Man and the state. The trial of Socrates. Man and the state : the trial of Socrates. Man and the state: the trial of Socrates. Man and the state: The Trial of Socrates. All rights reserved. Please sign in to WorldCat Don't have an account? More importantly, he contends, he has battled for decades to save the souls of Athenians--pointing them in the direction of an examined, ethical life. He reportedly says to his jurors if his teaching about the nature of virtue "corrupts the youth, I am a mischievous person.
Stone is right, the most damaging accusation against Socrates concerned his association with Critias, the cruel leader of the Thirty Tyrants. Socrates, in Plato's account, points to his refusal to comply with the Tyrants' order that he bring in Leon of Salamis for summary execution.
He argues this act of disobedience--which might have led to his own execution, had not the Tyrants fallen from power--demonstrates his service as a good citizen of Athens. Stone notes, however, that a good citizen might have done more than simply go home to bed--he might have warned Leon of Salamis.
In Stone's critical view, the central fact remained that in the city's darkest hour, Socrates "never shed a tear for Athens. He argues that he never presumed to be a teacher, just a figure who roamed Athens answering the questions that were put to him. He points to his pupils in the crowd and observes that none of them accused him. Moreover, Socrates suggests to the jury, if Critias really understood his words, he never would have gone on the bloody rampage that he did in Hannah Arendt notes that Critias apparently concluded, from the message of Socrates that piety cannot be defined, that it is permissible to be impious--"pretty much the opposite of what Socrates had hoped to achieve by talking about piety.
What is strikingly absent from the defense of Socrates, if Plato's and Xenophon's accounts are to be believed, is the plea for mercy typically made to Athenian juries.
It was common practice to appeal to the sympathies of jurors by introducing wives and children. Socrates, however, did no more than remind the jury that he had a family. Neither his wife Xanthippe nor any of his three sons made a personal appearance.
On the contrary, Socrates--according to Plato--contends that the unmanly and pathetic practice of pleading for clemency disgraces the justice system of Athens. When the three-hour defense of Socrates came to an end, the court herald asked the jurors to render their decision by putting their ballot disks in one of two marked urns, one for guilty votes and one for votes for acquittal.
With no judge to offer them instructions as to how to interpret the charges or the law, each juror struggled for himself to come to an understanding of the case and the guilt or innocence of Socrates.
When the ballots were counted, jurors had voted to find Socrates guilty, jurors for acquittal. Penalty Phase of Trial. After the conviction of Socrates by a relatively close vote, the trial entered its penalty phase.
Each side, the accusers and the defendant, was given an opportunity to propose a punishment. After listening to arguments, the jurors would choose which of the two proposed punishments to adopt.
The accusers of Socrates proposed the punishment of death. In proposing death, the accusers might well have expected to counter with a proposal for exile--a punishment that probably would have satisfied both them and the jury.
Instead, Socrates audaciously proposes to the jury that he be rewarded, not punished. According to Plato, Socrates asks the jury for free meals in the Prytaneum, a public dining hall in the center of Athens. Socrates must have known that his proposed "punishment" would infuriate the jury.
Stone noted that "Socrates acts more like a picador trying to enrage a bull than a defendant trying to mollify a jury. The only answer, Stone and others conclude, is that Socrates was ready to die.
To comply with the demand that a genuine punishment be proposed, Socrates reluctantly suggested a fine of one mina of silver--about one-fifth of his modest net worth, according to Xenophon.
Plato and other supporters of Socrates upped the offer to thirty minae by agreeing to come up with silver of their own. Most jurors likely believed even the heftier fine to be far too slight of a punishment for the unrepentant defendant. In the final vote, a larger majority of jurors favored a punishment of death than voted in the first instance for conviction.
According to Diogenes Laertius, jurors voted for death, for the fine. Under Athenian law, execution was accomplished by drinking a cup of poisoned hemlock. In Plato's Apology , the trial concludes with Socrates offering a few memorable words as court officials finished their necessary work.
He tells the crowd that his conviction resulted from his unwillingness to "address you as you would have liked me to do. Finally, as he is being led off to jail, Socrates utters the memorable line: "The hour of departure has arrived, and we go our ways--I to die, and you to live.
Which to the better fate is known only to God. There are no records suggesting that Athenian practice allowed defendants to speak after sentencing. Socrates spent his final hours in a cell in the Athens jail. The ruins of the jail remain today. The hemlock that ended his life did not do so quickly or painlessly, but rather by producing a gradual paralysis of the central nervous system.
Most scholars see the conviction and execution of Socrates as a deliberate choice made by the famous philosopher himself. If the accounts of Plato and Xenophon are reasonably accurate, Socrates sought not to persuade jurors, but rather to lecture and provoke them.
The trial of Socrates thus became the most interesting suicide the world has ever seen. Though Socrates seems to be citing nature in his argument, his assertions, Callicles points out, are based more firmly in law and custom. In addition, Socrates claims that punishment is capable of cleansing the soul after an act of injustice has been committed; he argues that punishment ultimately results in happiness because it serves as a necessary retribution for our crimes d.
In his initial refutation of this claim, Polus cites the example of the tyrant Archelaus who achieved great power and stature through injust deeds. I believe that, were a man such as Archelaus, who evidently possesses a negligible moral compass, to be punished for his crimes, he would certainly not be happy in the tangible, self-aware sense of that emotion.
Thus, though it is certainly possible to argue that for some evil-doers, punishment culminates in a moment of self-awareness, regret, and eventual reform, this would undeniably not occur for all.
Thus, were that cleansing not to be felt consciously and concretely, but rather occur on an entirely intangible level, it cannot, I believe, be considered relevant. However, I do not believe that is is applicable to all individuals in all situations.
The Injustice in the Trial of Socrates. Accessed January 14, Essay, Pages 4 words. Socrates and Justice In dialectic with Polus, Socrates argues that committing an injustice is worse than suffering one.
That was apparent at a program held in Chicago on Jan. Their arguments touched on still-unsettled questions about the nature of democracy and the relationship between citizens and their governments. One of the key issues raised by the trial of Socrates is how a democratic society should deal with its gadflies and agitators, says S.
Sara Monoson, a professor of political science and classics at Northwestern University in Evanston, just north of Chicago.
Socrates also raised questions about the meaning of citizenship, says Robert A. Clifford, the founding partner of Clifford Law Offices. He was the original cross-examiner, to reflect on what was necessary to contribute to society, to live that good life. The actual trial of Socrates in B. Socrates was 70 when he was charged by three fellow citizens with religious impiety and corrupting the youth of Athens with his political ideas, which some viewed as challenges to the governing structure, even though he had acted as something of a political gadfly for half a century.
Athenian law did not provide for prosecutions by the state, so Socrates and his accusers presented their own arguments before a jury of citizens, who cast their votes for conviction or acquittal by dropping specially marked discs into jars.
The jury convicted Socrates, then voted for the death penalty over his argument that he should receive no punishment at all.
0コメント