Socrates, a famous Greek Philosopher, was formally charged at the Athenian courts for his philosophical teachings and its effect on the people of Athens. He was presented in front of hundreds of jury men and unsupportive audience to defend himself against charges that were set by Meletus, one of his prosecutors. Normally a person would plead with the jury to free himself from receiving harsh punishments, but Socrates was not among them. Despite of knowing the fact that the result of the trail would be death, Socrates presented a powerful speech and tactfully cross examined Meletus to prove to the audience and the jury that Meletus accused Socrates of an issue (the corruption of the youth) that Meletus himself was ignorant about. As Socrates says “But in fact Meletus, you have sufficiently displayed that you never yet gave any thought to the young. And you making your own lack of care plainly apparent, since you have cared nothing about the things for which you bring me here” (West, 25 c).

First of all, Meletus accuses Socrates of corrupting the minds of the youth. When Socrates questioned to Meletus who is it that has a good influence on youth, Meletus replied the laws. Socrates then asked him to be more specific in terms of people, and Meletus said it were the jurymen. In response to Socrates persistent questions, Meletus mistakenly makes an absurd overstatement that the entire population of Athens has a positive influence on youth except for Socrates.

Socrates then, draws an analogy that involves horses, saying that horse-trainers, specialized people that possess skills on how to deal with horses, can possibly have a positive influence, whereas other people would have negative influence. Socrates believes that this analogy must be correct in terms of all animals along with human beings because if it takes an expertise to improve a horse, than it would certainly be incorrect to think that everyone in the society can help make young people better. Meletus’ overstatement and his inability to defend himself gives more authority to Socrates as it seems that Meletus is just arguing for the sake of it and that he does not have any true evidence that would prove Socrates guilty of corrupting the youth.

Secondly, Meletus further claims that evil people like Socrates intentionally do harm to those with which they are in contact with and that in turn harms the entire society. Socrates argues that if he intentionally does harm to others and the society, he would thus end up harming himself, as he is one of the member of society. Socrates further argues that he cannot be possibly be foolish enough to hurt himself, so even if he does cause harm, it is definitely unintentional. Although most of the people from the audience have observed Socrates for years, no one could bear witness to the accusation. And he concludes that one who involuntarily causes harm to the society should be educated rather than punished. Furthermore by saying this, Socrates is calling the whole purpose of law court into question. Therefore, it proves that Meletus did not care about the situation himself, but his only main aim was to charge Socrates and present a bad image of him to the Athenians and the juries.

Therefore, it is evident that Socrates was not guilty of the crime that Meletus accuses him of and that Meletus does not personally care about the issue, although he is mad that the youth are imitating Socrates and are questioning their beliefs. Socrates thought that it was very important for him to defend himself against the informal charges as he wanted to clear out the misconception that people of Athens had about him. Although, by listening to Socrates people not only learn about their own weaknesses but also how to indentify weaknesses in others.

Works Cited
West, Thomas G., and Grace S. West, trans. Four Texts on Socrates. New York: Cornell UP, 1984. 73-76.