaking freely. I wanted to also note that the reason why Socrates has so many accusers, both the wise men, the craftsman, the poets was their envy towards Socrates. Socrates time and time again disproved all those who claimed they were "wise" and as a result he had created a malicious reputation.
Socrates again can be praised for he knows his own ignorance. Socrates blatantly states that he knows that he is not wise. By acknowledging the fact of his own ignorance he already knows far more than the people who claimed they are wise and masterful of things beyond their comprehension.
In conclusion I must have to applaud Andrea because I completely agree that Socrates is not fearful of the jury but rather trying to persuade their minds and by doing so he is not only trying to rid his accusation but also trying to rid the jury's mind of what is truly wise.
Interesting comments and post.
Some questions:
1) You think that Socrates lies when he claims not to be a skilled speaker? But as we saw in class, he doesn't think he is skilled in the art of courtroom rhetoric--that is an important qualification.
2) Why do you think that Socrates did not offer a sufficient defense and why do you think that he merely tries to belittle his accusers? Are you saying that his defense is a series of ad hominem attacks on his accusers? That I might be able to agree with, to some degree.
3) Socrates' composure seems to follow from the fact that there is no penalty which can threaten him, right?
Unlike Andrea, I think maybe Socrates is ready to die. But I am not sure about this.
4) How were his teachings contrary to the conventional wisdom of the day? I think you might be right about this, but I'd like to know why you think this.
Post a Comment