PLATO

2 Apology

Overview: Though this dialogue is known as Apology, Plato is not making an apology to anyone. The Greek word Apologia in the original title refers to a speech made in a court of law, by a person defending himself. Plato is relating the trial of Socrates for impiety and corruption of the young. Though there is no record of the actual speech Socrates made in his defense, this is Plato’s representation of that speech. Though Plato was present at the trial, there is no way of knowing how closely it conforms to the original.

Socrates is charged with impiety for not believing in The Gods of Athens and for corrupting the young. Socrates uses Apollo’s representative on the earth, the Oracle of Delphi, in his defense – and states that wisdom cannot be taught by a teacher. He emphasizes that, just because someone is an expert in a particular subject, this does not necessarily make him knowledgeable in anything else. He asks people to recognize when they do not know what they think they know. He contends that death is better than living as a coward. Socrates never personally cared much for poets or ancient Greek myths, but he did use them in his defense.

Socrates could perhaps have saved his life by using a more humble tone, but he refuses this defense. He suggests that men should care less for their bodies or wealth and more for their souls, repeating that it is better to die than to live as a coward. He implores the members of the jury to think for themselves and judge him by the facts.

The court was comprised of 501 Citizens of Athens from different walks of life. The court acts as both judge and jury and determines the innocence or the extent of guilt and specifies the sentence if the defendant is found guilty.

Meletus has pressed charges of impiety and of corrupting the youth of Athens against Socrates. These charges were presented in flowery language that asked for a sentence of death. Meletus also warns the jury not to be swayed by Socrates, as he is an accomplished orator.

Socrates, on his own behalf, declares that he is 70 years old and has never before been in a court of law. Furthermore he is not accustomed to flowery speeches. Rather, he will simply speak in his normal manner, using the everyday language of the market place. He emphasizes that he will speak the truth and hopes that the citizens of Athens will think clearly and judge him on the facts. If Meletus thinks that speaking the truth makes him an accomplished orator, then indeed he is one.

Socrates starts his defense by asserting that Meletus and his associate accusers are lying. They have accused him of studying things in the sky and things below the earth. They have said that he converts poor arguments into strong arguments and teaches this technique to others, thus corrupting the young. This teaching is an impiety against the Athenian Gods, whom the city holds dear. Meletus is lying Socrates repeats. Unlike other philosophers, he charges no fee from his listeners, as he is not teaching anyone for a fee. However, when he talks people are free to listen if they wish, and then make up their own minds.

Socrates, in his usual manner, puts a question to himself. If he has done nothing wrong then why are there so many rumors against him? He answers himself by saying that his troubles began when he tried to find the wisest man in Athens. During his search he found that, just because an individual was wise in one field, that person assumed that he was equally wise in everything. Socrates proved such wise men wrong in their assumptions, and this was how he made enemies. The young people who followed him asked similar questions, which upset more people, creating still more enemies who then charged that Socrates was corrupting the young.

Socrates then talks about his friend Chaerephon, who had died but was still well known to the citizens of Athens. The two of them went to Delphi to ask the oracle who the wisest of men was. The oracle identified that that man as Socrates and announced that there was no one wiser. Socrates had found this reply very puzzling and then tried to find out what the oracle meant.

Socrates felt that he was not the wisest of men. If he was not, however, then what could the oracle mean, as the oracle does not lie. In his inquiries he went to a political public figure of note, whose name he withholds. This political figure appeared to be wise to many people and thought himself so as well. Socrates showed him that, though this man thought he was wise, in reality he was not, and for this reason this unnamed individual disliked Socrates. It was then that Socrates came to his conclusion that neither he nor the prominent politician knew anything worthwhile. However, the difference between the two was that, when the prominent politician thought he knew things that in reality he did not, he believed that he did. On the other hand, “when I,” Socrates explains, “do not know something, I do not think that I do. Hence, to a certain extent I am likely to be wiser than the politician, in that I know what it is that I do not know.” Socrates says that he has repeated this line of argument with many people and so has ended up making many enemies. This was when Socrates realized that he was becoming very unpopular with the Athenian people. Nevertheless, he had felt that what the oracle had said was true, and that his investigations were in the service of The Goddess at Delphi. Socrates had thus concluded that those who had the highest reputation were usually the most deficient in knowledge, while those who thought they were inferior were, in reality, more knowledgeable.

