All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 21, 2009 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
33:30
1261 The Trial and Death of Socrates - Part Two

The Trial Part 1.

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Good afternoon, everybody.
It's Stefan Molyneux. I hope you're doing very well.
Yes, we've had a slightly different change of venue.
Donations are down a little bit, so I'm actually out back of a Best Buy here, working on getting them to be a corporate sponsor.
I'll let you know how that goes, and thank you so much to the gentleman who suggested that I write my own, quote, inauguration speech to compete with Obama's.
I will do that. I'm just getting over a bit of a cold, so when I sound a little less sultry, I will absolutely get that done.
So this is The Trial and Death of Socrates, Part 2.
And I'm not even going to pretend to make this short.
This is going to be pretty in-depth because I want to go through the speech that he makes to the court in the court of law when Meletus brings the charges against him which are twofold.
The first is the corruption of the young and the second is not believing in the gods of the state and I'm going to go through the entire speech.
So, you know, get comfortable.
I think it will be well worthwhile because this is quite possibly the most influential piece of rhetoric that has ever existed, at least in the West.
So I think it's worth spending just a little bit of time going through it.
And I think it's also very fascinating.
So he starts off by saying...
He says, How have you felt, O men of Athens, that hearing the speeches of my accusers I cannot tell?
But know that their persuasive words almost made me forget who I was.
Such was the effect of them.
And yet they have hardly spoken a word of truth.
But many as their falsehoods were, there was one of them which quite amazed me.
I mean, when they told you to be upon your guard and not let yourself be deceived by the force of my eloquence, They ought to have been ashamed of saying this, because they were sure to be detected as soon as I opened my lips and displayed my deficiency.
They certainly did appear to be most shameless in saying this, unless by the force of eloquence they mean the force of truth.
For then I do indeed admit that I am eloquent, but in how different a way from theirs.
Well, as I was saying, they have hardly added a word, or not more than a word, of truth, but you shall hear from me the whole truth, not, however, delivered after their manner in a set oration duly ornamented with words and phrases.
No, indeed, but I shall use the words and arguments which occur to me at the moment, for I am certain that this is right, and That, at my time of life, I ought not to be appearing, before you are men of Athens, in the character of a juvenile orator.
Let no one expect this of me.
And I must beg of you to grant me one favour, which is this.
If you hear me using the same words in my defense, which I have been in the habit of using and which most of you may have heard in the Agora and at the tables of the money changers or anywhere else, I would ask you not to be surprised at this and not to interrupt me.
For I am more than seventy years of age, and this is the first time I have ever appeared in a court of law.
And I'm quite a stranger to the ways of the place, and therefore I would have you regard me as if I really were a stranger, whom you could excuse if he spoke in his native tongue and after the fashion of his country.
That, I think, is... Not an unfair request.
Never mind the manner, which may or may not be good, but think only of the justice of my cause, and give heed to that.
Let the judge decide justly, and the speaker speak truly.
This is the standard, and I mentioned this in my report on Obama's speech.
Excuse me. This is the standard layup of a fantastic piece of oratory, which is to say, oh, I have no eloquence, I have no capacity to sway you with my fine words.
And then he, of course, makes an absolutely amazing speech.
So he continues. And first, I have to reply to the older charges and to my first accusers, and then I will go on to the later ones.
For I have had many accusers who accused me of old, and their false charges have continued during many years.
And I am more afraid of them than of Anitus and his associates, who are dangerous too in their own way.
But far more dangerous are these who began when you were children, And took possession of your minds with their falsehoods, telling of one Socrates, a wise man, who speculated about the heaven above, and searched into the earth beneath, and made the worse appear the better cause.
These are the accusers whom I dread, for they are the circulators of this rumour, and their hearers are too apt to fancy that speculators of this sort do not believe in the gods.
And they are many, and their charges against me are of ancient date, and they made them in days when you were impressible in childhood or perhaps in youth.
And the cause, when heard, went by default, for there was none to answer.
And hardest of all, their names I do not know and cannot tell, unless, in the chance case of a comic poet, by this he means Aristophanes, But the main body of these slanderers, who from envy and malice have wrought upon you,
and there are some of them who are convinced themselves and impart their convictions to others, all these, I say, are most difficult to deal with, for I cannot have them up here and examine them, and therefore I must simply fight with shadows in my own defense and examine when there is no one who answers.
I will ask you then to assume with me, as I was saying, that my opponents are of two kinds.
One recent, the other ancient, and I hope that you will see the propriety of my answering the latter first, for these accusations you heard long before the others, and much oftener.
