Apology of Socrates

99 Pages·2013·9.01 MB·English

CornellUniversityPressgratefullyacknowledgesagrant TO HARRY V. JAFFA
from theAndrewW. MellonFoundationthataidedin
bringingthisbook to publication.
Copyright © 1979byCornellUniversity
Allrights reserved. Exceptfor briefquotationsina
review, thisbook, orpartsthereof, mustnotbereproduced
inanyform withoutpermissioninwritingfrom the
publisher. Forinformationaddress CornellUniversityPress,
124RobertsPlace, Ithaca, NewYork14850.
Firstpublished1979byCornellUniversityPress.
Thirdprinting, 1988.
InternationalStandardBookNumber0-8014-1127-0
LibraryofCongressCatalogCardNumber78-11532
PrintedintheUnited StatesofAmerica
Librarians:LibraryofCongresscataloginginformation
appearson thelast pageofthebook.
Contents
Around the hero everything becomes a tragedy;
around the demigod, a satyr-play; and around
Preface 9
God everything becomes-what? perhaps a "world"?-
PART ONE I Apology ofSocrates: Translation
-NIETZSCHE, Introduction to the Translation 15
Beyond Good and Evil Translation 21
Notes to the Translation 50
PART TWO I Plato's Defense of Socrates: Interpretation
1. The Introduction (Proem) (17a-18a6) 71
2. The Charge of the First Accusers (18a7-24b2) 81
3. The Charge of the Present Accusers (24b3-28b2) 134
4. Socrates as Public Man (28b3-31c3) 151
5. Socrates as Private Man (31c4-34b5) 181
6. The Epilogue (34b6-35d8) 201
7. Second Speech: The Counterproposal (35el-38b9) 208
8. Third Speech: Parting Words to the Jury (38cl-42a5) 222
Appendix: AnalyticalOutline of the Apology ofSocrates 233
Bibliography 236
Index of Authors 241
7
Preface
Thisbookisa translationandinterpretationofPlato's Apology
of Socrates. Following the structure of the dialogue section by
section, I discuss eachpartboth byitselfandasitcontributes to
the argument of the whole work. Wherever appropriate in the
courseofthecommentary, thebroaderquestionsofPlato'spolit
ical philosophy are also addressed. The translation, with its ac
companying notes, has been included as an aid for the reader
whodoes notknow Greek. Currentlyavailable renditionsofthe
Apology lack the requisite precision for a close scrutiny of the
.text. The notes to the translation elucidate theimportant Greek
terms and identify the references that Socrates makes to Athe
nian political.events and contemporary personages.
My reading of the Apology of Socrates·relies principally upon
the textitself. Ihave notenteredinto the question ofwhat hap
penedatthe trial ofthe "historical" Socratesbecause that ques
tion is unanswerable and, I believe, not very important. What
matters for us is Plato's portrayal of the event, for it is Plato's
Socrates who has truly made history. The Apology ofSocrates is
above all a philosophic document. Writing with extreme care,
Plato supplies us through his words alone with most of the
informationneededtounderstandthework. Itspartsarebound
to one anotherwith the samerigorous necessityas are the parts
of a living being. Every sentence, every word, seems endowed
with significance in the elaborately fashioned whole. Hence an
account of the Apology, as of any Platonic dialogue, resembles
the exegesis of a finely crafted poem. To do justice to its depth
9
Preface Preface
and subtlety, the interpreter must discover and expound the opinions of the Athenians. Socrates' philosophic.questioning,
articulation ofthework'sparts: hemustbringforthits logos, the which disputes the canons that the city holds sacred, weakens
reasonedthoughtorplanthatanimatesandbestowsunityupon the cohesion of the political order by undermining those opin
the whole. Such is the aim pf the present commentary. ions. InthecourseofhisanalysisSocratestentativelyproposesa
The Apology of Socrates is the most often read dialogue of means of resolving this tension between philosophy and poli
Plato, and for good reason: it occupies a central position in the tics: the philosopher, rather than the poet, must undertake the
bodyofhisworks. Socrates'future trialanddeatharealludedto education of his political community. If successful, he would
frequently in other dialogues, and the conflict between the establish a fundament of sharedbeliefs sympathetic to philoso
philosopher and his city, here vividly dramatized, is an explicit phy upon which new political modes and orders could be con
subject of conversation in the Republic, the Gorgias, and else structed. Socrates' solution, however, cannot be executed so
where. The questions at stake in that conflict lead, as the Apol long asthe philosopherhas nottransformed hislove ofwisdom
ogy.shows, to othermajorthemesofPlato'swritings: education, into knowledge. For if the philosopher who "knows that he
justice and punishment, politics and the laws, rhetorical and knows nothing" cannot answer the greatest questions-those
truthful speech, the nature of being, opinion and ignorance, concerning the best way of life for a human being-how could
self-knowledge, soul and body, virtue and vice, and the worth he responsibly educate others?