Socrates then explains that he continued his examination in fields other than politics. He asked the poets to explain their poems and found that they could not. Instead the common folk were better at explaining them than the authors themselves. From this finding, Socrates states, he concluded that poets had talent and inspiration and said fine things, but they did so without understanding their own works. Because of their poetry they thought that they were wise in other matters as well, but in reality they were not.

Socrates then notes that he has examined people in other walks of life. He has found that craftsmen knew many more things about their craft than he did. However, these craftsmen then felt that, since they knew so much about their craft, they must also be wise in other things as well. Demonstrably they were not.

Then Socrates, on behalf of the oracle, asks himself whether he should prefer to be what he is, neither wise nor ignorant, or whether he should admit to being both. The answer he gives to himself and to the oracle is that it is to his advantage to be what he is. This conclusion Socrates proposes, has resulted in his making many enemies.

Socrates believes that the oracle was correct in saying that “human wisdom is worth nothing.” He understands that wisdom is worthless. The young people who follow Socrates question others who think that they are wise and try to prove them wrong. Because of such followers, Socrates has collected many enemies who say that he corrupts the young. However, when he has turned around and asked his enemies how he corrupts the young, they have been unable to answer him. These critics fall back on the spurious accusations hurled at all philosophers who maintain that philosophers inquire: “about those things in the sky and things below the earth” and then assert that: “they do not believe in The Gods and make the weaker argument more appealing than the stronger argument.” These accusers will not accept that their claim to knowledge is bogus.

Meletus has accused Socrates on behalf of poets, craftsmen, and orators. Socrates reiterates that he has told the truth and hidden nothing and that his self-defense must then be what makes him unpopular.

As for the other charges brought against Socrates by Meletus, the deposition says that Socrates was guilty of corrupting the young and not believing in The Gods of Athens. Instead of directly defending himself, Socrates promotes new spiritual ideas. He turns this argument around telling Meletus that he is irresponsible for bringing people to court and professing to care for things that he has never cared about before. Socrates points out that as Meletus seems to know only those who corrupt the young, why can he not say who improves them? At first Meletus remains silent, but on further prodding he answers this question with a brief response – “the laws.” Socrates accuses him of evading the question and asks who has knowledge of the laws? Socrates continues, stating that it appears that everyone improves the young but only Socrates corrupts them, an argument that he finds preposterous. He asks Meletus if it is better to live amongst good or wicked fellow citizens? “Don’t the wicked do some harm and the good provide some benefits?” Meletus agrees to this hypothesis. Socrates then asks whether a man would rather be harmed or benefited. Is there any man who wants to be harmed? Meletus agrees that there is no such man. Socrates continues his questions, asking Meletus if he believes that Socrates corrupts the young deliberately or unwillingly? Meletus replies: “deliberately.” Socrates then asks whether Meletus believes that he does not believe in The Gods at all and considers him to be an atheist? Meletus replies that indeed, he thinks that Socrates is an atheist. Socrates replies that, just as other people do, he believes in the sun and moon as Gods. Meletus refutes that statement. Socrates turns the question around and asks Meletus whether he is also prosecuting Anaxagoras, the astronomer? Does Meletus know that people can buy books by Anaxagoras for a small sum and learn all about The Gods, without any help from Socrates? Socrates then questions Meletus further about the so-called “spiritual things.” They both agree that if Socrates talks about spiritual things, he must believe in spirits. Now, Socrates points out that spirits are either Gods or children of Gods and thus if Socrates believes in them he cannot be an atheist and so Meletus is contradicting himself. Socrates agrees that he is unpopular with many people and that this reputation might be his undoing. He allows that some would question him about following an occupation that puts him in danger of death, but he asserts that death is better than disgrace. If a person’s actions are correct, then his death is of no consequence. He reminds the jury that, during the battle of Troy, Achilles, is prepared to kill Hector to avenge the death of his comrade, Patroclus. The Goddess Athena has warned him that, if he kills Hector, his own death will soon follow. Achilles replies, saying that he despises death and danger, but is afraid of living as a coward if he does not avenge his comrade’s death. Socrates underscores that Achilles was prepared to die rather than live, saying that death may be the greatest blessing and men should not fear it.

