Socrates Unjust Punishment

When held on trial, Socrates stated that the people of Athens would be more harmed by his execution than he will be, if he were to be sentenced to death. Socrates was fighting charges for corrupting the youth and for not acknowledging the Gods. During the trial Socrates had proven that his accuser Meletus was accusing Socrates mainly out of spite instead of accusing him for the benefit of Athens or the people of Athens. He believed that an unjust killing was not good for the human soul. During the trial Socrates called himself a gadfly, attaching himself to the city of Athens and helping the people of the city understand the truth behind any theories that he would discuss or that would be brought up. To Socrates, this would be a part of his …show more content…
Nobody testified against Socrates under that accusation. When Socrates claimed that the people of Athens would be hurt more by his execution than he will, he mentioned how an unjust killing would not be good for the soul. This would be an unjust killing because Socrates had already proven to the jurors that he has not corrupted the youth nor do any of the other accusations that Meletus held against Socrates were even true. Socrates also proved to the jury that Meletus' did not even care about these accusations held against Socrates. Which means that Meletus' accusations carried no weight against Socrates. Meletus' second accusation would be that Socrates did not acknowledge the Gods. However Socrates also proved this was incorrect by stating that he does acknowledge God because as he claimed in his trial, God gave Socrates this mission to practise philosophy. By proving that Meletus was doing this out of spite means that Socrates death would be unjust. This would tie in with Socrates' claim that an unjust killing is not good for the human soul which would harm the people of Athens more than …show more content…
His approach to proving his innocence was interesting. First proving that Meletus does not care about the youth or Socrates alleged lack of faith, but after he did so he proved the charges against him held no truth to them. I do agree with what Socrates has to say about an unjust killing. Because if you are a part of an unjust killing, how one human being is able to live with the burden of killing an innocent man is beyond comprehension. No doubt that Socrates would be correct about how it would not be good for the human soul. When Socrates referred to himself as a gadfly I thought that he made a lot of sense. He was showing people that seeking the truth of things is a better way to live because it prevents laziness and faintheartedness. He was only doing what was best for the people of Athens in his eyes. To Socrates that was a noticeable problem in Athens, so without him there, who will play as the Gadfly? However I really doubt that in that Gadfly statement, the jury would be convinced that Socrates ever did anything to help Athens in any way other than his military service. Nevertheless, reading his defence you understand his point as he was on his mission from God. To finish, Socrates' defence was very convincing in my