Socrates Argument Against Charges

Socrates Argument Against Charges The Apology: The horse-breaker analogy The trial of Socrates came about because he was the teacher of several radical aristocrats who attempted to overthrow Athenian democracy and replace it with an oligarchy. Socrates had taught many of these men philosophy, and he advocated a philosophical kingdom ruled by elite philosophers as the ideal form of government. Socrates believed that just as the people most suited to make shoes should be cobblers, only the most intelligent and intellectually 'fit' should be allowed to rule (Stone 1979).

When Athens was threatened, Socrates was prosecuted (Stone 1979). Socrates' analogy of the horse-tamer is in response to Meletus' claim that everyone else is a positive influence upon the youth of Athens -- except Socrates. Socrates points out specialized individuals are required to tame a horse, rather than ordinary individuals. This suggests that only educators can have an influence upon young, untamed animals, not greater society. Socrates claims that because most of his students are good and not corrupt, he is a good teacher and influence.

Socrates' argument is profoundly antagonistic, although Meletus is unable to fully refute it. Socrates suggests that he alone, as an experienced teacher, can act as a good or bad influence upon the youth, and the fact that not all of his young pupils are bad means that Socrates can take credit for the result, much like a good horse-tamer. This supports Socrates' aristocratic view of the world that certain people are more fit to rule over the young, such as himself.

It suggests he is not a corruptor of the young, but an elevator of the moral character of young people. The first problem with the horse-tamer analogy is that it seems fundamentally inaccurate, even for horses. An animal can have one good 'tamer' but that does not necessarily mean that he will be influenced only by his trainer, and may even be more influenced by the ordinary people who ride him daily.

Similarly, a young person may have a good or bad teacher, but it is likely that the collective influence of the other people he knows, and the general environment of Athens, is to be a greater influence upon his character than that of his or her teacher. Socrates' contention also lies upon the notion that teaching is a specialized discipline and only teachers can 'reach' students. However, a student's real education is a continual engagement with the world.

Surely, regardless of what the students learned from Socrates, they were also learning other things in Athens. Even if Socrates believed that his way was the only 'right' way, the students could learn from their fellow human beings, far more easily than a horse could communicate with individuals not of his species. A final problem with the analogy is that horse-training is a physical skill, regarding the horses' responses to certain cues, and Socrates is talking about influencing human beings for good or for ill in a less measurable manner.

This moral aptitude or inclination in humans seems even more important in making decisions about philosophy than it is in.