In Plato’s Apology, the speech is not an apology, but Socrates attempting to use his wisdom to justify his teachings and beliefs. Socrates’ defense offers valuable lessons, and new ideas, and addresses real-world problems.
Socrates faced serious charges in ancient Athens for corrupting the youth and disregarding the gods, both considered serious offenses at that time. The accusations of corrupting the youth were linked to Socrates' practice of leading philosophical conversations with younger people that some citizens thought was harmful to their established beliefs. Similarly, Socrates refused to normal religious practices and challenged the regular views of gods, leading to accusations of not believing in them. Socrates argued in his defense that he sought knowledge by talking with the youth in philosophical discussions, and he spoke the truth, “I have a convincing witness that I speak the truth, my poverty” (Plato 35c). which he believed was proof of his beliefs.
…show more content…
However, whether it effectively refuted the charges is a two-sided argument since his counterpoints were based on his personal beliefs and experiences. Socrates refused to compromise or change his philosophy to avoid punishment, showing a commitment to his ideas that could be seen as admirable. Yet, Socrates' defense might have sounded arrogant or dismissive regarding the jury’s concerns which could have been the reason he was convicted. Socrates argued “Meletus is lying and that I’m telling the truth” (Plato 38b). This may come across as arrogant because he is so sure of himself. Ultimately, it’s difficult to know how effective Socrates' defense was since he was not acquitted. Nevertheless, his defense remains a great example of standing up for your beliefs and remaining true to yourself, even in the face of