Many people who have studied ancient greek civilization view the death of Socrates as the greatest travesty committed by the Athenians; the greatest democracy killing the greatest of minds. However, there are several important factors to keep in mind while considering the decision of Athens to put Socrates to death, and that, while it may not have been just, it was justified and thought to serve the greater good of the community.
In any case of law, when considering truth and justice, one must first look at the validity of the court and the system itself. While democracy existed in Athens, it is not the same democracy that the vast majority of the population enjoys nowadays, and, similarly, the justice system was also different. So, to understand why Socrates’ death was justified, it is important to understand how the circumstances changed the situation and how, what would seem like ridiculous charges and punishment nowadays, were felt to serve a common good in Athens ca. 400 BC. Back then, citizens on trial had to represent themselves in court, imprisonment was only used for smaller crimes when the guilty party could not pay the required fines, and ostracism was a common alternative to the death sentence. However, death penalty was not uncommon- because of a storm after the battle of Arginusae during the Peloponnesian wars, seven years before the death of Socrates, the eight Athenian generals responsible for the victory were unable to rescue the survivors of 25 sunken or disabled Athenian triremes. Out of the eight, six returned to Athens; they were tried and sentenced to death as a group, despite having been responsible for the victory at Arginusae. This is an extreme example of how the Peloponnesian wars forced Athenians to compromise the morale of their democracy and make decisions which might seem backwards, but ultimately were believed to preserve Athens.
One of the charges against Socrates was impiety- the lack of reverence for the gods. Socrates had claimed to believe in gods other than the widely recognized Greek gods, and admitted that his understanding of piety is vastly different from the more common Athenian conception. Athenians expressed their piety by participating in festivals, visiting shrines, making sacrifices, so on so forth. It’s hard to say whether or not Socrates participated in these forms of religious observance, but by Plato’s writing one can gather that Socrates lacked to motive to do so. However, he also claimed to have been given direction by the god who communicates through the oracle at Delphi, so he was not entirely atheist. Socrates also felt that the gods would not punish him, as he was a good man; this could be considered an excuse for him to not practice conventional forms of piety, but the suspicious Athenians would argue otherwise. The Athenians didn’t view Socrates’ religious practices as his own way of following their religion, but as simply not following it at all and openly disrespecting their gods. After the devastating plague and military defeat struck Athens, many of the city’s inhabitants viewed them as punishment from the gods and suggested they, the gods, were offended by Socrates’ methods, placing the entirety of Athens at risk. Thus, by trying Socrates, even if not necessarily sentencing him to death; as exile was offered, Athens was, in a way, cleansing and reaffirming itself. And, surely, anything done with the good of the people in mind is justified.
The second charge Socrates faced was corrupting the youth. As F.M. Cornford wrote in Before and After Socrates, “to tell the young that, in order to gain the full freedom of manhood, they must question every received maximum of conduct and aim at judging every moral question for themselves, is to demoralize them in the sense of cutting away every moral prop and buttress with which parents and society have so studiously environed their childhood. Socrates was, in fact, undermining the morality of social constraint- the morality of obedience to authority and conformity to custom...”[1] In a society still reeling from the effects of the Peloponnesian wars, after which Athenian democracy was replaced by the pro-Spartan rule of the Thirty Tyrants, led by Critias, a former student of Socrates, which ruled for 13 months yet killed 5% of the Athenian population, and the subsequent reinstatement of democracy. Another of Socrates former students, Alcibiades, had been an Athenian general in the Peloponnesian wars, ended up fleeing Athens and offering the Spartans counsel on how to defeat their rivals in return for him being allowed to stay in Sparta. He offered the Spartans advice which proved to be successful, but it wasn’t long before he ended having to flee from Sparta to Persia, who he then advised the Persians on how to manage the war. Near the end of the war, Athens, desperate, allowed Alcibiades to return to Athens as a general. He was ultimately sent back to Persia, where he was killed in 404 BC, just as the war was coming to an end. Undoubtedly, the Athenians would in part blame Socrates for the atrocities that had been committed against them as he had taught both of the most hated figures of the time, and, wanting to reevaluate what was influencing the youth, Socrates’ removal would provide a much sought-after solution to the question of how to prevent the rise of leaders such as those.
The matter of Socrates’ execution will continue to raise controversy for as long as people take the time to study it. Was it just; did Socrates deserve to die? Probably not, but his death was nonetheless justified given the context of Athenian democracy and the events which had just come to pass which he was, unfortunately, involved in, even if not directly. In a time of recovery during which democracy was fragile, having influential figures who publicly spoke out against democracy and, through their teachings, encouraged revolt and the rejection of conformity and custom was too dangerous to risk. Because Socrates’ death was thought to serve communal good and reaffirm the Athenians, it was ultimately justified.
[1] F.M. Cornford, Before and After Socrates, Cambridge University Press, 1950, page 48.
No comments:
Post a Comment