Kyo 's Key Ideas from Apology
by By Plato

Socrates attributed his reputation to a unique kind of wisdom. He recounted how his friend Chaerephon once asked the oracle at Delphi if anyone was wiser than Socrates. The oracle replied that no one was. Socrates, puzzled by this, sought out those reputed to be wise—politicians, poets, and craftsmen—to see if he could find someone wiser. He concluded that while these men thought they were wise, they were not, whereas Socrates knew he lacked wisdom. This, he argued, made him wiser to a small extent: he recognized his own ignorance.

Premise 1: Socrates claims to have wisdom in that he recognizes his own ignorance.

Premise 2: He conducted investigations into those considered wise in various fields (politicians, poets, craftsmen) and found that they professed knowledge they did not truly possess.

Premise 3: Socrates asserts that the recognition of one's own ignorance is a form of wisdom superior to the false knowledge of others.

Conclusion: Thus, Socrates justifies his claim of knowing nothing by arguing that his awareness of his own ignorance makes him wiser than those who falsely believe they possess knowledge.

Corrupting the Youth

Turning to the charge of corrupting the youth, Socrates pointed out that young men followed him of their own accord, enjoying his method of questioning and exposing the ignorance of prominent Athenians. These young followers then began questioning others themselves, which angered those questioned, who blamed Socrates for their embarrassment.

Premise 1: Young men follow Socrates voluntarily because they enjoy his method of questioning and seeking truth.

Premise 2: If Socrates unintentionally corrupted the youth, it would be against his own interests as they would harm him in return.

Premise 3: Socrates encourages critical thinking and self-examination, which he views as beneficial.

Conclusion: Socrates does not corrupt the youth; he educates and improves them.

Impiety

Socrates then cross-examined Meletus, one of his accusers, exposing contradictions in his arguments. He demonstrated that Meletus had little concern for the youth and was merely using the trial to attack Socrates. Regarding the charge of impiety, Socrates showed that Meletus accused him of both atheism and believing in demigods, a contradiction.

Premise 1: Socrates has been accused of impiety for years, largely due to misunderstandings and portrayals by playwrights like Aristophanes (older accusation).

Premise 2: Socrates acknowledges belief in spiritual entities (daimonian), which contradicts the claim of atheism.

Conclusion: The charge of impiety is based on misunderstandings and contradictions; Socrates does not reject the traditional gods.

Socrates also refused to beg for mercy, asserting that justice should not be swayed by emotional appeals. The jury found him guilty and sentenced him to death. In his final words, Socrates reiterated that his death would harm Athens more than himself, as his role was to provoke critical thinking and self-examination.

Despite the serious charges, Socrates remained unyielding. He declared that he would rather die than give up his pursuit of philosophy, believing it was his divine mission to challenge and improve his fellow citizens. He rejected the fear of death, claiming no one knows whether death is a blessing or a curse.

Socrates accepted his fate with composure, suggesting that death might either be a peaceful sleep or an opportunity to converse with great figures of the past. He concluded by saying,

"Now the hour to part has come. I go to die, you go to live. Which of us goes to the better lot is known to no one, except the god."