The Trial and untimely death of Socrates, in my opinion, was a small group of people throwing a fit when it was pointed they weren’t as smart as they thought. The reasoning used by Socrates is the greatest example of the facts, not the manipulation of, proving your innocence. Socrates makes several points as to the trial being a complete waste of time and that even if he was brought to court he would be innocent. I agree death was the wrong verdict by the jury, the jury should have voted for innocence.
To understand and accurately judge the accusations brought against Socrates you must understand how he came to upset his accusers. This started with the oracle of Delphi proclaiming that no man was “wiser” than he was. As you could imagine Socrates was very confused by this and wondered what is the riddle or there are many wiser people in Athens alone. He then, as he puts it “in service of the god”, went out and questioned and ...view middle of the document...
The first charge that Socrates answers is the charge of worshiping different gods then the city does, this is disputed by getting Meletus to calling him an atheist, who believes in no god/s, therefore contradicting his own accusations. The next accusation is the fact that he corrupts the youth, which Meletus claims that he does on purpose, though when asked how he corrupts them they are at a loss for a reasonable response, Socrates also points out the folly in Meletus’s statement that all the people of Athens make the youth better while he alone makes them worse, which is the second inconsistence in Meletus’s case.
Back to the court and my job as a juryman and defining the options of what is to be done with Socrates. As I have listened to the defense, Socrates, and the prosecution, Meletus, Anytus, Lycon, etc…, make their cases for what would be the best form of justice in this case. As I listened to Meletus talk I gained the imprecision that he had a personal problem with Socrates, as he has echoed the rumors about Socrates as his accusations. Meletus ends by wanting to put Socrates to death, which disgusts me, as he believes he can’t become better than he is now. I was shocked by the difference with which Socrates carried and defended himself. He used logic and simple reasoning to defend himself and tell us the sentences to be put to him being death, exile, or acquittal. He eliminates the option of exile stating he would not want to live in any other city then Athens, Which leaves only death or acquittal.
I have considered all that has been said by both sides and have come to the conclusion that Socrates should have acquitted. I chose this option over death, because anyone in my opinion can make anyone else better no matter who they are. Hearing the testimony of both sides I also found that not only should Socrates be acquitted but he should be praised, since as all the evidence indicates he has done no harm, and any that was done was accidental and unintentional.