The Argue Of Plato's Guilt In Socrates '

Socrates lived a life of truth; following the laws yet getting people to think for themselves. Because of the downfall of Athens and the way he lived, Socrates faced major charges such as corrupting the youth, spewing nonsense and going against the gods; or was it being a complete atheist? Even his accuser wasn’t sure which one it was. Proving his case well, Socrates manages to get his accusers and the jury to agree with him, but the jury still decides he is guilty. Socrates was charged unjustly because his accusers were manipulated, his charges are no longer valid and his accuser could not even make up their mind as what to charge him with. Socrates’ accusers manipulated the jury into believing he was a bad man, someone who was the cause of Athens’ downfall and that he must be

In this statement, Socrates mentions that even he started to fall for the accusers’ manipulative explanations, but he knows-and points out- the fact that they are lying. In addition, Socrates says he will use simple language so the jury can completely understand him, rather than larger, more complex words that the jury may think they know, but don’t fully understand. Unfortunately, the jury doesn’t take this into account and becomes biased, based on the accusers’ manipulative case, therefore charging Socrates unjustly. Socrates had been questioning things, seeking for the truth and getting people to think for themselves for his entire life. Why are his accusers only now charging him at the age of 70, instead of when he was younger? This charge is unjust because these accusations are out of date. He states, “Their charges against me are one of ancient date, and they make them in days when you were impressionable” (Plato, page 2). Socrates not only makes a valid point, but is completely