Socrates as a Threat to the Athenian Democracy - Coursework Example

Introduction

Socrates was one of the great philosophers of the ancient Athens. He was born around 470 BC and has two sons and a wife known as Xanthippe. Socrates teachings which came to be known as Socratic Method greatly shaped philosophy. During his stay in Athens, he became both a loyal citizen and a critic of the community's democratic ways of doing things. The heavy criticism of Socrates on Athenian democracy not only led to his consideration as a threat to the democratic society but also led to a crisis in 339 B.C (Colaiaco, 2013). Athens was a city that upheld the values of democracy and had dominant powers in its politics. It was, therefore, anticipated that all kinds of vices would prevail in the city following the form of rule that existed. Since most individuals hate to be challenged in an argument, they tend to take action against those who test them with questions. Socrates was a victim of this scenario. He addressed his democratic audience by saying that he did a right thing to exit the life of politics because when a good citizen fights for justice, then democracy turns against him. This paper examines deeper insights as to how Socrates was considered by the Athenian authorities as a threat to democracy in the city.

Brief Overview of the Socrates Trial Charges

To understand how Socrates was viewed as a danger to the democracy of Athens, it will be important to comprehend the context at which he was judged at the public trail of 399 BCE. Socrates was charged on accounts of two crimes: corrupting the youth in the city with his undemocratic views and impiety. The charges were pressed by Meletus, a voluntary prosecutor, and other democratic citizens in the city. According to Saxonhouse (2005), Socrates said: "I am gadfly which God has given the state and all day long and in all places am always fastening upon you, arousing and persuading and reproaching you" (Saxonhouse, 2005 p21). From these words, it is evident that the impiety charge was not valid. He referred to himself as "a gadfly" and, therefore, there is no way he could be said to be disrespectful to God. On another hand, Socrates was perceived to be a threat to the democracy through his critical opinions and assertions about the society, and this marked the basis of the second account of charge. He was said to be corrupting the minds of youths by arguing that there was a need for bringing up conversations to make significant improvements in Athens. He wanted the citizens of Athens to engage in critical thinking about the factors that influenced their lives, such as the legal system, norms, and traditions.

Critical Views of Socrates about the Democratic Athens

It is interesting that what some scholars regard to as Socrates's critical views appears to be simplistic views against the democratic society. Socrates merely posed questions to the people and authorities with the aim of making people think about themselves. He did not convince or force people to accept his suppositions. As Saxonhouse (2005) observed, Socrates just guided and led the citizens of Athens to think of a better life. Saxonhouse (2005) further wondered why the democratic citizens of Athens went ahead to prosecute Socrates for these views. In The Republic, Plato mentioned that “normal citizens do not always have the ability to make the right decision for the country” (Saxonhouse, 2005 p81). This is why the Athenian authorities deemed Socrates as a threat to the democracy of the city.

Xenophon's writings and Plato's Apology provide an insightful analysis of the perception of ancient Greece about Socrates being a jeopardy to democracy. Both Xenophon and Plato were "intent of distinguishing Socrates as radically as possible from other members of the sophists" or ancient Greece professors. From Xenophon’s view, Socrates was presented as a sophist who utilized argument to support a conventional and traditional comprehension of the virtues (Gray, 2011). On the other hand, in a bid to understand Socrates, Plato argued that Socrates was much more detailed regarding his views on the democracy. From the beginning, he did not present himself as a teacher, and he did what he believed was right regardless of any circumstance. For instance, after being tried at the court, he gave out a speech that was unapologetic of the accounts of charges put on him. In the speech he does not in any way align himself with the values of democracy embraced by other countrymen (Gray, 2011).

The speech by Socrates in the courtroom is depicted as a rhetorical masterpiece. According to Gray (2011), “he proved that his own political convictions are drastically at odds with popular views and that his irritating, idiosyncratic everyday practice of examining the Athenians, followed necessarily from his convictions" (Gray, 2011 p59). From his perspective, he illustrated that he was a loyal citizen who cared about the welfare of the polis and others who continuously acted out of the best interests of the city. In his speech, he additionally defined himself as a uniquely patriotic Athenian. He held that following the citizens' current problematic condition, "doing good," for Socrates, meant to be a social critic. Being a social critic involved questioning fundamental beliefs of the Athenians through conversations at private and public spaces of the city. Socrates was a proving a point that his accusers were fools to the extent that they would go on with business as usual in the democratic city. He criticized the democratic public by showing that true dignity was an affair of the individual soul and not a social matter. To him, the "Socratic politics" did not in any way attempt to persuade the audience. His ethics and teachings were not a matter of social control but a matter of private conscience. The unsympathetic jurors thought that Socrates's speech was persuasive and, therefore, viewed "as essential bulwarks of the democratic order" (Gray, 2011 p47).