ofthe philosophiclife. The ApologyofSocrates affords an appro The drama of Socrates' trial and death illustrates this
priate introduction to Platonic thought generally and is indis dilemma, in which the philosopher can neither accept the way
pensable to anyone who wishes to understand the,principles of oflifeprescribedbyhistraditionnordiscoveranunquestionable
classical politicalphilosophy. alternative to·it. Socrates defies his jury, insisting that he will
My chief complaint against the writings of contemporary never stop philosophizing, no matter what they threaten him
scholarson the dialogue concerns theirgeneralassumption that with or do to him. Although he appears to put himselfforward
Socrates was right and Athens wrong. This assumption can be boldly as the only man in Athens who knows how to educate
traced to the faith inherited from the eighteenth century that the young, the same Socrates submits to the sentence decreed
scienceand thoughtare thehighestauthority for the conductof by that jury and proceeds ca~mlyto his death. Plato's brilliant
life. Matterswere differentin the time beforethe popularization defense of philosophy in the Apology must not blind us to the
ofphilosophy. Itwas thenobservedthatthederacinatedhuman necessity of the conflict between the claims of the philosophic
understanding is evidentlybetterequipped to debunk ancestral life and the conditions of decent politics.
customs than to instructmenin theirproper duties. The case of
Socrates, who openly proclaimed his ignorance of life's pur I wish to acknowledge the guidance and aid I have received
pose, posed the problem with particular clarity. Accordingly, from teachers, friends, and acquaintances. I am grateful above
Plato's.Apology ofSocrates approaches philosophy less as a self all to Leo Strauss, who first made me aware of the leading
evident good than as something questionable that calls for jus themes of the Apology of Socrates during.a course he taught at
tification. Claremontin1969. IregardStraussasourcentury'sbestteacher
The structure and argument of the dialogue convey a com of how to read the great authors of the Western tradition. His
prehensive teaching about the nature of political life, particu writings on classical political philosophy in particular provide a
larly about who rules and who ought to rule. Socrates' implicit standard of excellence for the interpretation of the ancients.
analysis reveals the hidden but potent hierarchy of governors I thankHarryV. Jaffa for his generous encouragement ofmy
and governed: the politicians elected by the people are them work. His thoughtful exposition of the great issues of philoso
selvesunknowingfollowers ofthose.poetswhohaveformed the phy and politics has been a valuable spur to my own under-
10 11
Preface
standing. I am grateful for the time I have spent with Harry
Neumann, especially for his insistent questioning of thepossi
PART ONE
bility and value of philosophy itself. I also thank Allan Bloom,
whofirstgavemeaninklingofthebreadthandbeautyofpo~ti-
cal philosophy. '
John Alvis deserves particular gratitude for his careful, con
Apology of Socrates
scientious editorial and critical help with the book. The Press's
two anonymous readers raised objections that were, I think,
almost always right; I have adopted most of their recom
TRANSLATION
mendations, and I thank fhem for their comments. James M.
Nichols, ThomasSilver,KenMasugi, andPatrickCobyalsoread
the manuscript, and each of them provided detailed remarks
and suggestions that have been consulted throughout my re
visions. Likewise, George Anastaplo proposed useful altera
tions in the translation and notes. I especially thank Father
Placid Csizmazia·and Thomas L. Pangle for the time they de
voted to a critical comparison ofthe translation with the Greek
text. My wife, Grace Starry West, helped extensively with the
translation and the proofreading; she listened patiently and re
spondedwithsympatheticcriticismwhileI wasthinkingoutthe
argument of the book.
Finally, I express my appreciation to the Deutscher Akadem
ischer Austauschdienst (German Academic Exchange Service)
for a research grant, and particularly to the Earh,artFoundation
for the grant that supported my revision of the original manu
script and the preparation of the translation.
