Trial and Death of Socrates - The Blog of Daksh Pandit

The religiously charged environment as we live in today and the cancel culture emanating therefrom, was not an enigma in the ancient times. The proverbial trial and death of Socrates is a classic example of a Greek tragedy, where a person of high moral principle is confronted step by step with a situation from which there is no escape, often through conflict with some other person or persons whose principles are no less understandable and may frequently, represent the interests of the State itself.

The trial and death of Socrates is captured by his student, Plato, in his four Socratic Dialogues written by him viz-

Euthyphro– Socrates outside the Court house, debating the nature of Piety.
Apology– Socrates defending himself in front of the jury.
Crito– Socrates awaiting execution in prison.
Phaedo– Socrates calmly and confidently facing death.

Socrates (470 BC- 399 BC) was a Greek philosopher, famous for his ‘Socratic method’ (or rather infamous, as it resulted in his trial and conviction) which came to be named after him. Socrates would pick a debate with an expert having an expertise over a particular subject, and by using his clever conversational skills, involving a dialogue and round of questions, he would end up proving the expert wrong. Socrates’ method of argument, the elenchus, exposed inconsistencies in the moral beliefs of the interlocutor, inconsistencies which are likely to be reflected in their own lives. This method of Socrates did not stem from his own expertise over the subject of debate, rather Socrates acknowledged his own ignorance about the subject of debate and indulged in it as a student hoping to learn something from the expert.

These frequent interrogations undertaken by Socrates were a result of an Oracle who told him that there is none wiser in the world than Socrates himself. In order to confirm the statement made by the Oracle, Socrates frequently interrogated people claiming to have wisdom and expertise over a subject. His Interlocutors were people stretching from the lowest strata of society to people sitting in the highest social ladder, politicians, poets and peasants alike. The interrogations were held in the open, making them quite a spectacle for others to judge and form an opinion. The consequence being that these people who claimed to be highly educated stood exposed in the face of ‘Socratic method’. The young men imitated Socrates and similarly cross-examined other experts who also stood exposed.

Socrates believed that a wise man is not one who claims to have wisdom or expertise over a subject, rather, a wise man is one who realizes that real wisdom is the property of God and in terms of wisdom, he really is worthless. The effect of the interrogations and aforesaid belief of Socrates is reflected in the following passages in ‘Apology’ written by Plato-

“…it seemed to me, as I pursued my investigation at the God’s command, that the people with the greatest reputations were almost entirely deficient, while others who were supposed to be their inferiors were much more noteworthy for their general good sense.¹

…The effect of these investigations of mine, gentleman, has been to arouse against me a great deal of hostility, and hostility of a particular bitter and persistent kind, which has resulted in various malicious suggestions, and in having that term ‘wise’ applied to me. This is due to the fact that whenever I succeeded in disproving another persons’ claim to wisdom in a given subject, the bystanders assume that I know everything about that subject myself. But the truth of the matter, gentleman, is likely to be this: that real wisdom is the property of God, and this oracle is his way of telling us that human wisdom has little or no value. It seems to me that he is not referring literally to Socrates, but has merely taken my name as an example, as if he would say to us, ‘The wisest of you men is he who has realized, like Socrates, that in respect of wisdom he is really worthless.’²

Socrates, essentially, evoked the faculty of ‘questioning’ in others or rather ‘Socratic Questioning’, to not take things at face value unless they have passed through the screening of logic and reasoning. This, perhaps, irked all his victims who were made to look like fools, until one Poet, Meletus, prosecuted him for impiety on the following charges-

That Socrates failed to acknowledge the Gods recognized by the State and conjured up new Gods.
That Socrates was corrupting the mind of the youth.

It is during the trial of Socrates that we witness the Socratic thought, method and questioning, in all its glory, might and fury. Without exaggeration or any suppression of his enormity, Socrates masterly cross-examines Meletus, his accuser, in his trademark fashion involving rounds of questioning. However, despite emphatically dispelling the charges levelled against him by Meletus, the jury found him guilty and sentenced him to death. A travesty, perhaps, of the highest order, in the realm of justice. It is debated that the jury found Socrates guilty owing to his arrogant, insolent and impudent behavior, lacking respect for the authority of Court, which is akin to God himself. Socrates’ very conduct in Court could be taken as proof that his conduct in general promoted insubordination and a lack of respect for any authority. He had himself shown that he had no respect for the politicians, poet and skilled craftsmen and one might readily guess that his followers would show no such respect either. Socrates was a problem, he did breed attitudes which were difficult for the city to handle³.

Socrates may have failed to persuade the jury, however, it is important to highlight his principles which emerged during his skillful cross-examination of Meletus-

1. Goodness over monetary gains

“..Wealth does not bring goodness but goodness brings wealth and every other blessing, both to the individual and to the State….When my sons grow up, gentleman, if you think that they are putting money or anything else before goodness, take your revenge by plaguing them …..”⁴

2. Always stand by what you believe is right, no matter the cost.

“The Truth of the matter is this, Gentleman. Where a man has once taken up his stand, either because it seems best to him or in obedience to his orders, there I believe he is bound to remain and face the danger, taking no account of death or anything else before dishonor.”⁵

In Crito and Phaedo, Plato illustrates that despite being offered various opportunities by his followers to escape the prison, Socrates chose to face the execution, reminding his followers not to be afraid of death, rather embrace it, for Nothing can harm a good man either in life or after death.⁶

The Painting: Death of Socrates by Jacques-Louis David, capturing the climax of Socrates’ life when the poison, Hemlock, is being administered to him. Socrates is shown calm and composed, facing death with equanimity, in the backdrop of his anguished followers who failed to persuade him to escape the prison.

Socrates finds himself in the exalted company of those rare breed of people who would rather die for their principles than surrender them to toe the line of the State or the Authority.

By Daksh Pandit