Socrates Argument For Innocence In Plato's Apology

1298 Words6 Pages

In Plato’s Apology, Socrates uses religious appeals, proof by contradiction WC and various examples to argue for his innocence in court. Socrates is forced to argue for the sake of his life to prove that he is not guilty. Socreates’ speech, however, he is not apologizing for anything instead, the word comes from the Greek word “apologia,” that translates to a speech made in defense. Socrates begins his argument by stating the reason he thinks he is being accused is because of his reputation with the citizens of Athens. He says, “I shall call upon the god at Delphi as witness to the existence and nature of my wisdom, if it be such. You know Chaerephon … He went to Delphi at one time and ventured to ask the oracle … if any man was wiser than [Socrates], and the Pythian replied that no one was wiser. Chaerephon is dead, but his brother will testify to you about this.” This arguments’ strengths are that it calls upon a god as evidence and a religious appeal to the audience. Every citizen of Athens believes in the existence of Gods therefore, this appeal works well with his argument since he is explaining the way he is because Phythian said this was true. No one would question this part of his claim since they believe in Apollo and the oracles predictions. The weakness is that Chaerephon is dead so his evidence can neither be confirmed nor denied. He …show more content…

He states that “there is good hope that death is a blessing … either the dead are nothing and have no perception of anything, or it is, as we are told a change a relocating for the soul from here to another place. As his time is coming to an end he continuous to say that only god knows what will await him after death and no one knows what actually occurs. This claim is reasonable because no one knows the truth behind death, even though he doesn’t know either that is not enough evidence for him to fear