Socrates defence against the official indictment
The corruption of the youth
Conclusion
- Socrates begins with asking who improves the youth, rather than why Meletus thinks he (Socrates) corrupts the youth. To which Meletus replies, "the laws". Socrates carries on to say that he asked "who" not "what" prompting Meletus to say it is the all Jury members (and council and assembly members as well) that improve the youth.
- Socrates replies with "all Athenians make the youth admirable and good except me, and I alone corrupt them" questioning whether it is possible for a group of people to improve the youth, whilst only one corrupts them.
- Socrates goes on to question whether it's reasonable to hold him accountable even if he has corrupted the youth. Meletus' response is that Socrates voluntarily and knowingly corrupts the youth, and that those who are corrupted will do harm.
- A new line of questioning is opened as Socrates asks Meletus in what way he has corrupted the youth. Meletus alleges that Socrates makes the youth worse by teaching them not to believe in the gods, conforming to Socrates' understanding of the indictment.
- The article is questioning why Meletus is forgoing the first accusation (of sophistry) and links this corruption charge to the religious charges. This could be because Sophistry is not illegal.
- Had Meletus brought up the different ways that Socrates see's the gods it is believed that the jury would not have perceived them as particularly important.
- It seems that any ancient evidence that anyone regarded Socrates' beliefs in the gods as a cause for alarm cannot be found thus suggesting that the Athenians would have viewed his religious beliefs as ground for punishment.
not believing in the city's gods & introducing new divinities.
- Socrates questions this charge. There seems to be some proof that Athenian courts did not condemn atheism and there was no "official list of deities". Socrates looks to Meletus for clarification, is he claiming Socrates believes in the wrong gods and teaches others to worship his or that he believes in no gods whatsoever?
- Meletus replies that Socrates is an atheist, however this is easily dissuaded by the fact that the "new divinities" he introduces would then be void, since he believes in none, and of those Meletus claims Socrates introduces, none are of Socrates own inventions, instead put forth by natural philosophers.
- The Euthyphro demonstrates that he clearly does not believe ALL stories of the gods. However, this doesn't contradict what he is saying: that all who believe in divinities must believe in gods. Meletus is thus stuck, since any answer would paint him as the one not believing in gods or be highly implausible.
- However, by speaking of his Daemon and the unique relation he has with it, it can be argued that he is in fact committing the charge of introducing new divinities, since it is one which had before not been in existence or believed in.
- Though this elenic argument ends with Meletus confused and Socrates seeming truly justified in claiming that the former is "playing around in serious business", for he's trying to kill a man on easily refuted claims.
Was Socrates actually guilty?
Meletus and the formal charges
- There were three charges against Socrates, all under the umbrella of impiety. While he could elect to argue that any of these three were not in fact impious, he neglects to do so. "...presumably because he thinks that each one would constitute impiety" in some way or another.
- Instead he tries to prove Meletus as the wrongdoer because he's "pretending to be serious and troubled about matters he has never cared about at all".
- This Socrates proves by easily catching Meletus out and "tripping him up". If Meletus had thought through his own accusations this wouldn't, presumable, have been so easy for Socrates to accomplish.
- Doesn't address charge of not believing in the cities gods, critics claim, because he may be guilty of this charge and so he cannot.
- One would think that in proving that the accuser doesn't know the basis of his own accusations would be enough to suffice as evidence of the Socrates innocence, however this clearly isn't the case as the jury ultimately convicted him.
- Athenian law differs from modern, western law as there is no requirement to prove the charges "beyond reasonable doubt". Thus, many cases were charged not on fact but on popular opinion. In a court ruled by the masses rhetoric was important in winning your case. Socrates doesn't use rhetoric and believes that the jury have a preconceived notion of his guilt and so cannot be swayed. Also, Socrates runs the risk by tricking Meletus into showing his "incompetence" of the jurors concluding that the first accusation, that he is a sophist, is true.
- Some scholars have argued that Socrates is guilty of impiety as the Athenians would have regarded anyone as impious if they didn't believe in their gods in the right way. Socrates own conception of "perfectly moral gods" would be different to the ones they accept, therefor it would have been better had they tried to charge him with believing in the wrong gods.
- It's questionable as to if Meletus thought he could persecute Socrates with believing in the wrong gods as he does not say why, when Socrates asks him what he meant by saying "does not believe in the gods the city believes in". Euthyphro himself assumes that the "innovations" Socrates is charged with concern his daemon which Socrates characterizes as a divine voice he hears. Xenephon believed that this was what the charge was concerned with too. Similarly, Socrates tells the jury that Meletus is "making fun of" his daemon in this indictment. It is significant that there does not seem to be a single ancient source that suggests those that brought Socrates to trial had any concern with his belief in morally perfect gods.
- Socrates does not seem to understand that Meletus is troubled by the sorts of gods he believes in. Therefor not seeing that to be acquitted that he needs to convince the jury that he believes in the same gods as them. He does actually make the point that he believes in gods implicitly and that it is for that reason that he cannot convince them to violate the oaths they had taken under the gods, to follow the laws of the gods. This article seems to be saying that he believes himself to be guilty or he wouldn't be making them violate their oaths. We know not.
- Another reason for the skepticism whether Socrates is guilty or not is that "believing in the gods that the city believes in" is an unclear premise. It's also doubtful that most Athenians regarded Socrates' conception of the gods as explicitly dangerous. Socrates does however (in the way Plato portrays him) differ from most Athenians with respect to their religious views in different ways.