I like this. This is a great introduction because he's basically saying that he sees 70 and these slanderers have been floating around about his corruption of the youth and his atheism or his disbelief in the gods of the state.
And he's saying this is the mere tip of the iceberg when it comes to the slanderers that have been thrown against me.
For many, many, many years.
And that he also reminds people that not to be taken in by what they heard about Socrates when they were young.
So pointing out that this is the mere, the latest in a string of long slanders and libels against him, I think is really, it's a very, very smart thing to do because it reminds the court that this is nothing new for him and that they come in with a certain prejudice if they've heard these things before.
He continues. Well then, I will make my defense, and I will endeavor, in the short time which is allowed, to do away with this evil opinion of me, which you have held for such a long time, and I hope that I may succeed, if this be well for you and me, and that my words find favor with you.
But I know that to accomplish this is not easy.
I quite see the nature of the task.
Let the event be, as God wills, in obedience to the law, I make my defense.
I will begin at the beginning, and ask what the accusation is which has given rise to this slander of me, and which has encouraged Meletus to proceed against me.
What do the slanderers say?
They shall be my prosecutors, and I will sum up their words in an affidavit.
Is an evil-doer and a curious person who searches into things under the earth and in heaven, and he makes the worse appear the better cause, and he teaches the aforesaid doctrines to others.
That is the nature of the accusation.
And that is what you have seen yourselves in the comedy of Aristophanes, who introduced a man whom he calls Socrates, going about and saying that he can walk in the air and talk a deal of nonsense concerning matters of which I do not pretend to know either much or little.
Not that I mean to say anything disparaging of anyone who is a student of natural philosophy.
I should be very sorry if Meletus could lay that to my charge.
But the simple truth is, O Athenians, that I have nothing to do with these studies.
Very many of those here present are witnesses to the truth of this, and to them I appeal.
Speak then, you who have heard me, and tell your neighbors, whether any of you have ever known me to hold forth in few words or in many upon matters of this sort.
You hear their answer.
And from what they say of this, you will be able to judge the truth of the rest.
Thank you.
So Aristophanes in the clouds has Socrates talking about natural philosophy, which is not what Socrates is interested in.
This would be considered science or physics or biology or chemistry and so on.
Back then it would be closer to alchemy.
He continues. As little foundation is there for the report that I am a teacher and take money...
That is no more true than the other.
Although, if a man is able to teach, I honor him for being paid.
There is Gorgias of Leontium and Podicus of Seos and Hippias of Elis, who go the round of the cities and are able to persuade the young men to leave their own citizens, by whom they might be taught for nothing and come to them, whom they not only pay, but are thankful if they are allowed to pay him.
There is actually a Parian philosopher residing in Athens of whom I have heard, and I came to hear of him this way.
I met a man who has spent a world of money on the sophists, Callius, the son of Hippoconicus, and knowing that he had sons, I asked him, Callius, I said, if your two sons were foals or calves, there would be no difficulty in finding someone to put over them.
We should hire a trainer of horses or a farmer, probably, who would improve and perfect them in their own proper virtue.
And excellence. But as there are human beings, whom are you thinking of placing over them?
Is there anyone who understands human and political virtue?
You must have thought about this as you have sons.
Is there anyone? There is, he said.
Who is he? said I. And of what country?
And what does he charge?
Evanus the Parian, he replied.
He is the man, and he charges five minae.
Happy is Evanus, I said to myself.
If he really has this wisdom and teaches at such a modest charge.
Had I the same, I should have been very proud and conceited, but the truth is that I have no knowledge of the kind, O Athenians.
I dare say that someone will ask the question, why is this Socrates?
And what is the origin of these accusations of you?
For there must have been something strange which you have been doing.
All this great fame and talk about you would never have arisen if you had been like other men.
Tell us then why this is, as we should be sorry to judge hastily of...
Now I regard this as a fair challenge, and I will endeavour to explain to you the origin of this name of wise, says Socrates, and of this evil fame.
Pleased to attend then.
And although some of you may think that I am looking, I declare that I will tell you the entire truth.
Men of Athens, this reputation of mine has come of a certain sort of wisdom which I possess.
If you ask me what kind of wisdom, I reply, such wisdom as is attainable by man, for to that extent I am inclined to believe that I am wise, whereas the persons of whom I was speaking have a superhuman wisdom, which I may fail to describe, because I have it not myself, and he who says that I have speaks falsely and is taking away my character.
And here, O men of Athens, I must beg you not to interrupt me, Even if I seem to say something extravagant.
For the word which I will speak is not mine.
I will refer you to a witness who is worthy of credit, and will tell you about my wisdom, whether I have any and of what sort.
