The Defense of Socrates
Plato’s Apology also known as the part of the sequence of the Trial of Socrates scenes shows the famous philosopher pleading his defense before the committee of Athens that has decided it is his fate to die for corrupting the youth. His sentence does not bother him and he respects the decision of the state, acknowledging that it has the right to decide these matters. He objects, however, to the notion that he is being harmed by the decision, as it is his belief that the lesser cannot harm the greater. The greater, by virtue of its very essence, exists above the lesser and thus is not afflicted by the same pettiness that afflicts the lesser. Socrates, in other words, has his eyes on the transcendental ideal—the one, the good, and the true. He notes, “I do not think it is permitted that a better man be harmed by a worse; certainly he might kill me, or perhaps banish me or disfranchise me, which he and others think to be a great harm but I do not think so” (Plato, 1954). This paper will show that his statement is true based on his sense of the ultimate good and ultimate goal of life, which is to be united with the one, the good, and the true in the transcendent realm.

Plato argues that a worse man cannot harm a better because the better is filled with a different light altogether that cannot be drained just because the body is attacked by the worse man. The body, Plato points out, is not the mind. The mind is where one’s concern should be, according to Socrates’ words in Phaedo: “Only the body and its desires cause civil war, civil discord, and battles, for all wars are due to the desire to acquire wealth, and it is the body and care of it, to which we are enslaved” (Plato Phaedo, 66c-d). The war that Socrates’ accusers have dared to wage against him is caused by their jealousy, their fear, their worry that he might usurp their positions as leaders in Athens. They do not like the fact that he has become so popular. Socrates’ friends hate the verdict that has been given. Crito begs Socrates to abandon the verdict and escape since there is opportunity to do so. However, Socrates refuses. These words are echoed in the Apology when Socrates states that

The difficulty, my friends, is not in avoiding death, but in avoiding unrighteousness; for that runs faster than death. I am old and move slowly, and the slower runner has overtaken me, and my accusers are keen and quick, and the faster runner, who is unrighteousness, has overtaken them. And now I depart hence condemned by you to suffer the penalty of death, and they, too, go their ways condemned by the truth to suffer the penalty of villainy and wrong; and I must abide by my award - let them abide by theirs.

In other words, Socrates argues it is better to die in righteousness than to live in unrighteousness. For him to attempt to escape death would be like the soldier who throws down his arms and abandons that which defines him in order to preserve his life (which is never really his but must be forfeited to God or Fate, as man himself has no say in the matter). Socrates thus alludes that the only person who can harm the better person is the better person himself by abandoning his morals, his philosophical position, his sense of...…eternal community with others who have gone before. In either case this cannot be counted as a punishment because neither is unpleasant. So he shows that even when his enemies attempt to hurt him, they fail for they simply give him something even better than what he has now.

This argument of Socrates is very well made and he supports it with this statement: “no evil can happen to a good man, either in life or after death. He and his are not neglected by the gods” (Apology). Socrates argues that the gods watch over all things and are not ignorant of or indifferent to what happens to those who love them and those they love. Men who are devoted to the good will be rewarded for their goodness and those who are devoted to the bad will be punished. That is Socrates’ belief and it appears just and rational to me, for it highlights the idea that an external, objective, ideal of justice exists above, which Socrates had earlier described in his Allegory of the Cave as something that must be pursued in order to be fully understood.

In conclusion, Plato’s Apology shows Socrates arguing that a better person cannot be harmed by a worse one. First off, the better person is above the lesser one and if he is devoted to the good, nothing can disconnect him from the good. Second, the better person may be “judged” by the worse in this world, but it means nothing for this world is not the last stop: there is another that follows, and the better person will either be afforded a great rest after death or will be given community with those good men who have passed on before. Either way is a victory.

…