Socrates summarizes his defense by saying that, if he had to promise never to practice philosophy again to spare his life, he would reject that offer. He goes on to say that he would continue to persuade young people to care not for their own bodies or for wealth, but only for their souls. Wealth does not bring excellence, but excellence brings wealth. Whether the jury passes the sentence of death or not, Socrates states, what he said earlier will be his course of action. He further adds that if they do sentence him to death they will do more harm to themselves than to him. He says that Meletus and the others can put him to death but they can not harm him. Socrates ends his defense and refuses to plead for any favors or for his life.

The jury finds Socrates guilty, and Meletus asks for the death penalty. Socrates comments that he is not angry with anyone but that he is surprised that he was convicted by such a very small majority. Despite the verdict he still does not consider himself guilty of any of the charges.

Some members of the council try to assess a fine rather than the death penalty. Socrates comments he has no funds to pay a fine. Some citizens offered to pay the fine for him, but the jury declines to assess a fine. The sentence of death cannot be carried out for about a month because the state galley is on a religious pilgrimage to the Island of Delos and the law forbids carrying out the death sentence when the ship is not harbored at Athens. During this delay his friends offer to bribe the jailors to free him so that he can escape but once again Socrates refuses their help. He avers that, as a citizen of Athens, he was tried and found guilty. He will obey the laws of the city. When the time comes to depart from this life, he will go on to die, and they will go on to live without him. Who goes to a better place is only known to The Gods.

3 Crito

Overview: Socrates’s friend Crito argues that the state was wrong in convicting him and sentencing him to death. He proposes to pay off the jailors to allow Socrates to escape and live in exile elsewhere. Socrates presents numerous arguments to the same point, that doing one wrong to correct another wrong is never right. Socrates tells Crito that as a citizen he enjoyed all the privileges that Athens offered him and his family, and that in return he must observe the laws of the city and must accept the city’s judgment. Finally, they both agree that this outcome is also the will of The Gods. Elements of Plato’s arguments can certainly be found in Christian philosophy, for example, “turning the other cheek.”

Socrates has been found guilty and sentenced to death. However, the death sentence cannot not be carried out as the laws require that the Athenian state galley must be in port when an execution is carried out. This ship is now on an annual religious mission to the island of Delos.

Socrates’ friend, Crito, visits him in prison early one morning. Crito informs him that he has some very bad news: The state galley will arrive the next day, and therefore the death sentence will be carried out on the following day. Socrates tells Crito that he is ready for death.

Crito tells Socrates that he has enough money to bribe the jailor, and two other friends have promised more funds to help free him so that he can escape to another city. Crito adds that people might think that, if he did not offer help, he valued money more than his friend. Socrates advises him that he should pay no attention to the opinions of other people. Crito then expresses concern that some informers would let the authorities know of such an escape plot. Such an accusation would subject all of the friends to a court case, confiscation of their property, and imprisonment, but they still urge Socrates to escape. Socrates tells Crito that he has thought about this possibility as well as many other things. Crito replies that he has friends in Thessaly who would be glad to welcome Socrates, and implores him not to give up his life. Crito reminds Socrates that he has young sons to bring up and educate, and without their father they will become orphans. Socrates tells Crito that he very much appreciates his eagerness to help but that in his usual manner he would like to examine all the alternatives and come to a decision on his own. Socrates tells him that he values the opinions of all men. Good opinions can come from wise men and bad opinions from foolish men. A person should consider opinions only from men who are well versed in the subject.

