Precis on Apology

Eric Zhang

Rhetoric 103A / Fall 2016

Section 106 / Jerilyn Sambrooke

Precis on Apology

This paper is on Socrates’s response to “ancient” accusations in the Apology. Before he begins his argument, he states the accusations plainly: “Socrates is an evil-doer; a meddler who searches into things under the earth and in heaven, and makes the worse appear the better cause, and teaches the aforesaid practices to others”. Socrates proceeds to refute two of these accusations directly: that he is “a meddler who searches into things under the earth and in heaven” and that he is a teacher of these corrupt practices.

To refute the accusation that he is a natural philosopher, a serious accusation as it implies atheism, Socrates compares the nature of the charges to the character Socrates in The Clouds. In the comedy by Aristophanes, he is caricatured as a man who engages in ridiculous inquiries, some of them scientific or “natural”. Socrates argues, “Such is the nature of the accusation: it is just what you have yourselves seen in the comedy of Aristophanes”, meaning that the attribution of the activities of natural investigation to himself is just as ridiculous and fictional as the caricature in the play. Socrates states that he knows nothing of natural philosophy, asking the audience members if any of them have ever witnessed him speaking of such subjects. No witnesses step forward, and from this, Socrates concludes the refutation of the first “ancient accusation” and declares that the following accusations will be shown as similarly false.

To refute the accusation that he is a teacher of corrupt practices, Socrates does not show that his subject matter is uncorrupt, but instead argues that he is simply not a teacher. Rather than offering further evidence that he is indeed not a teacher, Socrates continues his argument by stating that even if he were a teacher, it would not be a crime to be so but an “honour”. Interestingly, we know for certain that he was indeed a teacher, and Socrates perhaps takes this route to avoid acceding anything to his accusers while still defending himself to the audience that knew him to be a teacher. He mentions the names of several prominent teachers of the day, Gorgias of Leontium, Prodicus of Ceos, and Hippias of Elis. Socrates further states that there is indeed another such a teacher in Athens and recounts an anecdote of a conversation with Callias about the education of his son. In the anecdote, Socrates makes an analogy of the education of a young man to the training of a young horse. By analogy, just as it is not a crime to hire a trainer for a young horse, so it is not a crime to hire a teacher for a young man. Socrates then concludes that he does not possess the requisite wisdom to be a teacher anyways, and therefore cannot be guilty of the accusation against him.

In conclusion, Socrates in these defensive arguments against “ancient” accusations has created an excellent foundation for which he will attack the other accusations against him. His concluding remarks in the second aforementioned refutation are used to transition into remarks about the reasons for such false accusations. It is here where Socrates tells the story of Chaerephon at Delphi, and this mention of the Oracle will then be used to refute the later accusation that he is an atheist.