Plato 1.0 Taking a Stand
In 399 BC, Socrates son of Sophroniscus, of the borough of Alopece, was arraigned on a charge of impiety and corrupting the youth. At a time when philosophy was more a predilection than a profession, Socrates had practiced a kind of public philosophy in the streets of Athens, speaking with anyone who would talk to him, asking questions about virtue and goodness, seeking definitions and an understanding of what it was to be good. His activities had brought him a following of passionate young men who liked to hear the give-and-take of his conversations, and to engage in them with the master. And yes, they enjoyed seeing pompous windbags deflated. For, though Socrates claimed not to be a teacher or to have any special knowledge of the topics he pursued, he convinced his followers that he was a kind of exemplar of the good life, a figure to be admired and emulated.
To judge by references in comic poets leading up to two comedies lampooning his actions, Socrates had been making waves in Athens for years. Now seventy years old, he was put on trial for the first time in his life, in a city famous for lawsuits against prominent citizens. Socrates was accused of corrupting the youth and of not believing in the gods of the city, but in new deities. The former charge recognized the large and enthusiastic following of young men he had attracted by his unorthodox practice of philosophy.
One of these young men was Aristocles, son of Ariston, of the borough of Collytus, but known by his nickname, “Plato.” Plato’s mother was Perictione, a descendant of the great Athenian poet and lawmaker Solon, and farther back, of Poseidon, god of the sea, according to pious genealogists.* Plato had fallen under the spell of Socrates, and had been in his entourage for perhaps ten years. Now he faced a great turning-point of his life. For his master was accused of the greatest of crimes for being a devotee, as Plato saw it, of justice and virtue. In his defense speech, Socrates named the young followers who were in attendance at the trial — offering their support to him — well as their fathers, many of whom were also present. The unspoken premise was that among Socrates’ followers were the best and the brightest young men of Athens, from some of the best families. If Socrates were corrupting them, why did their families not join in the prosecution?
Socrates had the same amount of time to defend himself as his accusers had to impugn him, measured by the outflow of water from a jar, a waterclock placed on a table, in a world that had no mechanical timepieces. When the jar was empty, your time was up. In an Athenian courtroom, the accused had to speak for himself before a large audience consisting of a numerous jury of his peers, in the case of Socrates, of five hundred citizens, as well as witnesses and onlookers.* The Athenian justice system was designed to support democratic principles, including a cross-section of the people, which would ensure that the advantages of the wealthy and powerful were neutralized, and would make bribery and jury-tampering impossible, or almost so.
Plato himself would write a gripping account of Socrates’ speech, The Apology of Socrates (from the Greek apologia = ‘defense’), presented as a monologue delivered by his master. In it Plato would offer the only references to himself as being present at a conversation of Socrates.* Socrates points out Plato and his brother Adimantus as being at the trial, and later recognizes Plato as offering to pay a fine for Socrates in lieu of having him condemned to death. Socrates makes it clear that he has to put to rest a great deal of prejudice against himself, raised by slanderers, and in particular by the comic playwright Aristophanes who had lampooned him as a sophist, scoundrel, and confidence man in his drama The Clouds, twenty-four years earlier, which he had later published.
Socrates notably refused to parade his family at the trial and beg for mercy, and indeed he used the bully pulpit of the courtroom to call the Athenian people to account for their vices. He lost his suit and was condemned to death, despite the best efforts of his friends and supporters.
Socrates pursued his philosophical queries in small groups and intentionally avoided a life of political activity that was the pursuit of many of the leading Athenians. Yet he had stepped onto the stage of history several times in his life, and now ended his career in the public forum with this trial. The trial was politically motivated, as would become increasingly clear in the aftermath. And in that aftermath, a hitherto unknown follower would play a large and indeed defining role. Plato, son of Ariston, scion of a noble family, who had until now remained a silent observer in the life of Athens, stepped out of the shadows at the trial. He joined forces with the wealthy Crito and Apollodorus to offer to help pay a hefty fine in lieu of the death penalty demanded by the accuser. They would pay thirty pounds, half a talent, to spare the life of their friend and mentor Socrates.[1]
Plato rarely talks about himself, but in his Seventh Letter, he makes it clear that he was shocked and appalled by the trial and its outcome. He considered Socrates to be the finest man of his generation, and head and shoulders above not only the thinkers, but also all the politicians and government leaders of the time. As a man with all the advantages of noble birth and superior education, Plato harbored political aspirations himself. But now the democracy in Athens, which Plato and Socrates had always been critical of, appeared broken beyond repair. And Plato’s bright future was gone. For the jury rejected Plato’s counteroffer. Socrates would die, the victim of a judicial assassination.
Plato had taken a stand as an advocate and supporter of Socrates. A political career in Athens was now unthinkable. Henceforth he would be a spokesman for his mentor.
[1] Plato Apology 38c.