Socrates now begins to examine the question of escape. Should he go against the wishes of the Athenian people as expressed by the jury that convicted him? First, he asks Crito if he would agree that no one should ever willingly do a wrong or, he adds do a wrong thing in one instance and not in another? He emphasizes that what ever the conditions, doing wrong is shameful. Crito agrees with this philosophy. Socrates then rephrases his argument: while a person must never do wrong, but, if a wrong is done to someone then that individual must not retaliate by inflicting wrong on the perpetrator of the original wrong. Crito again agrees with this moral judgment. Socrates then asks Crito to consider carefully whether his beliefs allow him to agree with these principles. He points out that many other men would not agree, as they hold opposing views. Socrates states his contention that a man should never consent to doing wrong or to return a wrong in response for a wrong to himself. Crito once again agrees. Socrates tells him that if he does agree, then he should always follow this principle and not just on occasions that suit him. After Crito agrees to everything that Socrates is telling him, Socrates asks him, how he would answer the Athenian state if Socrates goes against the jury’s verdict and escapes from the city. As Socrates could not say that the verdict was unjust: “therefore I, Socrates, would respond with another wrong.” Socrates repeats that he is duty bound to follow the laws of the city under whose protection he has lived his entire life, enjoying its comforts, and bringing up his children. This viewpoint is his moral contract with the city. Thus escaping from the jail and seeking asylum elsewhere would be doing wrong. Furthermore by living in exile a person becomes subservient to a different set of people. Finally, Crito concedes to Socrates’ arguments and Socrates replies that The Gods are showing him this path.

4 Phaedo

Overview: Phaedo is not so much a dialogue, but a retelling of the last day of Socrates’ life, as narrated by the principal character, Phaedo, to a group of friends in the Greek city of Phlius. Phaedo mentions by name several friends of Socrates who were present for his final hours. However, he makes a point that Plato was not present because he was taken ill that day. It seems worth considering whether Plato is perhaps trying to dissociate himself from what he makes Socrates say in this dialogue. First, Phaedo explains why it took more than a month for the death sentence to be carried out, relating the legend of Theseus and the monster Minotaur, which was relevant to the reason for the delay.

Phaedo follows with Socrates’ theory of how opposites seem to follow one another. For an example, Socrates cited the feeling of pleasure that followed the removal of the chains, which had caused so much pain in the legs.

Phaedo relates how Socrates suggested that the sophist Evenus should follow him soon (presumably in death). Socrates, Phaedo notes, had explained to him how a philosopher truly prepares for death all his life, so he should not be afraid of dying when his time comes. At death, according to Socrates, the body which is mortal, disintegrates, but the soul, which is immortal, lives on forever. Phaedo says that Socrates explained the belief that after death the soul is born again in a new being. Furthermore, if a person has led a virtuous life, then the soul may reside in Hades forever or be reborn in another person. If the life led was not virtuous, then the soul will be born again as an animal or as some lower form of life, depending on how lacking in virtue the life was.

Phaedo then discusses Socrates’ views on recollection and learning, which maintain that learning is only recollection of past memories, exemplified in this case by a lover seeing a garment belonging to his loved one. This object brings on a recollection of the loved one, even though that person is not physically present.

Then, Phaedo notes that Socrates talked about Forms. As an example, Socrates asserted that Beautiful is a Form and notes that the various features that comprise the Beautiful are only attributes of that Form.

Similar, he maintained, is the concept of odd and even numbers: Number 3 is an odd number, but 3 is only an attribute of Oddness.

Finally, according to Phaedo, just before his death, Socrates made a point of asking Crito to sacrifice a cock to Asclepius (The God of Healing). This sacrifice, Phaedo infers, suggests that death is actually a cure for the ills of Socrates’ life. This final request is based on the practice of the sacrifice of a cock by people who slept in the temple of Asclepius while seeking a cure for their illness.

