Socrates-Traitor or Patriot

Socrates-Traitor or Patriot

The fact that Socrates lived and died at the behest of the pre-eminent democracy of the ancient world has posed an enigmatic challenge to every generation since. Was Socrates a democratic patriot, or a justly condemned traitor to democracy? Must reason and patriot philosophy and the city be at odds? For centuries, the issue seems to have been settled in Socrates' favor. Roman Stoics, Christian Fathers, Enlightenment anti-clericalists all concurred that Athens had been in the wrong, though they differed as to the merit and nature of Socrates' beliefs. But modern admiration for Athens and affection for its patriot as a precursor of our own has made the status of its most famous judicial victim newly problematic. If we now consider ourselves to be patriot, and imaginatively ally ourselves with patriot 'then', must we too condemn Socrates? How have changing historical perspectives about Athens coloured our view of Socrates? (Lane, 2002, 39-42).

It is best to start by asking why the Athenians prisoner Socrates. Our evidence from the examination comes almost completely from Plato (c. 429-347 BC) in his Apologia of Socrates, which factually destined in Greek 'defense language. Plato's Apology describes the charges and the accusers, gives the results of the two votes taken (the first to decide guilt, the second to decide the punishment), and gives a version of the two defense speeches given by Socrates. That this was a version is made very likely by the existence of a rival Apology by Xylophone (c. 428-354 BC), which agrees with Plato about the charges and accusers and some elements in Socrates' speech, but not others. We know that writing Socrates' 'apology' became a popular literary pastime after his death, so that Plato's version of it cannot be taken to be (or perhaps even to have been ...