Critical Analysis of Plato’s Apology free essay sample

The ‘Apology’ is the defence speech of Socrates before the court at a trial for his life. He has been accused of deliberately corrupting the young and of non-belief in the Athenians’ gods. It is widely accepted that this is a true event, Socrates was tried, found guilty and put to death. What is not known for certain is the accuracy of Plato’s account of his defence. David Leibowitz tells us that the Greek title is ambiguous and could mean a defence speech either for or by Socrates. From this it is hard to discern if the Apology as we know it was written by Plato or Socrates, or if indeed it is Plato’s carefully edited version of Socrates actual speech. To understand and take the most from the speech we must forget the issue of authenticity. This is at least the defence speech of Plato’s Socrates and there is much to be gained from close reading of the entire text. To understand and take the most from the speech we must forget the issue of authenticity. This is at least the defence speech of Plato’s Socrates and there is much to be gained from close reading of the entire text. The ‘Apology’ covers a number of important themes and issues that are dear to Socrates and relevant to his defence. From the outset he attempts to show that he is not guilty of these crimes or at the very least if he is, it is not deliberate as the charge states and that he should not be punished but enlightened as to his mistakes (25e-26a). He discusses issues of harm done to oneself through doing harm to others, belief in gods and his own divine charge (21a-21b) amongst others but he is, perhaps inevitably, pronounced guilty. This pronouncement sparks the issue of death that becomes a dominant theme for the rest of the speech and the end of the speech in particular when he has been denied any alternative punishment. In the passage for analysis here the main points of discussion are death as a good or an evil, death as annihilation or death as a transmigration of the soul and briefly, some issues of justice and harm. The passage we will be focussing on is 40c-42a, his final words to the jury. As mentioned it is dominated by the theme of death but also touches on issues of harm and justice. This section opens with a confident assertion that we are â€Å"quite mistaken in supposing death to be an evil† (40c). At first glance one could be inclined to think this merely a romantic sentiment and that he moves perhaps to reassure himself that death is not the worst thing to be facing. It seems however to be much more than this. He qualifies the statement in such a way as to leave the listeners in better understanding of the deep-seated beliefs from which it comes. For once, his proof of the matter is not hard evidence as he would usually have it. Socrates, who places so much emphasis on knowing, merely believes that death cannot be a bad thing. He believes that were it bad his â€Å"sign† would have turned him away from this path (40c). Before now his sign has opposed him at moments when he would have supposedly misstepped. It protected him from mistakes that would have caused him, others, or his soul harm. More than this it opposed him if what he was doing would not have some positive effect (40c). By sharing this with us he tells us that death is not alone not a bad thing or even simply a neutral one, it is a good thing that will bring good effects. It should be noted here however that despite his valiant efforts to appear sure of himself in this regard he contradicts himself later on and shows his human doubts. Though he says that the juror’s should, like him, look forward to their own deaths and that the time had come when it was better for him personally to die(41c- 41d), at the close of his speech, as a word of farewell, he says â€Å"Well now, it is time to be off, I to die and you to live; which of us has the happier prospect is unknown to any but God. (42a)† These last words undermine the confident assertions of the first paragraph. It would appear that he is neither certain if death is generally good or if it is truly the best thing for him at this time. He tells us that death is one of two things, the first of which is annihilation or dreamless sleep (40c- 40d). Socrates supposes that anyone, private person or Great King, would have fewer days or nights more pleasant than a night of dreamless sleep. The reference to the Persian King lends emphasis to his theory in that the Persian kings were often seen as a paradigm of worldly happiness . If even a man such as this would prefer a night of dreamless sleep to most of his other days then it must surely be a very pleasant thing. Socrates ignores here the issue that this sleep would be endless, so leaving the sleeper unable to ever appreciate it in the only way humanly possible, by contrast to other nights and days. Another interesting interpretation of the king as example is raised by T. G. West. He suggests that the Persian King might prefer to be asleep than awake due to a faulty way of life. Tarrant tells us the King is a paradigm of worldly happiness but West calls him a â€Å"paradigm of someone who cares for money and his body instead of how his soul will become the best and most prudent possible† . If we accept this interpretation it would seem that Socrates is making a subtly ironic comment on the good of death, that it is merely good for someone whose life is unsatisfactory. If this is truly Socrates’ view, has he inadvertently told us that his life is unsatisfactory? If so it surely cannot be for