This dialogue, as narrated by Phaedo to Echecrates, describes the conversation among a group of Socrates’ friends on his final day of life.

Phaedo, on his way to the city of Elis, stops at the city of Phlius where he is met by Echecrates. Echecrates asks him whether he was present when Socrates swallowed poison, and if he was there, what Socrates’ final words were? Phaedo assures him that he was with Socrates on that final day along with Socrates’ wife, Xanthippe, their baby, and several friends who he names. He reports that Plato was not there, as he had taken ill that day. Echecrates says that everyone in Phlius wondered why the death sentence was only carried out so long after the trial ended. Phaedo explains that this execution day was chosen by chance and, as explanation he relates the story of the King of Crete, Minos, who had defeated the Athenians in a battle. Each year, as tribute, the Athenians were obligated to send seven youths and seven maidens to be sacrificed to the monster Minotaur who dwelled in the labyrinth at Crete. One year, Theseus who was one of those sent to be sacrificed succeeded in slaying Minotaur. To commemorate this triumph, the Athenians vowed to send the ship every year on which Theseus had sailed, on a pilgrimage to the island of Delos. The ship was crowned with garlands just the day before Socrates’ trial ended. Once the ship was crowned for its voyage, Athens had to be kept pure. Because of this restriction, no one could be put to death until the ship returned home.

Echecrates then asks for more details about Socrates’ confinement. Phaedo says that initially all visitors were asked to wait outside until the guards removed the chains from Socrates’ legs. The visitors then were led to his cell. Very soon, Xanthippe, Socrates’ wife, began to cry and Socrates asked Crito to arrange for someone to take her and the baby home, which was done.

Then Socrates put his feet on the bed and gently rubbed them, saying how good it felt to be free of his chains. He wondered, Phaedo relates, about what men call pleasure, noting that it is interesting that opposite always follow each other, such as pleasure follows pain. Socrates contended that man cannot have both pain and pleasure at the same time, but if he pursues one, then the opposite soon follows. He wondered whether Aesop, the writer of fables, had noted this constraint. If Aesop had, Socrates reasoned, he would surely have written a fable about it. The Gods, Socrates averred, could not reconcile these two opposite reactions, and therefore they joined them together. Thus, according to Socrates, Phaedo reports, that when man has either pain or pleasure, the other soon follows. That is what was happening to him. The chains had caused pain in his legs and now pleasure seemed to be following their removal.

At this point, Phaedo reports, Cebes intervened, saying that Evenus, the sophist and teacher, had requested that he ask Socrates what induced him to write poetry after he was confined to prison, as Socrates had never done this type of writing before. While in prison, Socrates had put Aesop’s fables into verse and had also composed a hymn to Apollo. Socrates answered Cebes, saying that he should tell Evenus that he did not do it to rival Evenus, as that would not be easy to accomplish. Instead, he had tried to find the meaning of the recurring dreams he was having. The dreams were concerned with which of the arts he should practice, so he had written poetry to satisfy his curiosity. The dreams told Socrates that he should practice and cultivate the arts. In the past, he had thought that to practice the arts meant practicing the art of philosophy. Following his trial and the delay in executing the sentence, he thought that the dream might mean practicing the popular arts such as poetry. Phaedo relates that Socrates continued: “Tell this to Evenus, wish him well and tell him to follow me soon.” Here Simmias interrupted, questioning this advice, and saying that he had met Evenus often and that he was not likely to willingly follow Socrates soon. Socrates asked: “Why this should be so, is Evenus not a philosopher?” According to Socrates, Phaedo explains: “A philosopher is never afraid to die.” Simmias agreed that Evenus might agree to follow Socrates in death, but he would not take his own life. Socrates then told Simmias that men practicing philosophy are never afraid to die and are hopeful that they will attain greater blessings yonder. Hence, if this belief held true, after being eager all their lives for death, to resent death when it does come would be strange indeed. But, Socrates advised, a man should not commit suicide unless it is absolutely necessary. Then, all of the discussants asked whether there is such a thing as death. They all agreed that death is the separation of the soul from the body. Phaedo then relates that they discussed whether a philosopher should concern himself with the pleasures of the body, such as food, drink, sex, and fancy clothes, along with bodily ornaments. They agreed that a philosopher must despise all of these pleasures and instead strive to separate body from soul. They all were in accord that it is the body and its desires that cause so many of mankind’s problems such as war, civil discord, and immoderate desire for the acquisition of wealth. Ultimately, it is the body that prevents men from seeing the truth.

