The Apology of Socrates

1. The Apology of Socrates By George Dunn, Lecturer in Philosophy and Ethics, University of Indianapolis; Adjunct Lecturer in Philosophy and Ethics, IUPUI; Revised and put in PP format by Brian McDonald

2. Introducing George Dunn • George as expert in philosophy, ancient and modern • Particular strengths in the philosophy of early and late antiquity • Thus he is a “natural” to contribute to the selections for this unit: • The “Apology” of Socrates near the beginning of “antiquity” for which he takes full responsibility • New Testament Readings which are mostly my work and • The Confessions of Augustine at the close of antiquity and the beginning of the Middle Ages on which he has contributed about two thirds. • As I will highlight in forum questions, we will see the tensions between “Greek” and “Hebrew” trends of thought: the former represented by Socrates, the latter by the New Testament, with Augustine as a kind of tense synthesis of the two.

3. The Apology of Socrates • An account written by Socrates’s student Plato • “Apology” is not ‘I’m sorry’ but Socrates defense before an Athenian Jury on two charges • Corrupting the youth of Athens • Impiety

4. The Athenian Jury • Unlike ours was 500 people • Chosen by lot • Prosecutor not a public official but private citizen(s) bringing charges: In this case the citizens • Antyus • Lycon • And, most prominently, Meletus • Majority vote will decide both guilt and penalty

5. Socrates and His “Judges” • Significant that he calls his jury “Athenians” instead of judges. Why? • The answer to this question will shape this lecture • We must first discuss Socrates’ “lecture” on how to give a speech • His only eloquence is that he speaks the truth • He says his accusers are eloquent but do not speak the truth • The virtue of a good speaker is to speak truthfully; the virtue of a judge is to judge justly. • Only the trial’s end will show whether his jury deserves the title of “just”

6. Athens on Trial • His attitude toward “judges” is a clue on reading the entire speech • The defendant Socrates is actually putting Athens on trial! • Evidence that this is not ordinary defense shown in the way he begins by speaking of “old” charges • P. 729: “Socrates is an evildoer who searches into things under the earth, and in heaven, and he makes the worse appear the better cause.” • The meaning of the “old charges” • The harm they’ve caused • The question they’ve raised: P. 730. “But what is the origin of these accusations. . . there must have been something strange which you were doing?”

7. The “Strange” Thing: Socrates’ Quest for Wisdom • The Delphic Oracle as Socrates’ “witness” • Tells Chaerephon, no one is wiser than Socrates • Unexpected difficulties arise when Socrates seeks to find a wiser among • Politicians • Poets • Artisans • Two Results: • Positive: the nature of human wisdom: “God only is wise; . . . . He, O men,is the wisest, who, like Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing” (732 • Negative: “those who are examined . . . Instead of being angry with themselves are angry with me” (732)

8. The Cross Examination of Meletus • Socrates’ “indictment” of Meletus • A jester pretending to be in earnest • Eager to bring men to trial • Pretends interest in matters in which he is not truly interested (733) • Proof of 3rd Charge: • Meletus’ ignorance of how youth are ‘improved’ despite feigned interest • Scapegoating of Socrates rather than interest in “improvement is his motivating force

9. Pressing the Other Two Charges • Proof of 2nd charge against Meletus • Does any man want to live among bad citizens? • If I “corrupt’ youth it must thus be unintentional (important Soc. Principle) • This is a matter of private warning not public accusation and trial (734) • Proof of lst charge (“jest”) • Am I guilty of believing in “new gods”? • Am I guilty atheism? • The fact Meletus accuses of both when both can’t be true shows he treats high matters in “jest.”

10. End Result • Socrates does not refute charges but “presses” charges • Athens condemns Socrates but history acquits him • Three immortal principles established: • Human wisdom is to recognize ignorance • The only true evil is not to endure injustice but to commit it: It is better to “fulfill the philosopher’s mission of searching” than “to desert my post through fear of death” (737) • “The unexamined life is not worth living”