Socrates - A just citizen of Athens?
Socrates did not fit in to the usual status quo in Athens in terms of his debating method, alternative views, choice of clothing and perceived arrogance, but this does not mean he was not just or virtuous. In this essay, I will argue that he did indeed exhibit these qualities.
It appears Socrates was attempting to reform society for the greater good of the citizens by encouraging them to question their values in order to understand better how they ought to live (Brickhouse, T. and Smith, N. 2004 : 2). Socrates is remembered for saying, ‘the unexamined life is not worth living’ (Apology 38a5–6) and made this the basis of his debates. Socrates had served in the army, contributing to society and creating a reputation for courage and uprightness.
According to Plato, some Athenians would become infuriated by debating with Socrates, who would expose their beliefs through questioning and consequently show that they were lacking substance, leaving the individual confused and angry, not wanting to let go of their beliefs. His style of debate appears to be designed to break down barriers and encourage an open mind, which if looked upon positively would have been refreshing and felt as promoting self discovery. For Socrates’ followers, it was understood that he had the wisdom of an open mind and he valued the ability to reflect, along with upholding morals. Conversely, the prime focus for many Athenians was status and wealth. Socrates’ intentions appear to be clear and consistent in his vision of a society where the citizens would engage in reasoned debate and reflection, as opposed to believing they knew the absolute truth about what was important in life.
Following on from discussing his intentions, it is important to highlight that during his trial, Socrates said he was motivated by ‘a daimonion or internal voice. The implication that he was guided by something he regarded as divine or semi divine’ (Nails, D., 2018). Although the Athenians were suspicious of this, Socrates does align himself with a higher purpose, demonstrating virtue. He shows unselfish motives by not pleading for his life, instead requesting that the citizens think through their actions and see the value in what he was bringing to society. He is persuasive yet expresses himself in a way that implies he would like to keep his life only so that he can still be useful to the society, and not because he is scared of death. Furthermore, Socrates did not accept money for his debates and insisted ‘I’ve never been anyone’s teacher’ (Plato, Apology 33a 3) unlike the Sophists of the time, which displays a virtuous, honest approach to sharing philosophy without gaining financially. He notably had a shabby appearance, choosing to wear threadbare clothing and walk barefooted, showing his lack of pretence and disregard for keeping up appearances.
This lack of pretence and moral uprightness is clear when he accepts the death sentence at his trial. Socrates displays respect for the democracy of Athens and this is evidence that he loved the city and was willing to lay down his life for his beliefs. Living according to his morals up until his final moments, shows a faith in his way of life and enabled him to shine a light on the thought processes of Athenians as to what they found most important. When his friend Crito suggests an escape from jail, Socrates establishes that escaping prison would be wrong […] by virtue of being a life long Athenian (Graham, J., 2018), stating ‘don't put your concern for your children or your life or anything before justice’ (Crito 54 b 1-2). He warned the citizens, ‘rest assured that if you kill me […] you won’t harm me more than you harm yourselves’, (Apology 30c 4-5) giving them the opportunity to reflect on their actions, demonstrating his belief that no one does an evil deed knowingly. The vote in favour of death was purportedly 280 to 220, which demonstrates 56% of people voting for his death. Notably, 44% of the jury voted for him to survive. This may suggest support, respect and even awe for Socrates.
Nevertheless, ultimately Socrates was condemned to death by the people of Athens. A possible reason for this is that he was perceived as arrogant. ‘Once the divine sign is viewed as part of a pattern of arrogance, Socrates begins to look very dangerous […] he openly tells his judges that if they were to command him to give up his religious mission, he would disobey them and follow the god instead […] a proclamation of the irrelevance of traditional religious institutions and the superiority of one individual over the political decisions of the whole city. (Smith, N. 2000 : 17). According to Plato’s rendition, Socrates takes control at the trial and instead of pleading for his life, the accused becomes the accuser of the Athenians. This would have been infuriating, as it was highly unusual and could have displayed superiority. This may have resulted in anger, obscuring Socrates’ true intentions, which I would argue was for the Athenians to engage in self-reflection. Alternatively, this arrogance may have incited fear in the jury if it were seen as a deep confidence and sense of mission. With one accusation being that Socrates was ‘corrupting the youth’, the jury may have seen him as a rebel and wanted to eradicate him from society for fear of the change he had the power to create.
In conclusion, it could be seen that Socrates lived as a just and virtuous citizen of Athens, consistently putting moral conduct ahead of status and wealth and attempting to encourage Athenians to examine themselves as a way of enriching their lives, right until the very end of his own. He could be viewed as an altruistic person, who stated he was motivated by god and not his own selfish gain. His debating method may have ruffled some feathers, but if people were willing to go beyond their own anger, they may have found an expansive, open mind, which could be incorporated in to their existing mind-set to bring a deeper wisdom to themselves and to society as a whole.
Bibliography
Smith, N. D., Allhoff, F., Vaidya, A., 2008, “Apology”, Ancient Philosophy, Malden, MA, Blackwell Publishing
Smith, N. D., Allhoff, F., Vaidya, A., 2008, “Crito”, Ancient Philosophy, Malden, MA, Blackwell Publishing
Brickhouse. T. C., Smith, N. D., 2004, Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Plato and the Trial of Socrates, ProQuest Ebook Central, UK, Routledge, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/anglia/detail.action?docID=199939 Created from anglia on 2018-12-16 06:55:09
Smith, N. D., Woodruff, P., 2000, Reason and Religion in Socratic Philosophy, ProQuest Ebook Central, USA, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/anglia/detail.action?docID=272553 Created from anglia on 2018-12-16 11:23:29
Nails, Debra, “Socrates”, 2018, The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (Spring 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https//plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2018/entries/Socrates/>.
Graham, J. N., 2018, “Ancient Greek Philosophy”, Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy”, https://www.iep.utm.edu/greekphi/#H2