Socrates Trial Socrates' Defense and

Socrates Trial Socrates' defense and his decision to face the sentence to death accepting it show that he acted the only way he was able to. He acted according to what he believed in: one's duty to examine life and question the truth. Socrates thinking was a continuous source of inspiration to people from politicians, to writers and religious thinkers. As Benjamin Franklin wrote in his Autobiography: "Humility: Imitate Jesus and Socrates" (Franklin).

Some could argue that Socrates was anything but humble in his reasoning before the jury that sentenced him to death because of having attempted to "study all things in the sky and below the earth" (Plato, 22) and of having made "the worst argument the stronger" (idem). The accusations of questioning everything and not taking anything for granted are based on the false conclusion that the accused is challenging the natural order of things and thus not believing in the gods. Society felt threatened in her most important foundations: religion.

Socrates' defense in Plato's Apology will indicate that he was not questioning the righteousness to believe and act according to god's laws, but he was only examining the way human society used and explained them to the younger generations. Some might say that according to the Christian doctrine, Socrates' attitude in front of the jury was not humble, but very bold, even arrogant. He might have bee committing a suicidal act, which proves even worse in the eyes of a Christian.

but, five hundred years before the birth of Jesus Christ, Socrates acted the only way he could. He was by no means a martyr. He was just unable to deny himself. He was believing in a greater power than him and trusting that the destiny a superior force gave him was dictating him to act according the what the gods reserved for him.

He trusted the voice of destiny that stopped him from acting a certain way and did not stop him to accept the death sentence precisely because he was doing what the gods had in mind with him. His posture before the jury speaks is far from showing humility in the sense that he could have thrown himself on his knees and begged for mercy or compassion.

but, Socrates acted the way he did not because he was lacking the resources of being humble before his accusers, but before he was being humble before humanity and its destiny in general. He explained that the Oracle indicated that he was no more worthy or wiser than any other of his fellow men. The difference between him and those who accused him of disseminating wrong and harmful ideas was not coming from any virtues he was willing to point out, but from the permanent quest for the truth.

He was not willing to accept everything his ancestors left humanity as spiritual heritage. He used his ability to find new meanings in ordinary things and proved the human capacity to understand the world around it as still having a long way to go. He recognized his limitations, along with those of everyone else and pointed out that no one was able to be wise in every field. Humans were according to Socrates subject to bad judgment, despite their ability to do well in another matter.

Society as a whole is, according to Socrates, a body that needs all its subjects in order to aspire to finding the truth. When being accused of corrupting the Athenian youth, Socrates explains that one man could never harm by himself younger generations that were well educated in the spirit of righteousness by various exponents of society. The young minds molded by wiser people, like politicians or teachers, or even their parents, should not be so easily disturbed in their beliefs when a man like Socrates comes along.

or, maybe it is exactly the opposite that Socrates is trying to prove. His arguments rely heavily on a solid foundation that appears to give him the right to express his opinions to anyone willing to listen to them. He was, by no means, a politician, since no matter the amount of good a politician does, he is still dealing with compromise every day. Moreover, he was not even a paid teacher who would agree to do the job of educating young minds in exchange for material benefits.

He emphasizes his goals as being the urge to follow his destiny and let the world now of his thinking. Given these facts, Socrates can be exonerated of the guilt of having premeditated any of his actions in order to gain something for himself or rich a personal goal with the price of wrong doing.

Socrates explains to the jury why he felt compelled to express his thoughts to anyone who was willing to listen to him: If I say that it is impossible for me to keep quit because that means disobeying the god, you will not believe me and will think I am being ironical.

On the other hand, if I say that it is the greatest good for a man to discuss virtue every day and those other things about which you hear me conversing and testing myself and others, for the unexamined life is not worth living for men, you will believe me even less (Plato, 39). Socrates put the very purpose of man's existence on the stand and points out that without a tireless and continuous search for the truth, humans are doomed to live a worthless life.

This is by no means, en invitation to suicide for all those who are in the position of not fighting for their own search, but it is a personal choice for the man who is refused the basic right to obey his destiny b his own judges. He does not question their right to judge him, curiously enough. That would mean that he question the very foundations of the society he was born in. but, Socrates is suggesting his judges that they are in the wrong doing in his case.

A cause greater then life bounds him to act the way he did all his life and they are blind and cannot acknowledge the fact that their source of righteousness is coming from a corrupt belief that they know everything and thus are empowered to take a decision, regardless of the matter. Knowing that by the time of his trial, Socrates was seventy years old, one cannot stop and question the stubbornness of those who insisted on sending him to death.

He was close to death anyway and they could have just let nature take its course. but, just as Socrates could not act differently, they were also unable to recognize their own limitations. By admitting that they might be wrong, those members of the jury who voted for him being sentenced to death would have accepted the fact that Socrates was right. They were however, able to use their authority because of their pretended expertise in all things.

Their ability to perform something the right way was their source of power in every other field. By claiming that they always know what is right, they were denying their very human condition.

Socrates was expressing his weakness as a mortal and recognizing his limitations in front of a superior power: "Then I showed again, not in words, but in action, that, if it were not rather vulgar to say so, death is something I couldn't care less about, but that my whole concern is not to do anything unjust or impious. That government, powerful as it was, did not frighten me into any wrong doing" (Plato, 35).

In the Introduction to the book the Trial and Death of Socrates: Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Death Scene from Phaedo, G.M.A. Grube stresses that Socrates' search for the meaning of life as a mean to live right made him develop a paradox: "virtue is knowledge and when men do wrong it is only because they do not know any better" (Grube, v).