Socrates Reflection

In the retelling of his trial by his associate, Plato, entitled “The Apology”; Socrates claims in his defense that he only wishes to do good for the polis. I believe that Socrates was innocent of the accusations that were made against him, but he possessed contempt for the court and displayed that in his conceitedness and these actions led to his death.

Ex-convict from South Central Los Angeles, Socrates Fortlow, makes a difference in his community by helping/guiding an 11-year old boy soon to be gang member, Darryl, helps long time friends, Howard and Corina, get their family back in order, and helps get rid of a murderer in the neighborhood, Petis.

Even though Socrates was on his deathbed, he was still teaching and arguing with his students. He wanted his students and friends to understand that it was for the good of society that he dies. I believe Socrates was thinking about the future and how his death would be a lesson for someone else. Socrates was also telling his students that he was not going to disobey the law. Socrates’ students and friends could have taken him to another city. That would have made Socrates a liar about what he was teaching all along. Even though the students and friends were crying and grieving over Socrates’ death, Socrates was not comforting them or fleeing to another city. Socrates was just teaching them his strong belief in justice and loyalty to the government. This was very devastating to his friends.

Perhaps it is the divided sentiments of the vote that impact Socrates, or perhaps just his realization that from the onset, he would have been condemned not matter what his arguments, but Socrates appears to transform himself after the votes are cast. Socrates is given the opportunity to propose an alternative sentence to the death penalty proposed by Meletus, and many men would have begged for mercy, asked for forgiveness, claimed to repent for their actions, and request leniency. Socrates, though, demonstrates not only his strength in his

Socrates should not escape from prison to avoid his death sentence because he would be breaking the law which ultimately led to him straying away from his own principles. He was a person who believed in what was just and doing what was morally correct. If he were to escape from prison, he would essentially be harming others and the State. He thought through harming others, he would be harming himself and his soul, so Socrates did not believe in harming others and thought it was unjust and morally wrong. Even though Socrates had the opportunity to escape and he was given plenty of reasons from his friends to do so, he did not want to go against what he believes in and his philosophy. He could not live a life where he would have to stop

He does this simply because he does not believe that it is just nor noble to allow emotions to overtake a situation that is designed to be dominated by logic and justice. In describing, what he believes to be the function of a jurymen he says, “The judge is not seated to give away the just things as a gratification, but to judge them. For he has not sworn to gratify whoever seems favorable to him, but to give judgment according to the laws.” (35c) He also believes that it is their duty to “Concentrate [their] attention whether what [he] says is just or not, for the excellence of a judge lies in this.” (18a) He presents his case with these ideals in mind. He states the facts and gives logical explanations for the deeds of which he is accused. He expects that the jury will adhere to their duties, as previously prescribed, and acquit him in the face of his logic and superior arguments. This does not come to pass and he is found guilty of all charges and sentenced to death. In examining the verdict, Socrates concludes that the decision could not have been based on justice and reason given the clear justice and reason in his argument and subsequent guilty conviction. He reasons that if the decision was not based on the law of justice, it must have been based on the law of emotion:

Socrates’s offering to the jury is to tell the truth, despite not admitting that it is simply his truth and thus not the entire truth, he is not able to convey to the jury the importance of not killing him. A bad citizen would try to undermine the jury by committing perjury and disobeying the decision of the court. He however, wouldn’t even like it if the jury committed perjury on his behalf, “Socrates says what he means on the stand hold honesty above all else, so when he is offered a chance to escape from his execution he does not take it. By refusing to escape, he reiterates how sticking to agreements is important to him. Socrates' commitment to the societal agreement between him and the city where he is allowed to live in

The problem with Socrates concerns the problem with the role of value and reason. Nietzsche believes that the bulk of philosophers claim that life is a corrupt grievance for mankind. Nietzsche reasoned that these life deniers were decadents of Hellenism, as a symptom of some underlying melancholy. For someone to paint life in such a negative light they must have suffered a great deal through the course of their own life. Furthermore, these no-sayers agreed in various physiological ways and thus adopted the same pessimistic attitudes towards life. Socrates was ugly, alike decadent criminals and by ways of these similarities was decadent as well. Nietzsche also claims ugliness as a physiological symptom of life in its decline supported by studies in phenology.