Socrates as a Threat to the Athenian Democracy

Socrates was viewed as a person who had capabilities of persuading a critical mass with his arguments. Most of his arguments were anti-democratic. This is why he was treated as a threat to the Athenian democracy. Having been accused of a serious crime of impiety, it was anticipated that Socrates would use his convincing skills to counter the jury. He used his public duty record to show the public that he had executed state’s official services and, therefore, he should be treated as a loyal and patriotic citizen. He argued that his sentiments that did not appeal to the democratic order should not be used to judge him since he was exercising his democratic right. He refers to his military service to the state as a democracy service. "When the commanders that you (humeis) elected to command me stationed me at Potidaea and Amphipolis and Delion, I remained there like anyone else and ran the risk of death" (Huang, 2008 p19). This was one of the verbal statements that Socrates largely used to prove that his undemocratic sentiments were for the best interest of the citizens. He was showing that he was a loyal and patriotic citizen.

From his teachings, it was clear that Socrates was establishing himself distinctively by setting up a different standard of dignified behavior. He distanced himself from the democratic notion of a dignified citizen which was used by the authorities to protect the citizens of "lesser wisdom" (Huang, 2008 p26) against physical or verbal insult. The Athenians regarded democratic dignity as possession of citizenry in a collective way, guaranteed by the people’s collective political will. This was widely applied in the legal system of Athens. Socrates heavily criticized the democratic legal system of Athens by asserting that dignity was supposed to be based a personal standard of virtue. He went further to criticize the judicial system by terming the role of Athenian court was unofficial because it involved an agent of social control. The jurors not only upheld that justice was paramount to the people, but they also defined justice as the will of the democratic citizens (Huang, 2008).

The Apology demonstrates the openly critical utilization of the democratic genre against the rhetoric in the courtroom. Plato presents Socrates’s assertions as radical and provides alternative words that would have been used by him (Ober, 2001). Instead of showing submission and conformity with democratic ethos with an emphasis on collective wisdom and equality through the speech, Socrates employed a form of cultural criticism and provocation. He told the public that they should not think that he has been convicted because of lacking words to persuade them. For him, he was prosecuted for lack of unwillingness and bold shamelessness to utter things that the public would find most pleasant (Ober, 2001).

Socrates posed a threat to the Athenian democracy through his prophecy. He argued that democracy will be in jeopardy in the coming years after his death. Numerous critics will emerge and stubbornly challenge the Athenian beliefs and democratic values. He urged the citizens of Athens to abandon their democratic, ideological, illogical convictions and seek for more logically and better consistent alternatives. For the better part of his life, he thought that he was doing well by being a social critic. He believed that it was a duty given to him by his god and the citizens. This belief fuelled his ideological campaign further making him a greater threat to the Athenian democracy (Ober, 2001).

Ober (2010) observed that Socrates veered from being sympathetic to democracy in two significant ways. Firstly, he had an egalitarian outlook that made him capable of speaking to anyone, irrespective of their status in the society. Secondly, he was capable of convincing his fellow polis that they can attain virtue by taking care of themselves or their souls. He emphasized the mass thinking was corrupting the society and that explained why Athens as a democratic society had all forms of vices. The social control of the government’s key institutions, such as the judicial system subjected the public to bias and corruption. Ober (2010) conceded that Socrates was a critic of the government and thought that the state was being governed wrongly.

The ‘Socratic democracy,’ according to Simpson (2006), was the one that would be made up of individuals who would meet the criteria of qualification. To implement this kind of democracy, the then government of Athens had to be removed in power, and wait for competent persons to be processed by the public and given the opportunity to manage the affairs of the state. This was a sign that Socrates in a way sympathized with democracy, but he was pleased with the way it was practiced in Athens. His emphasis on an individual critical thinking challenged the very fabric that held the Athenian democratic values together.

