In What Sense Does the Case against Socrates Show that His Idea Challenged the Good Order of Society - Essay Example

In what sense does the case against Socrates show that his ideas challenged the good order of society? Socrates trial appears to have been a culmination of a series of events throughout his life as an independent thinker and a philosopher. In his engagements, it was not unusual for him to come up against all kinds of accusations and thence continually came up against powerful individuals. This won him admirers and foes in equal measure. It was only unfortunate that the foes yielded greater power as they were part of the propertied and the ruling class while his large following stemmed from the youth. This meant he was more likely to face the consequences of his actions as those against him yielded the power to prosecute him. According to Plato’s (Socrates close friend) account, Socrates prosecution was masterminded by Anytus, a leading democrat. In the years before Socrates trial, the Tyrants had taken over Athens, these were lead by Critias, a former pupil of Socrates (Brickhouse and Smith 26). Many of the Athenians who supported the democrats and the democrats who were overthrown by the tyrants viewed Criatias actions as emanating from Socrates teachings. The fact that Critias made it clear that he had cast aside the follies of his youth, such as education, did not change the Athenians view of Socrates role in the growth of the tyrants. Soon after, the Tyrants were replaced by the democrats. As a sign of reconciliation and a means of healing the wounds of the civil war Socrates perceived role was sidestepped. However, Anytus who was a leading voice among the democrats was not as forgiving. His actions were not only a result of the civil war but were mostly personal as his son was a keen follower of Socrates teachings. He bore a significant grudge as Socrates had urged his son to live the family’s tanning business in preference of leading a “philosophical life” which was more satisfying and helped one keep off vices (Strathern 46). Though instigated by Anytus, the case was brought forward by Meletus, who acted as Anytus front man. Meletus was an unsuccessful young tragic poet (Strathern 46). In the trial, brought before five hundred jurors or members of the ruling council Meletus accused Socrates of two main charges. The first of these charges was impiety. Under impiety, Socrates was accused of believing in multiple gods of which the state never believed in. In extension, he failed to seek divine explanations and instead sought natural explanation for natural phenomenon. The second charge was that he corrupted the young, as part of the charge Socrates was accused of invoking a spirit of criticism among the youth (Fagan and John 121). As part of his regular teachings Socrates received great audience from the youth across all social groups in Athens, he critically evaluated prominent individuals in the marketplace. In his cross-examination of prominent people such as poets, artisans, and statesmen Socrates often dismissed them as lacking in knowledge and believing to know more than they actually did (Brickhouse and Smith 26). It is his ability to criticize those in power that he struck a code with the young and this had a profound effect among them. As stated, Socrates trial was a result of witch hunting and a bulk of what Socrates was accused of was a misrepresentation or misinterpretation of his engagements in Athens. According to the Athenians, piety was a representation of several engagements. Key among these was respect for the gods, the dead and the ancestors. They believed that any impious person was only attracting the wrath of the gods and the entire society would suffer in return, mainly through plague and sterility. Impiety charge was thus a serious charge among the Athenians. Because Socrates was a critique of existent practice it is possible that any of his words or actions would have translated to an impiety charge. A keen follower of moral instructions, Socrates may have failed to take part in significant religious festivals. Further, he attracted the charges by forwarding arguments against the communal, ritualistic position on religion collectively embraced by the Athenians (Weiss 14). He particularly opposed the idea that the gods would act immorally or whimsically which was contrary to Athenians spiritual view. Additionally, the impiety charge would have stemmed from Socrates declaration that he had received divine instruction (voice or sign) instructing him to shun politics and continue with his philosophical mission. On the charge against corruption of the youth, Socrates views his actions as advice to the youth. In the trial, Socrates pointed to the jury that he was a hero. He refers to his excellent service as a hoplite in three battles. As part of this, he seeks to illustrate to the Athenians that he was one who had a great experience and only sought to mentor the youth. More importantly, Socrates cited, he had spent almost his entire life battling trying to hoard the souls of the Athenian youth, whom he sought to herald in the direction of an examined, ethical life (Fagan and John 121). In his defense, Socrates cited that he would rather be sentenced to death rather than give up saving souls, he considered this an act of obeying God to man. In summation, he considered his acts as inspired by God and that men could not understand this, as they bore limited capacity to appreciate his life and assimilate his teachings which apparently the youth did. Under the Athenian law, a public hearing was a chance for people to prove their innocence. As was the norm, those accused would cast aside pride, and seek to demonstrate humility as a means of provoking sympathy. They were also expected to demonstrate remorse. However, Socrates defied the norm. In his trial, he spoke with pride and failed to acknowledge the wisdom of those set to determine his sentence. More importantly, he tore into Meletus argument often citing his irrationality (Fagan and John 122). In the trial, Socrates provokes authority by citing that he is a true hero, one concerned with saving souls. On conviction, Socrates accusers proposed death as punishment. The norm was a counter proposal suggesting exile; however, Socrates instead suggested to the jury that he be offered free meals in the Prytaneum, as an apparent reward as opposed to punishment. These instances demonstrated Socrates disregard of authority. Beyond the trial, Socrates was in a day to day basis involved in critiquing the ways of prominent individuals in society (Weiss 13). His sublime argument was that these individuals, especially the politicians, perceived themselves as wise yet they fell short of a general measure of wisdom. Such was considered insubordination and pointed to Socrates arrogance in the eyes of the ruling class. In summary, Socrates viewed his actions as mostly beneficial to the society. First, he considered his stand an important statement to those who seek justice in that they must be willing to pay for the same. Socrates showed no remorse even with the confirmation of death as punishment. He considered his belief more important than the efforts by man to intimidate him. At the same time, he considered his actions as proof that service to God and dedication to a moral course superseded service to man or selling ones soul to the ruling class. Finally, Socrates considered his trial a learning curve for young philosophers and friends such as Plato, this may have been the reason as to why he used his trial not as a platform to persuade jurors but to educate and provoke them. Works Cited Brickhouse, Thomas C, and N D. Smith. Socrates on Trial. Oxford: Clarendon, 1990. Print. Fagan, Patricia, and John E. Russon. Reexamining Socrates in the Apology. Evanston, Ill: Northwestern University Press, 2009. Print. Strathern, Paul. Socrates in 90 Minutes. Chicago: I.R. Dee, 1997. Print. Weiss, Roslyn. Socrates Dissatisfied: An Analysis of Plato's Crito. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998. Print. Read More