Revised: The Trial of Socrates: Innocent or Gulity?

In Plato's Euthyphro the audience is told that the great thinker Socrates is being sued. He is being charged with corrupting the youth introducing new gods, and creating new gods. Now one may wonder why someone would charge a man like Socrates. Are these charges actually legitimate? In order to establish this, the time period and events leading up to Socrates persecution must be examined. At this time the Peloponnesian War was taking place, which meant that the nation was in great stress. With all the men at war the people were dependent on the youth to be the driving force of their society. Amongst all this we have Socrates charged with corrupting the "precious" youth. Even though the charges may be utterly false, the fear of corruption has struck the society. Therefore, in this time of great peril and distress the paranoia of the people regarding their youth is just. Socrates just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Whether or not the people were rational regarding the prosecution is a different matter. The people could have examined the matter and truly examined whether or not Socrates was corrupting their youth. This argument is also valid in the terms of new gods. The people only had the gods to turn to in the time of distress and war. With their faith shaken the persecution of Socrates is understandable. Furthermore, Socrates’ was highly intellectual given the time period. The way he spoke was highly elevated and at times confusing. He spoke in a method now known as the “Socratic Method.”  This method often confused people and lead them to find Socrates annoying and pest like. This could have also been a factor in the prosecution of Socrates. People are more likely to go against someone that they find annoying even if they are in the right. Therefore, indirectly, Socrates is also a contributing factor in his prosecution. This combined with the situations leads to the prosecution of Socrates. However, can this be characterized as a fair trial? In the minds of the Athenians it probably was. The court system that was in place at the time was also fair. Socrates did have the right to defend himself, and after the court proceedings he was found guilty. However, the court system could also be questioned. Perhaps the jury had already made up their minds about whether or not Socrates was guilty. Therefore, Socrates’ defense might not have made an impression on them. Currently, I am undecided on whether or not this is a fair trial. The charges are disputable; however, given the mental state of the citizens, can we really blame them? The trail itself was fair, it’s not as if they just through Socrates in jail; they gave him a chance to defend himself. However, his defense may not have made a difference on the predetermined decision. Determining whether or not this trial was fair is difficult. There are many factors that can contribute to both sides of the argument.