THo,MAs G. WEST
University ofDallas
12
PART TWO
Plato's Defense of Socrates
INTERPRETATION
CHAPTER 1
The Introduction
(Proem)
(17a-18a6)
An "apology" is a speech of defense against an accusation of
injustice. The word apo-logia itself denotes a "speaking-away,"
an explanatory discourse intended to repulse a charge against
oneself. Most readers of Plato's Apology ofSocrates feel a strong
sense of injustice in the conviction of Socrates on a charge of
impiety and corruption of the young.1 Socrates' present-day
1. Some examples of the usual interpretation are: Thomas Meyer, .Platons
Apologie(Stuttgart,1962);W.K.C.Guthrie, Socrates (Cambridge,1971);Romano
Guardini, TheDeathofSocrates (ClevelandandNewYork,1962);JohnBurnet,in
hisannotatededitionofPlato'sEuthyphro, ApologyofSocrates, andCrUo(Oxford,
1924);A. E.Taylor, Socrates (GardenCity,N.Y., 1953);ReginaldHackforth, The
Composition ofPlato's "Apology" (Cambridge, 1933); PaulFriedlander, Plato, IT
(New York, 1964), 157-172; Kurt Hildebrandt, Platon, 2d ed. (Berlin, 1959),
pp.50-68;ErwinWolff, PlatosApologie(Berlin,1929);MauriceCroiset,"Notice,"
in Platon: Oeuvres Completes, I (Paris, 1920), 117-139. Hegel's account, which
argues that Socrates' case is tragic because both sides were right, is a partial
exception: Georg W. F. Hegel, Vorlesungen ilber die Geschichte der Philosophie
(Frankfurta. M.,1971),I, 441-516. Therehavebeensomenotablerecentexcep
tions tothis trend: EvaBrann, "TheOffenseofSocrates," Interpretation 7(May
1978), 1-21;James Redfield, "A Lecture on Plato'sApology,"Journal ofGeneral
Education 15 Guly 1963), 93-108; Alexander Sesonske, "To Make the Weaker
ArgumentDefeattheStronger,"JournaloftheHistoryofPhilosophy6Guly1968),
217-231; John Sallis, Being and Logos (Pittsburgh, 1975), pp. 25-63; Willmoore
Kendall, "The People versus Socrates Revisited," in Willmoore Kendall Contra
Mundum (New Rochelle, N.Y., 1971), pp. 149-167; Harry Ne1.!mann, "Plato's
Defense ofSocrates," Liberal Education 56 (October 1970), 458-475; Diskin Clay,
"Socrates'MulishnessandHeroism," Phronesis 17(1972), 53-60;GeorgeAnas
taplo,"HumanBeingandCitizen:A'BeginningtotheStudyofPlato'sApologyof
Socrates,"inHumanBeingandCitizen (Chicago,1975),pp.8-29;LeoStrauss/liOn
Plato'sApologyofSocrates andCrito, inEssaysinHonorofJacobKlein (Annapolis,
II
Md., 1976), pp. 155-170;AlanF. Blum, Socrates (London, 1978).
71
Plato's Defense of Socrates The Introduction
advoc.atescommen.dhisspeechasa modeloftruthandnobility. byimplication, inAthenianpubliclifegenerally. Thisabjuratiol!