And that witness shall be the god of Delphi.
You must have known Sheriffon.
He was an early friend of mine, and also a friend of yours, for he shared in the exile of the people and returned with you.
Well, Sheriffon, as you know, was very impetuous in all his doings, and he went to Delphi and boldly asked the oracle to tell him whether, as I was saying, I must beg you not to interrupt, he asked the oracle to tell him whether there was anyone wiser than I was.
And the Pythian prophetess answered that there was no man wiser.
Sheriffon is dead himself, but his brother, who was in court, will confirm the truth of this story.
Why do I mention this? Because I'm going to explain to you why I have such an evil name.
When I heard the answer I said to myself, What can the God mean?
And what is the interpretation of this riddle?
For I know that I have no wisdom, small or great.
What then can he mean when he says that I am the wisest of men?
And yet he is a God and cannot lie, that would be against his nature.
After long consideration, I at last thought of a method of trying the question.
I reflected that if I could only find a man wiser than myself, then I might go to the God with a refutation in my hand.
I should say to him, Here is a man who is wiser than I am.
But you said that I was the wisest.
Accordingly, I went to one who had the reputation of wisdom and observed him.
His name I need not mention.
He was a politician whom I selected for examination, and the result was as follows.
When I began to talk with him, I could not help thinking that he was not really wise, although he was thought wise by many, and wiser still by himself.
And I went and tried to explain to him that he thought himself wise, but was not really wise, and the consequence was that he hated me And his enmity was shared by several who were present and heard me.
So I left him saying to myself as I went away, Well, although I do not suppose that either of us knows anything really beautiful or good, I am better off than he is, for he knows nothing, and thinks that he knows.
I neither know nor think that I know.
In this latter particular, then, I seem to have slightly the advantage of him.
Then I went to another who had still higher philosophical pretensions, and my conclusion was exactly the same.
I made another enemy of him, and of many others besides him.
Right, so that's Socrates' introduction to his defense.
This is a form of suicide, because he knows he's facing the death penalty, he's poor, he has no money, to pay a fine, which would be the other alternative.
This is not particularly relevant to his defense.
But what is he really saying to the court?
He's saying to the court, you know nothing.
I have examined everyone I think is wise.
I have either examined you and found you lacking in wisdom or with only the illusion of knowledge, or I have not examined you because I do not even think that you are wise.
So when he's talking to the hundreds of Athenians who are gathered to judge his case and to the judge himself, This story is kind of a giant F.U. to the Athenian system of law.
And it's not relevant to his case.
The case is not you think you're so wise.
The case is you don't believe in the gods of the state and you are corrupting the young.
So this is what we would now call passive aggression, though it would not be called so at the time.
He continues. After this I went to one man after another, and, being not unconscious of the enmity which I provoked, and I lamented and feared this, but necessity was laid upon me.
The word of God, I thought, ought to be considered first.
And I said to myself, Go, I must, to all who appear to know, and find out the meaning of the oracle.
And I swear to you, Athenians, by the dog I swear, for I must tell you the truth.
The result of my mission was just this.
I found that the men most in repute were all the most foolish, and that some inferior men were really wiser and better.
I will tell you the tale of my wanderings and of the Herculean labors, as I may call them, which I endured only to find, at last, the oracle, irrefutable.
When I left the politicians, I went to the poets, tragic, dithyrambic, and all sorts.
And there, I said to myself, you will be detected.
You, now you will find out that you are more ignorant than they are.
Accordingly, I took them some of the most elaborate passages in their own writings and I asked them what is the meaning of them, thinking that they would teach me something.
Will you believe me?
I'm almost ashamed to speak of this.
But still, I must say that there is hardly a person present who would not have talked better about their poetry than they did themselves.
They showed me in an instant, and not by wisdom.
Sorry.
They showed me in an instant that not by wisdom do poets write poetry, but by a sort of genius and inspiration.
They are like diviners or soothsayers who also say many fine things, but do not understand the meaning of them.
And the poets appeared to me to be much in the same case.
And I further observed that, upon the strength of their poetry, they believed themselves to be the wisest of men in other things in which they were not wise.
So I departed, conceiving myself to be superior to them for the same reason that I was superior to the politicians.
At last I went to the artisans, for I was conscious that I knew nothing at all, as I may say, and I was sure that they knew many fine things.
And in this I was not mistaken, for they did know many things of which I was ignorant, and in this they certainly were wiser than I was.
But I observed that even the good artisans fell into the same error as the poets.
Because they were good workmen, they thought that they also knew all sorts of high matters, and this defect in them overshadowed their wisdom.
