The conviction and death of Socrates: an assessment

Socrates was alleged of two offences and thus was charged by the Athenian government of impiety (rejecting the gods of the city) and also for corrupting the youth. Socrates in his lifetime will always be in the marketplace and gathering youths through his catchy topics which ranges from politics and ethical matters, his rhetorical skills in debates was also appealing this was what he used in critiquing the leaders who flaunt their rhetorical skills. He uses his continuous questioning skill which can also be called Socratic wisdom to question their ignorance till they get into a state of aporia that is a state of confusion whereby can no longer defend what they claim to know due to shortage or inadequate points or arguments. Socrates claimed that he was only helping the youth birth their ideas or potentials into fruition by questioning them thus sharpening their rhetorical abilities. This was the idea behind his so called intellectual midwifery. The Athenian state during this time was peculiar for its intellectual and political liberty. This was evident in the way issues were being debated, especially in the Athenian political arena.
The offense of Socrates was a process and it started when he started challenging the Athenian government by questioning their philosophies and ideologies, and also exposing their ignorance and flaws to the pleasure of the youths. This was how he got the idea of referring to philosophy as a gadfly that sting. He called democracy chaotic and he had compelling arguments that exposed the inadequacies and flaws of democracy. All these created biases and prejudices in the mind of the government officials and this caused them to nail Socrates even though he had the chance of being freed.
Socrates mocked the Greek gods by calling them silly and immoral. Because to him they were not ethical gods because people do immoral things and still find solace in these gods. This was because is core message was virtue and morality, which he taught people especially how to live a good life and for him this was unachievable, based on the immorality of the imaginary gods of the city. In other words, there is no way an immoral god would help one to live a moral life, instead he upheld inner virtues such as Love, integrity, knowledge, justice and honesty. He critiqued the Athenian democracy which for him it is the government in the hands of “arguing mobs” or the uneducated individuals but for him government should be in hands of “those who knows” which according to Plato are the philosophers.
To start with, the charge of impiety against Socrates is an elusive accusation because not even Euthyphro in his intellectual maturity could give an acceptable or univocal definition of “piety” and if they do not know what they are talking about then it would have been unlikely that they will create a conviction based on impiety, because if they do although, which they did then it would be their convictions would not be justifiable. In the same way, the second charge of corrupting the youth is equivocal and it also lacks substantial evidence. Nevertheless, the real cause of the execution is the critiques of Socrates against the political structure, political ideology and the political leaders in the city. Therefore, it can be assumed that the cause of the charges is the political instability rather than the charges of impiety or corrupting the youth.
The arguments of Socrates as we know were through the dialogues of Plato, and he did through his own fictions. Because there is no way he could have documented the story and occurrence like Socrates who was the major character in his own story. As we know Socrates never documented any of ideas all through his lifetime. Thus, his argument we know are through Plato and the authority of these arguments are uncertain. These arguments of Socrates are in the dialogues of Plato; Crito, Apology, Euthyphro, Phaedo. Socrates argument he has been used in teaching faithfulness to civic obedience all life, thus, instead of confidently pursuing justice by running away from an unjust death when all appeals have been rejected, he rather stood and take the judgment as it is. He attempted to counter the charges against him by arguing that the term “piety” cannot be defined and if it cannot be defined then there is no point using the word and if there is no point using the word then he should be acquitted.
Socrates was advised to escape by some of his friend like Crito, among others. They even opined and bribed the officer at the gate of Socrates’ prison who was even susceptible to the request, but Socrates would not yield because for him he needs to live what he preach and what he preached was integrity and civic obedience and to rebel will not be virtuous thus, for him not escaping at the expense of his life is virtuous and such life is worth living. He also argued for the moral supremacy of the state as against individual freedom or individual rights, that is, no individual exist outside the collective or communal right. But, this not so because it is the individuals that make up the state and not the state that give identity to the individual. In other words, individuals are basically member of a particular community by accident because an Athenian would have been a Persian if s/he was born in Persia but was the other way due to birth.
Socrates’ major argument is that doing evil hurts one’s soul, and that life is not worth living with a ruined soul. However, the soul is immaterial and its existence is yet to be proven beyond doubt that is, every argument about the soul are just assumptions. He also argues that given that an idea or argument is popular does not make such idea to be rational because people are influenced by so many things rather than rationality. For instance, people are influenced by eloquence, economic status, social status, authority, power, and even age. He also argued that he not escaping was for Athens and not for himself. He finally, argued that it is an unjust action to escape and thus he cannot escape because unjust action ruins the soul and he does not want his soul ruined.
His argument for not escaping are unsuccessful on the following grounds, Socrates before his conviction was known to be a drunkard, debtor, and a man who come of age. These were inadequacies he could not manage. Because, he could not have a decent or aristocratic (noble) life, he could not be a good father, he was a widower among man other social and psychological problem. Thus, he saw all these social problems he had as an insurmountable mountain and the only way he could escape them was death and suicide would unethical which against his teaching thus he chose to be killed by the Athenian governments. But this is a vice and not virtues as against his teaching on virtue and ethics.
The verdict of death against Socrates was unjust because rather than promoting liberty and freedom what was promoted was totalitarianism because the city-state was seen as being, a leviathan in Thomas Hobbes language or a prince according to Niccolo Machiavelli which is over and above others. In other words, the freedom of Socrates is being dishonored. The democracy of the Athenian can be said to be such which give a wide berth to opposition, and any democracy that is against opposition by restricting people’s freedom through hostility against opposition is not a systematic democracy.