Yet hIS defense failed before the jury to whom he addressed of the accepted'canons of.court oratory casts doubt not merely
himself~thi~ n:ial. W~are provokedto wonderwhyhefared so upon his accusers, but upon the entire way of life popularly
ba~ly wIth hIS ~mmediate audience when the judgmentof pos approved by the "men of Athens" he addresses, who identify
terIty favors hIm so overwhelmingly. His scholarly admirers the peak of human excellence with the successful pursuit of
~av~ often attributed his conviction to such causes as political public honors through persuasive speaking in law courts and
IntrIgue, Retty vindictiveness, and mindless superstition; but beforetheAssemblyofthepeople(cf. 36b6-93).4Inhispresenta
SocrateshImselfprovidesa simplerexplanationin theintroduc tionpersuasiveand truthfulspeeches seemto bewhollyincom
tion (proem) ofhis defense speech. patible, with the result thata manis limitedto the single choice
He begins by comparing.the unprepossessing manner of his between being an orator "of their [the accusers'] sort" (persua
own speech with the forceful manner ofhis accusers. "I nearly sivelyfalse) orofSocrates' sort (unpersuasively truthful). His is
forgot myselfbecauseofthem, so persuasivelydid theyspeak," no conventional exhortation to live up to one's rep~tationby
he says. Socrates professes to be amazed at his accusers' asser telling the truth about oneself so that one may be what one is
ti~nthatheisaclever(thatis, persuasive)speaker. Heevencalls thought to be. He denies, in effect, that the truth about a man
thISthemostshamefulofthemanyliestheyhavespoken, since, can ever coincide with the way he appears to others, since a
so he claims, it will immediately come to sight that his only truth-tellerwillalwaysseempaltryordisgustingbesideaskillful
"cleverness" is to speak the truth. What made the accusers' practitionerofpersuasive oratory. Laterin the Apology Socrates
~/peech.so persuasive? Socrates says that their speeches were describes his inquiry into human wisdom, wherein he discov
~eautIfully spoken, ... ordered and adorned [kekosmemenon]2 ered that men with lesser reputations invariably proved more
~Ith phrases and words." Socrates, on the other hand, prom sensible than·those reputed to be superior (22a3-6). Or, as he
Ises to speakatrandom (eike), usingwhateverwordshechances states it still later, a good man simply cannot survive if he is
upon;.herefusesto."fabricatespeecheslikeayouth."Heimplies active in politicallife (32e). For Socrates, as it seems, every suc
thathIS own speakIng style is thatofan old man-unattractive cessful politician is a villain, and a decent statesmanship based
without beauty, adornment, or order-and therefore far les~ upon rational choice and d~liberationis impossible.
sUit~d to impress his listeners than the youthful, vigorous, en When Socrates links youthfulness, adornment, beauty, and
~a~gmanner.ofthe accusers. Their graceful and popular dic
tI~n IS at home In the Athenian lawcourts, and Socrates appro 3. Citationsinthetexttothe ApologyofSocrates andtootherworksofPlato
prIately compares himself to a foreigner in the court'who is refer to Plato, Opera Omnia,ed. John Burnet, 5 vols. (Oxford, 1900-1907). The
pagenumbersfollowtheStephanuspagesanddivisionsusedtherein. Passages
confined to his barely intelligible native dialect because he is
oftheApologyquotedorparaphrasedinthetextwillnormallynotbecitedwhen
unfamiliar with the language of the place. they occur within the section under immediate consideration. Thirty-five dia
If Socrates had restricted himself to an ironic contrast of his logues and thirteen letters have come down to us from antiquity as Plato's
authentic writings. During the past two centuries classical scholars have at
own simplicity with his accusers' deviousness, his remarks
tackedmanyoftheseworksas spurious. Inrecentyears, however, allofthem
wouldn~tbeparticularlynoteworthy. Butbycomparinghimself haveagainobtaJnedscholarlydefenders,althoughmuchdisagreementremains.
to a f~reIgner, he ungraciously suggests that he alone among As aconvenienceIwillcitetheminmynotes as writtenbyPlato. Translations
~thenlansspeaks the truth. He self-righteously distinguishes from the Greekand'German, unless otherwisenoted, are myown.
4. When Socrates' friend Crito calls the conduct of the trial "ridiculous,"
hIS own manner from the'way ofspeech "here" in court-and, "shameful[ugly],"and"unmanly,"heisexpressingthecommonopinionabout
Socrates'mannerofspeech-and,byinference,hiswayoflife(Crito45d8-46a4).
2. Therelated~ordkosmos, "order,"andtheEnglishderivative"cosmetic" Cf. Callicles'criticismsofSocratesonbothgroundsinPlato'sGorgias, 482c-486d
suggestthetwo pnmarysenses ofthe term, which isheretranslated "ordered and passim. See also Arthur W. H. Adkins, Merit and Responsibility (Oxford,
andadorned." 1960), pp. 153-168.