To have pure knowledge, the group concurred, men must escape from the body and see everything with their souls. However, only when dead can men attain this viewpoint. Hence, Phaedo concludes that it is only he who practices philosophy in the correct manner who most wants to free the soul from the body. Thus a philosopher is never afraid of dying. Phaedo notes that Cebes interjected that Socrates’ idea of the soul separating from the body might be true, but he thought that many people believe that when a person dies his soul also disintegrates. Socrates agreed to discuss this point. Socrates asked whether, when a person dies his soul exists in the underworld or not? The conventional theory is that the souls arriving in the underworld are from the dead, and if the souls arrive, they must, therefore, exist. Then the living must come from the dead, for, if this were not the case, how could it be that they can be born again. Socrates went on to several more examples. Hence the living Socrates posited, are generated from the dead through birth, and the dead are generated from the living by dying. Thus the cycle of life is perpetuated.

Socrates then talked about recollection and experience. Recollections can come from similar or dissimilar events. Learning, Socrates said, is the same as recollection. He presented an example: when men are questioned in the right manner they always give the right answers, which they could not do if they did not have the correct knowledge inside of them. Socrates then went on to explain his point. They all agreed that if someone recollects anything, he must have known it before. So this knowledge is recollection. He further explained this viewpoint by pointing out that, if, a lover sees a piece of clothing that belonged to his beloved, the image of the beloved comes to mind just as if the lover were seeing that person instead of the item of clothing. If a man sees a picture of a horse, Socrates continued, he may recollect the man who has ridden that horse. Hence, as those in the group had said earlier, recollection can be caused by things that may be similar or dissimilar to the event. They agreed that these recollections derive from seeing, or from hearing, or from another of the perception senses, with all of these senses being similar. Given the notion that people begin to see or perceive immediately after birth, it stands to reason that the knowledge of those perceptions must have been acquired before birth. Thus, if they retain this knowledge it has not been forgotten. Phaedo says that Socrates claimed that a person acquired the relevant knowledge before being born, but then loses it at birth. By using the senses people reacquired this knowledge, so the argument went. Learning is thus the reacquisition of this knowledge, which is actually recollection. Hence souls would have also acquired knowledge before birth and, therefore, the soul must have existed apart from the body before birth. Socrates explained that when the soul and the body are together, nature orders the soul to rule and be the master, while the body is to be the subject to be ruled. This natural aspect, Socrates inferred, leads to the conclusion that the soul has multiple desires and is deathless, while the body is human and mortal. Thus, when a person dies, the body eventually disintegrates, and the soul goes on to the underworld – Hades. That soul will be reborn as an animal or another person, depending on the life led previously. If life were lived badly, the soul will be reborn as an animal, but, if the life was lived well the soul will then be reborn as a human.

Socrates, Phaedo relates, then told everyone that when he was young, he was keen on natural science. Socrates claimed that he knew the causes of each thing, when it came to be and when it perished. He had wondered if the brain provided the senses of hearing, sight and smell, from which people get memories and opinions that then become knowledge. He soon realized, however, that he had no natural aptitude for these questions and so gave up this line of reasoning. Then, one day, when he was reading a book by Anaxagoras, he came to understand that it was the mind that dictates, which is the cause of everything. His hopes were dashed, however, when he found that man made no use of the mind and gave it no role in management of the body.