Therefore I asked myself on behalf of the Oracle whether I would like to be as I was, neither having their knowledge nor their ignorance, or like them in both, and I made answer to myself and the Oracle that I was better off as I was.
This investigation has led to my having many enemies of the worst and most dangerous kind, has given occasion to many calumnies.
Yes.
And I am called wise, for my hearers always imagine that I myself possess the wisdom which I find wanting in others.
But the truth is, O men of Athens, that God only is wise.
And in this oracle he means to say that the wisdom of men is little or nothing.
He is not speaking of Socrates.
He is only using my name as an illustration.
As if he said, He, O men, is the wisest, who, like Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing.
And so I go my way, obedient to the God, and make inquisition into the wisdom of anyone, whether citizen or stranger, who appears to be wise.
And if he is not wise, then in vindication of the oracle I show him that he is not wise.
And this occupation quite absorbs me, and I have no time to give to either any public matter of interest or to any concern of my own.
But I am in utter poverty by reason of my devotion to the God.
There is another thing.
The young men of the richer classes, who have not much to do, come about me of their own accord.
They like to hear the pretenders examined, and they often imitate me and examine others themselves.
There are plenty of persons, as they soon enough discover, who think that they know something, but really know little or nothing.
And then those who are examined by them, instead of being angry with themselves, are angry with me.
This confounded Socrates, they say, this villainous misleader of youth.
And then, if somebody asks them, why, what evil does he practice or teach?
They do not know and cannot tell.
But in order that they may not appear to be at a loss, they repeat the ready-made charges which are used against all philosophers about teaching things up in the clouds and under the earth, and having no gods, and making the worse appear the better cause, for they do not like to confess that that pretense of knowledge has been detected, which is the truth.
And as they are numerous and ambitious and energetic, and are all in battle array and have persuasive tongues, they have filled your ears with their loud and inveterate calumnies.
And this is the reason why my three accusers, Meletus and Anteus and Lisson, have set upon me Meletus, who has a quarrel with me on behalf of the poets, Anteus on behalf of the craftsmen, Lisson on behalf of the rhetoricians, and as I said at the beginning, I cannot expect to get rid of this massive calumny all in a moment.
And this, O men of Athens, is the truth, and the whole truth.
I have concealed nothing. I have dissembled nothing.
And yet I know that this plainness of speech makes them hate me, and what is their hatred but a proof that I am speaking the truth?
This is the occasion and reason of their slander of me, as you will find out either in this or any future inquiry.
I have said enough in my defense against the first class of my accusers.
I turn to the second class who were headed by Meletus, that good and patriotic man, as he calls himself.
And now I will try to defend myself against them.
These new accusers must also have their affidavit read.
What do they say? Something of this sort, that Socrates is a doer of evil and a corrupter of the youth, and he does not believe in the gods of the state and has other new divinities of his own.
That is the sort of charge, and now let us examine the particular counts.
He says that I am a doer of evil who corrupts the youth, but I say, O men of Athens, that Meletus is a doer of evil, and the evil is that he makes a joke of a serious matter.
And is too ready at bringing other men to trial from a pretended zeal and interest about matters in which he never had the smallest interest.
And the truth of this I will endeavour to prove.
Come hither, Meletus, and let me ask a question of you.
You think a great deal about the improvement of the youth, Meletus.
Yes, I do. Socrates.
Tell the judges, then, who is their improver?
For you must know, as you have taken the pains to discover their corrupter and are citing and accusing me before them, speak then and tell the judges who their improver is.
Observe, Meletus, that you are silent and have nothing to say.
But is this not rather disgraceful, and a very considerable proof of what I was saying, that you have no interest in the matter?
Speak up, friend, and tell us who their improver is.
Meletus. The laws.
Socrates. But that, my good sir, is not my meaning.
I want to know who the person is who in the first place knows the laws.
Meletus. The judges, Socrates, who are present in court?
Socrates. What do you mean to say, Meletus, that they are able to instruct and improve youth?
Meletus. Certainly they are.
Socrates. What?
All of them, or some only, and not others?
Meletus. All of them.
Socrates. By the goddess, here is good news.
There are plenty of improvers then, and what do you say of the audience?
Do they improve them? Yes, they do.
And the Senators?
Yes, the Senators improve them.
But perhaps the Ecclesiastes corrupt them, or do they too improve them?
Mellitus, they improve them.
Socrates, then every Athenian improves and elevates them all, with the exception of myself, and I alone am their corrupter.
Is that what you affirm?
Mellitus, that is what I stoutly affirm.
Socrates, I am very unfortunate if that is true.