In Plato’s discussion of Crito, he commented on Socrates’s position on democracy postulating that “democratic knowledge” can be equated to ignorance. The principal duty of a philosopher-citizen was to criticize ignorance. Fetal ramifications should be anticipated in the process from the ‘indecent' democratic public. The injustices that characterize democracy warrant the campaign against it. This was one of the many factors that necessitated the jury to come to a conclusion that Socrates posed a danger to the city's ways of doing things. He was a significant threat to the Athenians social norms, beliefs, ideologies, and democratic values. Socrates was said to have failed to recognize the gods acknowledged by the city. He introduced new gods and anti-democratic teachings to the young people who surrounded him (Simpson, 2006). Despite making reference to the gods and his guide, the words that he uttered to the public were considered ungodly and politically dangerous. However, his conviction was mainly based on account of corrupting the youth by urging to them to think critically about themselves and that their individual soul would save them from the misery of democracy. As he stood before the jury, Socrates said that he would rather obey the gods than the jurors. This meant that he could adhere to the legal provisions of the judicial system that was elected democratically by the public. The jury represented the will and good of the people. Through this way, Socrates was clearly posed as a danger to the democracy of Athenians (Simpson, 2006).

Conclusion

Socrates went down in history as one of the wisest philosophers ever to exist in the world. He lived in Athens, a state that substantially upheld democratic values. Socrates challenged the people's minds and the authorities with regard to their democratic views through questions. He believed that democracy was unjust to the society because it relied on the mass decisions. From his perspective, mass control of important institutions of the government undermined the relevance of Athenian democracy. These radical reviews foresaw his conviction by the authorities backed up with the public. He was charged with corrupting the youth and impiety. Even in the courtroom, Socrates continued to express his discontent of the democratically set institutions, including the judicial system. For him, democratic dignity should be based on individual intuition rather than the mass control. Socrates was ready to die, but could renounce his position about democracy.

Critical Views of Socrates about the Democratic Athens

It is interesting that what some scholars regard to as Socrates's critical views appears to be simplistic views against the democratic society. Socrates merely posed questions to the people and authorities with the aim of making people think about themselves. He did not convince or force people to accept his suppositions. As Saxonhouse (2005) observed, Socrates just guided and led the citizens of Athens to think of a better life. Saxonhouse (2005) further wondered why the democratic citizens of Athens went ahead to prosecute Socrates for these views. In The Republic, Plato mentioned that “normal citizens do not always have the ability to make the right decision for the country” (Saxonhouse, 2005 p81). This is why the Athenian authorities deemed Socrates as a threat to the democracy of the city.

Xenophon's writings and Plato's Apology provide an insightful analysis of the perception of ancient Greece about Socrates being a jeopardy to democracy. Both Xenophon and Plato were "intent of distinguishing Socrates as radically as possible from other members of the sophists" or ancient Greece professors. From Xenophon’s view, Socrates was presented as a sophist who utilized argument to support a conventional and traditional comprehension of the virtues (Gray, 2011). On the other hand, in a bid to understand Socrates, Plato argued that Socrates was much more detailed regarding his views on the democracy. From the beginning, he did not present himself as a teacher, and he did what he believed was right regardless of any circumstance. For instance, after being tried at the court, he gave out a speech that was unapologetic of the accounts of charges put on him. In the speech he does not in any way align himself with the values of democracy embraced by other countrymen (Gray, 2011).

The speech by Socrates in the courtroom is depicted as a rhetorical masterpiece. According to Gray (2011), “he proved that his own political convictions are drastically at odds with popular views and that his irritating, idiosyncratic everyday practice of examining the Athenians, followed necessarily from his convictions" (Gray, 2011 p59). From his perspective, he illustrated that he was a loyal citizen who cared about the welfare of the polis and others who continuously acted out of the best interests of the city. In his speech, he additionally defined himself as a uniquely patriotic Athenian. He held that following the citizens' current problematic condition, "doing good," for Socrates, meant to be a social critic. Being a social critic involved questioning fundamental beliefs of the Athenians through conversations at private and public spaces of the city. Socrates was a proving a point that his accusers were fools to the extent that they would go on with business as usual in the democratic city. He criticized the democratic public by showing that true dignity was an affair of the individual soul and not a social matter. To him, the "Socratic politics" did not in any way attempt to persuade the audience. His ethics and teachings were not a matter of social control but a matter of private conscience. The unsympathetic jurors thought that Socrates's speech was persuasive and, therefore, viewed "as essential bulwarks of the democratic order" (Gray, 2011 p47).

Socrates as a Threat to the Athenian Democracy

Socrates was viewed as a person who had capabilities of persuading a critical mass with his arguments. Most of his arguments were anti-democratic. This is why he was treated as a threat to the Athenian democracy. Having been accused of a serious crime of impiety, it was anticipated that Socrates would use his convincing skills to counter the jury. He used his public duty record to show the public that he had executed state’s official services and, therefore, he should be treated as a loyal and patriotic citizen. Read More