This perspective of Socrates represented by Plato demonstrates the difference between a man accused of wrong doings and a man who is being condemned. When Socrates is informed of the final decision by the jury he again keeps his composure and states in his defense speech by emphasizing that he is alright with the way he presented himself instead of begging and pleading. Finally, Socrates tells the jury “that there is hope in death and that he will enter into it with no fear”(Yount). His final request is for the jurymen to make sure that his sons grow up in the right way and praises some of the jurors who voted for his innocence.

Socrates suggested that if he were to get what he deserved, he should be honored with a great meal for being of such service to the state. He rejected the sentences of prison or exile, offering instead to pay a fine. When the jury rejected his suggestions and sentenced him to death, Socrates accepted the verdict and said that no one but the gods know what happens after death and so it would be foolish to fear what one does not know. He also warned the people who voted against him that by silencing him rather than listening to him, they have harmed themselves much more than they have harmed him.

During Socrates’ defense against Meletus, Anytus, and Lycon in Plato’s Apology, Socrates states that he will refuse the jury’s decision, regarded as the Law of Athens, if the court were to acquit him on the basis that he stops practicing philosophy. However, later in Plato’s Crito, Socrates explains he cannot escape from prison due to the laws of Athens and thus adheres to the jury’s decision of a death sentence. Despite appearing to contradict himself, Socrates is actually not contradicting himself at all. Socrates asserts that he did nothing wrong in regard to the laws of Athens and has never been a bad example for the youth in comparison to everyone in the audience and jury. If Socrates were to lament and agree to the acquittal in order to live, then he would be going against his philosophical mission from god and would be agreeing that he did do something wrong; this is why Socrates testifies that he would die rather than agree to stop practicing philosophy. Since escaping jail to avoid death would contradict his ideals, Socrates refuses to disobey the laws of Athens, which he always adheres to, and decides he will commit to his sentencing despite the fact he is unjustly convicted. In both cases, Socrates is standing up for his ideals of philosophy and to his notion of goodness, which allows him to sensibly and honestly state that he will adhere to the jury (and therefore the Laws of Athens) in one case and is able to refuse to adhere to their judgments in another.

He knows that if he escaped, it would be a crime. I find it ironic that he would argue his trial, but not argue his punishment from the trial he argued. The bottom line with Socrates and laws is that he probably did not live by them very closely. It is my belief that Socrates was a good person with good morals. He probably saw laws for the weak minded, and he was certain he was not weak minded. The question of whether he would abide by these laws is that he would and he did. He died for them.

They wished for him to formally apologize or the result would be death. The court protested that if he stopped teaching his theory, then the charges against him would be dropped and he would not have the ultimate punishment, being death. Socrates believed that his argument could be sensibly defended without death being the penalty, which is why his apology ceases to apologize for insulting the wise men. He tells the court "if I was bound to be acquitted....you are bound to put me to death, because if I were to escape, all your children would forthwith be utterly corrupted by practicing what Socrates teaches..."(78). Inevitably he dies for protesting the court's wishes to stop teaching his beliefs.

Socrates would rather be punished or die before he breaks the laws that were set forth by his state, and this he says later in the same passage, “I should run any risk on the side of law and justice rather than join you. (Cahn pg. 38 Apology b10-c2).”

Socrates spent his time questioning people about things like virtue, justice, piety and truth. The people Socrates questioned are the people that condemned him to death. Socrates was sentenced to death because people did not like him and they wanted to shut him up for good. There was not any real evidence against Socrates to prove the accusations against him. Socrates was condemned for three major reasons: he told important people exactly what he thought of them, he questioned ideas that had long been the norm, the youth copied his style of questioning for fun, making Athenians think Socrates was teaching the youth to be rebellious. But these reasons were not the charges against him, he was charged with being an atheist and