But suppose I ask you a question.
Would you also say that this holds true in the case of horses?
Does one man do them harm and all the world good?
Is not the exact opposite of this true?
One man is able to do them good, or at least not many.
The trainer of horses, that is to say, does them good, and others who have to do with them rather injure them.
Is not that true, mellitus, of horses or any other animals?
Yes, certainly. Whether you and Antaeus say yes or no, that is no matter.
Happy, indeed, would be the condition of youth, if they had one corrupter only, and all the rest of the world were their improvers.
And you, Meletus, have sufficiently shown that you have never had a thought about the young.
Your carelessness is seen in your not caring about the matters spoken of in this very indictment.
So, just to break out of the transcript, this was all written down by Plato after the fact, so it has all of the challenges of a historical and biased document, but we take it for what it is.
When I first read this, I was very disappointed, because I thought for sure that Socrates was going to We're sort of going to go along the lines of the following.
Excuse me. That he was going to ask Meletus and say, so all of these Athenians know how to improve the youth, and they all improve the youth.
And Meletus was going to say yes.
And then I thought that Socrates was going to say, but they are not all of one opinion about how the youth should be improved.
Some believe it's better to do gymnastics.
Some people believe that it's better for education.
Some people believe that religion is better for them.
Excuse me.
So how can we say that all of them improve the youth if they all have widely divergent opinions about how the youth should be improved?
That to me would be... And so who have you examined and who have you found to have the best solution in how to improve the youth?
That to me would have been... Better.
But he didn't.
And I think that was not good.
And I don't think he really established his case by simplicity, because he gave the premise of the argument to Melitus, which is that everyone improves the youth except for Socrates, which is something that I've certainly heard myself.
So he goes on to say, and now, Melitus, I must ask you another question.
Which is better, to live among bad citizens or among good ones?
Answer, friend, I say.
For that is a question which may be easily answered.
Do not the good do their neighbours good and the bad do them evil?
Meletus? Certainly.
Socrates? And is there anyone who would rather be injured than benefited by those who live with him?
Answer, my friend. The law requires you to answer.
Does anyone like to be injured?
Meletus. Certainly not.
Socrates. And when you accuse me of corrupting and deteriorating the youth, do you allege that I corrupt them intentionally or unintentionally?
Meletus. Intentionally, I say.
Socrates. But you have just admitted that the good do their neighbours good and the evil do them evil.
Now... Is that a truth which your superior wisdom has recognized thus early in life?
And am I, at my age, in such darkness and ignorance as not to know that if a man with whom I live, I have to live, is corrupted by me, I am very likely to be harmed by him, and yet I corrupt him, and intentionally too?
That is what you were saying, and of that you will never persuade me or any other human being.
But either I do not corrupt them, or I corrupt them unintentionally, so that on either view of the case you lie.
If my offense is unintentional, the law has no cognizance of unintentional offenses.
You ought to have taken me privately and warned and admonished me.
For, if I had been better advised, I should have left off doing what I only did unintentionally.
No doubt I should.
Whereas you hated and conversed with me, Sorry.
Whereas you hated to converse with me or teach me, but you indicted me in this court, which is a place not of instruction, but of punishment.
And this, again, to me, strikes me as not a good argument, because he's saying, why would I corrupt the youth, since I have to live among the youth, and the youth will grow up to do me harm if I corrupt them, and why would any man wish to corrupt and the youth will grow up to do me harm if I corrupt them, and why would any man wish I mean, But Socrates is being accused by those, because he later makes the claim that he is the conscience of Athens.
He is the gadfly that pricks them towards and admonishes them towards better behavior.
And that by killing him off, they will end up leaving themselves without a moral compass, without a moral guidance, and be that much the worse off thereby.
So the very fact that he's facing this charge in court Is indication that people will do that which is harmful to them.
And we all, I mean, this is the great problem of ethics, right?
Which is that good people do good and are interested in ethics and bad people do evil and reject ethics.
And so ethics is like a cure that can only be applied to people who are not sick.
That is the great contradiction of ethical behavior.
And it is, to me, unanswerable without psychology.
And that's why I spent some time talking about relationships and self-knowledge and self-awareness.
So when he says, why would anyone do harm or corrupt those around him to their own detriment?
He is in a very situation where the vast majority of people are desiring just that in terms of the attack against Socrates.
So I will break this up into two parts and we will continue.
I thank you for your patience.
This to me is a fascinating, fascinating text.
And I think it indicates just how far, sorry, how not far philosophy has come in the 2,500 years since this court case.
So we will continue in part three.
▲
Export Selection