Socrates's Argument Analysis

     Socrates’ argument was unique in that he tried to convince the jury he was just an average man and not to be feared, but in actuality demonstrated how clever and tenacious he was. He begins with an anecdote of his visit to the Oracle of Delphi, which told him that there was no man smarter than he. He, being as humble as he is, could not take the Oracle’s answer for granted and went about questioning Athenians he felt surpassed his intelligence. However, in questioning

Living in a democracy, everyone is exposed through television and other various forms of media everyday to numerous trials by jury. Usually they are rarely given a second thought, but every once in a while along comes a specific trial which captures the attention of the entire country. This goes the same for trials throughout centuries in our past. Although they did not have the same forms of media as in this, modern era, there were still specific trials in which everyone knew about. One trial that stands out is the one against the great philosopher Socrates. Accused of corrupting the youth, being an atheist, and believing in other gods, Socrates faced trial by jury. The early forms of democracy

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

If I were a juror in this trial I would plan to vote note guilty. The basis of my decision would be simple. In Socrates' defense speech he is clear in his arguments, and I was thoroughly convinced when he cross examined Meletus and cornered him on many areas of his charges against Socrates. An example of this is when Socrates says, "All Athenians, it seems, make the young into fine and good men, except me, and I alone corrupt them. Is that what you mean? -- That is most definitely what I mean." Socrates then goes and counter attacks by asking Meletus if this also applies to other animals. Socrates asks if all men improve horses and only one person corrupts them. Socrates ends this small argument by saying "You have made it sufficiently obvious, Meletus, that you have never had any concern for our youth; you show your indifference clearly; that you have given no thought to the subjects about which you bring me to trial." This quote from the text obviously shows that Meletus does not

was led to court because of some accusations that became serious charges and led Socrates to death at the age of seventy. In this essay, the argument between Socrates and Meletus will be examined based on the accusations of corrupting the youths, believing in other gods instead of gods of Athens and making the weaker argument appear stronger and their refutations that show Socrates was actually accused of being a smart speaker.

In The Crito by Socrates, both Crito and Socrates present arguments, one that Socrates should escape prison, and one that he should not. Crito’s argument contains logic fallacies that undermine his argument and make it weak. Therefore, Socrates argument that he should remain in prison and face his death is valid and strong, and is better than Crito’s.

Socrates questions Meletus, one of the men that accused him of corrupting the youth. During this trial, he says that Meletus only pretends to care and be serious of things he has never cared about before. Socrates asks him, “do you not regard it as most important how the youth will be the best possible?” (24 d), and Meletus does not respond at first but then says that the judges and the laws are what shapes the youth to make them better. Socrates defends himself by saying that the only reason they brought him to trial is because they did not like Socrates ignorance and find him irritating. Socrates was the only one who cared about teaching the youth because he understood that they were important and they were the future. “For it would be a great happiness for the young if one alone corrupts them, while the others benefit them. But in fact, Meletus, you have sufficiently displayed that you never yet gave any thought to the young. And you are making your own lack of care plainly apparent, since you have cared nothing about the things for which you bring me in here.” (25

His position had an immense impact on the guilty verdict of his trial because he behaved arrogantly toward the judges who would choose his verdict and punishment. For example Socrates refused to refer to the judges to the as their titles but only as, Athenians. This caused an outrage towards Socrates this was seen as disrespectful. As well Socrates would talk back to the judges, “Do not interrupt me Athenians, with your shouts. Remember the request which I made to you, and do not interrupt my words”(pg. 41). Logically Socrates should have been much more agreeable towards the judges considering the situation he was in, but in contrast he remained true to his philosophical lifestyle and pursued his innocence in a way he felt was best.

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.

According to the majority of the jury members of Athens, Socrates is a corruption to the youth, doer of evil and does not agree with the gods of his people. In the Apology, written by Plato these are the assumptions and accusations Socrates is held in court for. In court, he is faced with what most men fear, being wrongly accused leading to the death sentence. Socrates argues and strives to prove that he has no fear of being hated, being accused of serious crimes, being threatened with punishment, or being put to death.

In court, it was Socrates’ responsibility to defend himself against the accusations. Back then, they had no lawyers, so instead the accused would defend themselves. He calls up Meletus to cross-examine him and proceeds to attack the charges that were made against him. He begins with who improves the youth, and Meletus tries to go around the question and replies that the laws do. Socrates agrees but asks who made the laws—no one but the judges, of course. So he asks Meletus which judge, and then what senator, corrupts the youth too, to which Meletus has answered all that none of them do. Overall, Meletus clearly states before the court that everyone improves the youth but Socrates, which is a ridiculous statement.

Socrates begins by asking Meletus if he thinks that Socrates has corrupted the young by “teach[ing] them not to acknowledge the gods which the state acknowledges, but some other new divinities,” and Meletus agrees that this is the reason for his accusation. However, Meletus further states that Socrates is a complete “atheist,” meaning that he does not believe in god at all. This inconsistency in Meletus’ answers refute the entire accusation that Socrates is an atheist because Meletus already has established that Socrates teaches “other men to acknowledge some gods, and therefore that [he] does believe in gods, and [is] not an entire atheist.” This can also be presented as an argument in which our first premise is (P1) that Atheists do not believe in Gods, our second premise is that (P2) Socrates believes in God, and our conclusion therefore is that (C) Socrates is not an Atheist. This logically proves that Meletus is incorrect in his reasoning and that Socrates is not guilty of teaching the youth not to believe in Gods as a whole, but has only attempted to broaden their minds by introducing them to divinities outside of the state.

One relevant argument Socrates makes quite well is the fact that those bringing charges against him clearly dislike his character and actions. Socrates openly dissenting with political figureheads such as Meletus and Anytus which spurred their disdain for him. He uses this as a ploy to help his jury find him innocent. Though he is correct in asserting the charges against him are brought because his enemies want to see him dealt with, he is not correct in assuming they are inherently wrong in

The accusers, Meletos, Anytos, and Lycon, are all young and trying to make a name for themselves. They begin by telling everyone not to be deceived and to take caution because Socrates is a “clever speaker”. According to Socrates, the difference between him and his accusers is that he speaks the truth. He is on trial for two items, which include, corrupting the youth and impiety. Socrates tells everyone that he has no experience with the court and he will speak the way he is used to by being honest and direct. Socrates explains that his behavior is from the oracle of Apollo at Delphi.      

In his Apology, Plato recounted the trial that led to the execution of his friend and mentor, Socrates. The account revealed that values of Socrates’ accusers and his own fundamentally differed, and that they had been angered because he tried to prove that they had misplaced theirs. Those differences created conflict between the two parties that culminated in his trial. With the understanding that a jury condemned Socrates to death and his defense nevertheless pleased him because he gave it truthfully, it is most sensible to call it a good defense because he felt it was the best that he could do.