72 73
Plato's Defense of Socrates The Introduction
order to falsely persuasive speech, he severs from truthfulness that diction in nearly every sentence of the proem.8 But he
the artfulappointmentsitneeds in·orderto appearto bewhatit deliberately uses those commonplaces unpersuasively, in order
to show that his truthfulness arises from choice and not in
is. Not only ornamentation but even coherentarrangement de
ceiveandmislead.5 Socrates seems to rejectthe kalon, thebeau competence (cf. 38d3-8). An orator aiming at success would
employ such devices to conciliate his audience, but Socrates
tifulornoble, asthe'basisofrightspeechandaction. Heopposes
here a long Greek tradition, which used the term kalon as high uses them to prepare the way for his unexpected assertion that
praise for an outstanding man's appearance and deeds. The "[thevirtue] ofanoratoris to speakthe truth." Heisproposing
a reversal of the generally accepted view, which held that the
leading poets, the spokesmen and teachers of Greece, cele
noblestachievementofforensic rhetoricwastosecureanacquit-
brated the excellences of gods and outstanding men, lending
them a manifest presence in beautiful poetic images that the tal.9
In Plato's Gorgias, one ofwhose major themes concerns how
people could grasp and trust.6 The poets' praise of glory and
oneshould speakin public, Socratesmaintains thata good man
honorwas temperedbytheirappreciationoftheprecarious ten
should speakwithaviewto orderand arrangement (kekosmeme
sion that accompanies the union of visible grace and true
non) and not at random (eike).10 He apparently prescribes a
worth.7 Socrates denies that sucha union canbe; he repudiates
the beauty ofoutwardform; he speaks the whole truth and no manner of defense there that contradicts his procedure in the
thing but the truth. Apology. Yet Socrates' truthful speech does have an oider
although not the sortthat results from deploying schematic de
Yet Socrates does not simply abandon nobility, for he also
vices andcleverembellishments. The coherenceofhis discourse
callshisaccusers' speechshamefulorugly(aischron), suggesting
thatspeech should bebeautiful ornoble. He therebypropounds derives from an invisible beauty and arrangement discernible
behind its apparent disorder. However, the closest attention of
a standard ofbeauty that distinguishes the superficialbeautyof
the mind is required to look upon that latent beauty. Con
adornmentandorderfromthegenuinebeautyoftruth. Socrates
sequently, onlythose jurymenwho are thoughtfulwill discover
criticizes popular opinion concerning beauty and nobility and
the charm ofSocrates' truthful speechbeneathits surface disar
counters itwith a new understanding, one which he elaborates
ray. Heironicallydissembles thedegreetowhichhisspeechwill
throughout his defense. When he says that it would be un
display order, but thi~ self-depreciation is justified by his
becoming to him as an old man to speakas his accusers did, he
knowledge thatits arrangement will not shine forth unambigu
implies that he could speak in their manner but chooses not to.
Scholarshavenoticedthatevenwhile Socratesdisclaimsknowl ously from the bland surface. Indeed,itis simply true, without
anyironicallowance, thatorderisnot"present"inthespeechat
edge of court procedure and diction, he uses 'commonplaces of
all, since itonlycomes to be seenonsecond sight, thatis, upon
5. Cf. Crassus' critical remarks on Socrates' separation ofeloquent speech
from wisdomin Cicero's De Oratore(111.60-61).
8. James Riddell, in the Introduction to his edition of The Apology ofPlato
6. !heparadigmisHomer'sportrayalofAchillesandtheOlympiangodsin
(1877;repro NewYork,1973),p. xxi;Burnet,pp. 66-73;Meyer, PIatonsApologie,
the Ilzad (cf. Apology 28c-d). Cf. Plato Republic 606el-5, Phaedrus245al-5;
Xenophanes, Fr.10,inHermannDiels,ed., DieFragmentederVorsokratiker, 16th pp. 26, 45-46, 51-52, 59.
9. Burnet, p. 67, says that Socrates "improves on the current rheforical
ed. (Zurich,1972),I,131;H. I. Marrou, AHistoryofEducationinAntiquity (New
York, 1956), pp. 9-13; Werner Jaeger, Paideia, I, 2d ed. (New York, 1945), commonplacesbygivingthemdeepermeaning"; they"areallmadetoleadup
tothegenuinelySocraticparadoxthatthefunctionofagoodoratoristotellthe
35-56. .
truth."Meyer, p.25,remarks: "Thereissomethingunusualaboutthisformula
7. Tragedy occurs when the coherence ofbeauty and truth is visibly sun
tion. When one proclaims to tell the 'whole truth' in an [ordinary] defense
dered. Sophocles' Oedipus, the ruler ofThebes who solved the riddle ofthe
speech,onedoessoonlyinrelationtoaconcreteassertion,notingeneral,notin
Sphinx, inappearancethewisestand mostgloriousofmen, discovershiscon
cealeduglinessandbringsitintothelightofday. Pindar'sodes tothelustrous sucha solemnwayashere."
fame ofkings and tyrants mightbe compared. 10. Gorgias 503d6-504a1.
74 75