the same reasons as a political man such as the king who has neglected the care of his soul. Throughout the speech he does present himself as a somewhat sorry figure. Though he does not care for worldly possessions it is unlikely that his poverty is an easy state of being for him, his choice of lifestyle and mission to understand the oracle also leads to the neglect of his family for which perhaps there is some guilt. Socrates is accused of religious impiety which from his defence truly does not seem to be the case. It is possible then that what has truly offended his accusers and lessens the worth of his life is Socrates’ neglect of more earthly issues. Perhaps sleep is better for this man who is so persecuted and has neglected those in his charge despite what assiduous care he has taken toward the welfare of his soul. Whether he truly meant to depict this death as a good thing or not he does present it as an end. Any life that is better cut off in this manner than continued seems a desolate one in either case. The second idea of death that Socrates presents is of movement of the soul from the body to some other place where those that have died before will also be. This idea of death is more easily believable as a positive alternative to life and Socrates himself seems a little more enthused by it. Instead of an end to life it is a continuation of life in another place without the physical body. He tells the jury he is willing to die ten times over if this account of death is the true one (41a-41b). It seems like this death would almost be a victory for him over the men of the court who have accused and convicted him. He refers to the men before him as â€Å"so-called jurors† in contrast with the â€Å"true jurors† like Minos and Triptolemus who live in the afterlife. He mentions heroes who have undergone death by unfair trial as he feels he is doing now and says it would be amusing to compare his fortunes with theirs. These sly digs at the jurors before him tell us something of Socrates thoughts on justice and harm. If he goes now to the company of these great men the greatest harm has been done by the jurors to themselves not to him. To his mind they will have corrupted their souls with the injustice of his conviction and execution. The death will not harm him as his soul and conscience are clean but there is a sense that the â€Å"so-called jurors† will not be welcomed by the dead heroes as he will be, heroes who would not punish his philosophical enquiry as they have done. There is however further self-contradiction to this idea, earlier in the text Socrates professed to have no knowledge of what comes in Hades after death, West tells us that Socrates does not believe the soul can exist outside of the body, and Socrates weakens the sense of conviction buy three times stating â€Å"as we are told† in relation to his account of life after death . So not alone does it appear that Socrates does not really know if this will all be the case, it would seem his belief in it is shaky at best. As already mentioned Socrates suggests that the jurors do themselves more harm by their malice and injustice than they do him. He believes that no harm can befall a good man in life or death and that the gods care about the fortunes of such a man (41c-41d). Socrates shows no resentment of the men who have brought him to his death because he believes it is time for him to die and be released from his distractions. He does however say that they are culpable of ill intentions as it is not for these reasons or his benefit that they want him dead. Perhaps because of the lack of justice he feels he has been shown he offers the jury another way to do justice to him and his family. The favour is unorthodox as he asks the men to do to his children exactly what he is being punished for doing to them. It is one last way of showing the court the strength of his conviction in the virtue of his own actions and beliefs. Despite the end it has brought him it is the legacy he wishes to leave to his children and the only justice he can now have at the hands of the court, which would, essentially, require them to see the error of their current judgement. These last words of Socrates’ defence are perhaps the most poignant of the ‘Apology’. Through the presentation of his convictions and, accidentally perhaps, his doubts we are given a picture of Socrates that seems more human than the gadfly who pesters reason out of people who he believes haven’t thought enough to realise they know less than they think they do. It is only human for this section of the speech to dwell so much on the issue of death, he refuses to plead for his life and instead uses death as a theme that shows the court has not defeated or hurt him. It is interesting and sad to note that death, even one that is a simple lack of consciousness is to him better than his own life, as it would be to a man who has partaken in injustice and lead a life of little virtue. As mentioned above it is perhaps a lack of care towards the traditional values of Athens and its people rather than the traditions of its faith that has brought Socrates to this point. In the world of today were we are advised to seek balance in everything we do it seems obvious that Socrates cared for his soul to the neglect of his physical life. Perhaps in this way it was his time to die. In death he no longer has to choose, his philosophy if not his soul has endured for centuries without his physical body because of the choice he made in his ‘Apology’ to die with his philosophical enquiries intact.