Socrates’ Trial
Socrates’ Trial
Introducing New gods
One of the charges brought against Socrates during the trial was that he had gone against the beliefs of fellow Athenians. However, he was not guilty of this charge. There are various perspectives that help n justifying this assertion. Firstly, Socrates was entitled to his own beliefs pertaining to religion. He had no reason to belief in the religious aspects of other Athenians. Socrates was also not guilty because he had not shown any form of influence towards the beliefs of other people.
According to his actions, Socrates had his own beliefs but not impose them on other people. Had Socrates been imposing his beliefs on other Athenians, then he would have been guilty. It is also evident that Socrates was full of respect for other people’s beliefs. Although he did not belief in the Athenian gods, he had tremendous respect for the religious perceptions of other people. Through his apology, it is clear Socrates had no intention of demeaning the beliefs of other people. Nevertheless, he recognizes that the intentions of worse me cannot prevail over the intentions of better men (Plato, 2006).
This is results from God’s divine intervention upon the nature of life. In his defense, Socrates tries to convince the jury about the benefits of being good to other people. According to Socrates, he would not have been facing the charges if the jury knew about the divine benefits of goodness. God’s desire for humankind is to be respectful and good to other people. Gossip was the main basis of the allegations against Socrates.
Throughout the City of Athens, there were widespread rumors that Socrates’ beliefs did not conform to the values of Athenians. Consequently, the jury did not have sufficient evidence that would substantiate its claims against Socrates. This serves as further justification of Socrates innocence. It is extremely unfair for any jury to condemn an individual using rumor. However, the jury did not consider this perspective while trying Socrates. Some members of the jury were also guilty of religious contradictions.
Despite accusations about his beliefs in demigods, Socrates was assertive about the contradictions by some jury members. For instance, Meletus was culpable of these contradictions. Socrates’ perception about death and spirituality justifies his innocence. According to Socrates’ beliefs, no one is certain about the consequences of death (Plato, 2006). Whereas some perceive death as evil, it might be a form of blessing. All these perspectives help in justifying Socrates’ innocence with regard to believing other gods.
Corrupting the Youth
During the trial, Socrates was also facing a charge of corrupting the youth in Athens. According to the jury, Socrates influence on Greek youths was unacceptable. If guilty of this offence, he could be punished by the death penalty. However, Socrates provides a staunch defense of his input towards the youth’s knowledge. In essence, Socrates was just sharing knowledge with the youth.
He had no intentions of corrupting them in any way. It was thus unfair for the jury to convict Socrates of corrupting the youth. It is also essential to highlight that the youth need guidance from wise people. Being the wise man he was, Socrates felt that he had the responsibility of guiding the youth (Plato, 2006).
Consequently, the jury did not have the basis to vilify him. Through his interactions with the youth, Socrates did not try to create some sense of rebellion in them. He was merely trying to open their way of thinking so that they would be more positive towards life. This behavior did not violate the laws of Athens in any way.
In essence, Socrates’ interactions with the youth were for the overall good of the entire nation. It was thus unfair for the jury to charge him with corrupting the youth. Socrates’ actions were also not tantamount to political sabotage. This is further evidence that he was not guilty of corrupting the youth. During the trial, the jury did not call some of the youth from Athens. If the allegations about Socrates’ influence on the youth were true, the jury would have brought some youth representatives as witnesses in the case.
In his defense, Socrates took note of this perspective. It is a perspective that elicits concerns about the validity of the jury’s allegations against Socrates. Glaucon is another character that helps in justifying Socrates’ innocence in terms of not corrupting the youth. Glaucon was a youth Athenian who represents the values of other young people. Glaucon’s defense for Socrates shows that his influence upon the youth was positive. In addition to Glaucon, Adeimantus also presents evidence that supports Socrates’ innocence in this case (Plato, 2006).
As a youthful Athenian, Adeimantus also had similar views to his brother. They had positive perceptions about Socrates as a wise man. This is in contrast to the jury’s vindication of Socrates’ actions in terms of influencing the youth. Based on these perspectives, it is thus evident that Socrates was not guilty of corrupting the youth.
Reference
Plato (2006). The Republic, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press
Is this your assignment or some part of it?
We can do it for you! Click to Order!
