• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

What justification was there for Socrates' trial, verdict and death sentence?

Extracts from this document...


Q. What justification was there for Socrates' trial, verdict and death sentence? Athens, known for its enthusiasm for new ideas, had gone down in history as a centre of new ideas, and was called the "school of Hellas," which attracted philosophers from near and far. So why was 'the wisest man,' who distributed opinions and ideas put to death? Were his trial, the two charges Socrates was blamed upon, and the resulting verdict justified? Socrates was brought to trial in 399 B.C, by three accusers, and citizens of Athens - Meletus, Anytus and Lycon. The jury in the trial, and the three accusers considered Socrates a sophist, corrupter and a nuisance. They defeated Socrates on two charges, "corrupting the minds of the young," and "believing in supernatural things of his own invention instead of gods recognised by the state,"1and as a result, he was put to death. I believe these two charges were neither justified, nor fair. For the first charge, of corrupting the youth of Athens, as Socrates argued in his defence speech, he never considered himself a teacher, and never charged a fee. In my opinion, the 'pupils' of Socrates were not forced to, but chose to follow Socrates and imitate his ways. ...read more.


Socrates was believed to be the teacher of people who later became traitors to Athens, such as Alcibiades and Critias. Critias was part of the Thirty Tyrants, who terrorised Athens in 404 B.C, just five years before Socrates' trial. During this time, thousands were either executed or banished from the city. Many Athenians chose to flee the city during this time. Socrates did not exile with the democrats, but stayed in the city. This would have been seen as supporting the regime, and hate built up in the eyes of the Athenian citizens, because Socrates had taught this man who created the tragedy. This incident would be prominent in the minds of the jury, and they therefore would have a set dislike for Socrates, and a bias. He also did not suffer at the palms of the thirty Tyrants unlike his principal accuser, Anytus, who lost much of his property when he fled and joined the fight to free the city. This is another reason why Anytus could have brought Socrates to trial. If this is so, the charges were not just, because this was a hidden agenda, which Socrates may not have prepared for. ...read more.


The death penalty was not fair, if the jury were already bias in so many ways, and of the large amount of confliction about the two charges. However, Socrates played into the hands of the jury, by not acting in the way recognised by the court in the duration of his trial. He antagonised them continually through the trial, bringing up memories of how he criticised those while philosophising inside the city, and his reputation. I believe Socrates was a scapegoat for the problems inside Athens. The actual trial itself was legal, but I believe the charges which brought him to trial were merely to cover up a deep hatred for Socrates, as a result of his contacts, and teachings of traitors, and the Peloponnesian War. Even fifty years after Socrates died; nobody had denounced the trial and his death. It find it suspicious that the accusers chose to convict Socrates at this late date - he was seventy, and surely in a few years he would have died of natural causes, and then he would no longer annoy people. 1 Apology, p. 46 2 'A New Apology for Socrates' by I.F. Stone. 3 Socrates - speaking in his trial in 399 B.C, as told by Plato. Elysse Jones 13cl ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Machinery of Justice section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Machinery of Justice essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    ‘Trial by jury is outdated, expensive and ineffective in ensuring justice’ Analyse arguments for ...

    4 star(s)

    Researching what goes on in the jury room is another topic which came up in both the Runciman Commission and the Auld Report. Runciman felt that provision should be made in order to research the conduct of jury deliberations in order to ensure the decision was made in a just

  2. The Death Penalty in Canada. There are many issues surrounding the rebirth of ...

    An interesting question to possibly ask is who even wants the death penalty? In 2010, a Canadian survey showed that 43% supported a life sentence compared to the option of the death penalty, which was 38%v. The rest of those surveyed did not have an opinion.

  1. ' Is the jury the "...lamp that shows freedom lives"?

    This assertion is however hard to substantiate from evidence, not least because research into jury room deliberations is not permitted. Little direct information can therefore be produced on how confusing or otherwise jurors on complex cases find the evidence presented to them.

  2. Describe trial by jury within the English legal system. How effective is trial by ...

    of their number as foreman, and try to reach a verdict on the case which has been presented to them.

  1. The Canadian Justice system towards aboriginal offenders

    sentences should be used as a guideline for determining the sentence in the present case".37 The persistent failure of such rigid sentencing practices to diminish aboriginal criminality has provided the impetus for a sentencing philosophy which accounts for individual characteristics.

  2. Law and Morals

    These issues are the part of the 'circle of law' that is not strictly controlled by morality. However, issues such as abortion, which was legalised in the Abortion Act 1967, play an integral part in legal and moral issues. While it can be argued that abortion is morally wrong, the

  1. Describe How The System Of Trial By Jury Operates

    Any judge may discretionarily excuse any person with good reasons, e.g. any parent with small children, although, there has to be a very solid, valid reason. Any judge may also excuse anyone whom they believe is not suited for the job such as any person affected by deafness or blindness,

  2. Law and Morals

    violations they are not seen as immoral, whilst immoral acts like adultery are not a criminal offence under the British Law. There are various theories on what relationship of law and morals should be. The first theory I have talked about above of St Thomas Aquinas.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work