Socrates Defense In Plato's Apology

Plato’s Apology tells the tale of Socrates’ defense, counterproposal, and death sentence in front of a jury of approximately 500 Athenian citizens. Plato’s Crito is named after a wealthy friend of Socrates who the philosopher invokes during his defense as an example of one of the men present in the jury who had enough exposure to his teachings, whether directly or through relatives, to have grounds to testify as a witness against Socrates if indeed his teachings were corrupting the young. An analysis of Socrates’ defense in Apology and the Laws’ defense (anthropomorphized by Socrates) in Crito suggests that Socrates is not opposed to the Laws themselves, but rather the misapplication of the Laws. Before exploring the relationship between …show more content…
With that in mind, it is clear that Socrates’ quarrel is not with the Laws, for then he would be quarreling with himself. Rather, Socrates uses this rhetorical device as a means to get Crito to understand why he is opposed to the idea of evading his death sentence. In the excerpt above in which the Laws warns Socrates of the consequences that await him if he breaks the covenant with the city by going into exile, it is clear that Socrates is not opposed to the Laws but rather to the human beings to whom he allegedly did injustice by and how they applied the Laws to sentence Socrates to death. Crito describes this misapplication of the Laws: “ . . . the way the lawsuit was introduced into the law court, even though it was possible for it not to be introduced; the way the judicial contest itself took place; and now this; the ridiculous conclusion of the affair.” Socrates’ dialogue with the Laws combined with his unrepentant defense followed by complete compliance with the sentence suggests that he has no intention in breaking his covenant with them as an Athenian citizen, but rather is fully invested in the Laws and instead opposed to the misapplication of the system by human beings such as Meletus, Anytus, and