Introduction

The scholar acknowledges that there is no way to determine the exact relationship between Plato's Apology and Socrates' actual defense, though it does align in tone with Xenophon's description.

The speech is marked by a spirit of defiance rather than supplication, imitating Socrates' colloquial manner in the marketplace.

Plato's account represents the ideal of Socrates as Plato conceived him, with the facts and character brought out through the defense like a portrait, not as a literal transcript.

Plato's method is compared to Thucydides' speeches about Pericles—presenting an ideal truth rather than literal fact, and differs from Xenophon's chronicle approach.

The Apology is an elaborate composition rather than a report, as much an artistic work as Plato's dialogues, though some words and facts were likely remembered.

Plato's stated presence at the defense (but absence from the death scene in the Phædo) may signal his intent to give authenticity to one account but not the other.

The account of Socrates receiving his mission from the Delphic Oracle appears suspicious because Socrates was already famous before the oracle was consulted, and such stories are easily invented.

While the Apology faithfully represents Socrates' character, no single sentence can be verified as actually spoken by him; it breathes his spirit but is recast in Plato's mold.

The Apology stands apart from other dialogues, though the Crito and Gorgias develop related themes about justice and suffering, while Xenophon's version lacks Socratic irony.

The Apology divides into three sections: the defense proper, the address on penalty, and the final prophetic exhortation.

Socrates begins by apologizing for his plain, colloquial style, defending his commitment to truth over rhetorical artifice.

Socrates distinguishes between the nameless accuser of public opinion (influenced by Aristophanes' caricature) and the formal accusers, whose charges fall into two formulas.

Socrates clarifies that he is neither a natural philosopher nor a Sophist, professing respect for them while maintaining his ignorance and lack of paid teaching.

Socrates' praise of Evenus for teaching virtue at a moderate rate contains hidden irony, indicating his distinction from the Sophists.

Chaerephon's question to the Oracle about Socrates' wisdom prompted Socrates to investigate, discovering that his wisdom lies in knowing that he knows nothing.

Socrates examined politicians, poets, and craftsmen seeking to refute the oracle, finding they possessed little wisdom yet imagined they knew all things.

His life-consuming mission to expose false wisdom created bitter enmities and led to accusations of corrupting youth and impiety, which are standard charges against philosophers.

Socrates challenges Meletus' accusation of corruption by asking who improves the citizens, exposing the absurdity of Meletus' claim that everyone else does.

Socrates refutes the charge that he teaches disbelief in the gods by exposing Meletus' contradictory position that he has no gods but other new gods.

Socrates demonstrates that Meletus has compounded a logically absurd indictment asserting both that Socrates has no gods and that he has new gods.

Socrates refuses to abandon his post as a soldier obeys orders, preferring obedience to God over obedience to judges and accepting uncertainty about death.

Socrates presents himself as a divine gift to Athens, like a gadfly stinging a noble horse into action, beneficial to the city.

The divine sign prevented him from engaging in public life, which would have led to his death without allowing him to do good.

Despite avoiding public affairs, Socrates risked his life twice for justice: at the trial of the generals and against the Thirty's tyranny.

Socrates has instructed citizens privately throughout his life without payment, never promising to teach but allowing young men to observe the refutation of false wisdom.

If Socrates had corrupted the youth, their relatives would testify against him; instead, families appear in court supporting him, including Plato himself.

Socrates declines to entreat the judges or present weeping children as supplication, feeling such conduct brings discredit to Athens and requires judges to break their oath.

As expected and probably intended, Socrates is convicted, after which his tone becomes more lofty and commanding rather than conciliatory.

Instead of death, Socrates proposes he deserves maintenance in the Prytaneum like an Olympic victor, or a trivial fine, showing indifference rather than contrition.

Socrates asserts he would rather die in his own fashion than live in the manner his judges prefer, expressing no regret despite facing execution.

Socrates prophesies that his death will generate future teachers who will rebuke and exhort the Athenians more harshly, as his death serves as seed for his mission.

Socrates addresses his supporters, noting the divine sign did not interrupt him, which he interprets as evidence that death is a good.

Socrates contemplates death either as a sleep or as a journey to another world where he might meet the heroes of old and encounter just judges.

Nothing evil can happen to the good man in life or death, so Socrates forgives his judges as they have done him no harm.

Socrates requests his judges trouble his sons as he troubles others, should they prioritize riches over virtue.

The scholar asks whether Plato intended to represent Socrates as employing sophistries or deliberately irritating the judges, or whether these should be understood as natural to his character.

Several of Socrates' arguments—about the absurdity of one corrupter and many improvers, his inability to corrupt those he lives with, and his belief in divine sons—appear sophistical but contain irony.

Socrates' defense that he never professed to teach anything is unsatisfactory given the notorious crimes of Alcibiades, Critias, and Charmides, though the substance of his answer is sound when removed from irony.

Socrates' claim that corruption would be involuntary reflects his doctrine that all evil is involuntary, which is philosophically transcendental but practically untrue.

Socrates' argument that belief in divine sons proves belief in gods refutes Meletus' claim of atheism, not the original indictment, and follows mythological logic of the time.

Socrates probably neither wholly believed nor disbelieved in popular gods but trusted his internal divine sign and believed in truth and right as foundations of religion.

Socrates' irony, superiority, and audacity are not deliberate provocations but natural expressions of his lofty position, and he does not seek to hasten his death.

A defense acceptable to the judges is impossible for Socrates because his nature prevents him from perverting justice, though he can fence with his accusers as with Sophists.

Socrates' mission, though arising from accident, is guided by his divine sign, which is similarly accidental yet accepted as directing his life.

Socrates is not represented as a freethinker or skeptic, and his speculation about seeing heroes in the afterlife is sincere, though his hope of immortality remains uncertain.

Socrates' absolute truthfulness prevents him from asserting more than that no evil happens to the good man; he makes no mythological claims.

Socrates declares he will not speak as a rhetorician would, beginning with conciliatory words rather than composing a formal defense.

Though not attacking Sophists directly, Socrates' position contrasts sharply with them: he is poor versus their wealth, claims to teach nothing versus their promise of all knowledge.

Socrates adopts an outward friendliness toward Sophists while maintaining concealed irony in his presentation.

Socrates shows less kindness toward Anaxagoras, who had disappointed him about mind and nature, though Anaxagoras was already dead and beyond persecution.

Socrates' prophecy of a new generation of harsher teachers was never fulfilled, but this does not determine whether his words were actually spoken.

The prophecy expresses the martyr's hope for future followers and the natural expectation they would be fiercer without his restraining influence.

The scholar emphasizes that all preceding analysis concerns Plato's portrayal, not necessarily the historical Socrates, as these elements may be Platonic invention.

Arguments that the Apology was composed during the trial or that Plato reproduced Socrates' words exactly are unconvincing; Plato may have freely composed what we read.

The impact of Socrates' death on Plato cannot be determined, nor can we judge how it must have influenced his writing.

Despite Aristophanes' enmity toward Socrates, Plato depicts them in friendly conversation in the Symposium, and there is no attempt to vilify Anytus or Meletus.