The Defense Of Socrates In Plato's The Apology

In Plato’s The Apology, a trial is depicted to convict Socrates, a man who simply wanted to seek and define the truth, for corrupting the youth of Athens, and harming the relations among citizens by causing disrespect through his practice of philosophy. The trial seeks to uncover the truth of Socrates’ actions, or rather, if his actions were a harm to the society of Athens. In regards to the city, the prosecution had some strong arguments, and many weak ones that Socrates goes on to discredit time and time again. As for the defense, many accounts of strong and weak arguments existed, that were followed by no dispute by the prosecution. That being said, despite even their weakest argument, the defense put forth the best support for their case. Socrates …show more content…
During his exchange with Meletus, Socrates’ accuser, Socrates states that if he participates in daimonic activities, he must believe in daimons. When Meletus agrees, Socrates goes on to explain that daimons are the children of gods, and Meletus concurs once again. This could have arguably been Meletus’ worst mistake in the trial. Socrates goes on to question how, if he does not believe in gods, he could believe in daimons and engage in daimonic activities. The answer to this question reads, “There’s no conceivable way you could persuade any man with even the slightest intelligence that the same person believes in both daimonic activities and gods, and, on the contrary, that this same person believes neither in daimons, nor in gods, nor in heroes,” (Plato 32). In this statement, along with the remarks in his exchange with Meletus, the accuser of Socrates, he outrightly invalidates this argument made by the prosecution. The prosecution had several weak allegations towards Socrates, making the arguments on the side of the defense that much