Death of Socrates: Execution by Poisoning or a Concealed Suicide?
DEATH OF SOCRATES: EXECUTION BY POISONING OR A CONCEALED SUICIDE?
Prof. Dr. Kadircan KESKİNBORA
Bahçeşehir University Faculty of Medicine
In 399 BC, upon the notice of three citizens, the poet Meletos, the craftsman and politician Anytos, and the orator Lykon, the assembly of Athens of 500 asked Socrates, the voice of the god Apollo, to the person whom the Oracle of Delphi called "the wisest man". filed a lawsuit.
Socrates, who, unlike most of the philosophers, did not leave Athens except for military expeditions and struggled throughout his life to help people discover the truth, was accused of "disbelief" and "corrupting the morals of young people" by not paying attention to the city's gods and performing new religious practices, when he was seventy years old. was brought before the court. The person who filed the lawsuit was Meletus, who was convinced by Anytus to open the lawsuit, who was known to Socrates for revealing that people like him were stupid and incited people against him.
Socrates did not accept the defense of Lysias, a famous lawyer who could definitely help him get out of this situation, and prepared his own defense. His defense had been so disrespectful and insolent that members of the House were outraged. He declared him guilty by 280 votes to 220. Prosecutors demanded execution: according to Athenian custom, he would drink a cup of hemlock poison. He could have negotiated a reduced sentence, but he declared that he was a benefactor of the city and that his needs should be met by the city. Thereupon, the anger of the Parliament grew; The majority in favor of the death penalty has increased. Socrates would drink the poison. Socrates actually drank the poison, saying that since the punishment was given by a legitimate court, he had to accept it. He was seventy years old then. His friends offered to help him escape from prison and hide in a safe place, but he flatly refused.
Why was Meletus angry with Socrates?
According to Socrates; The slanders against him started especially when Pythia informed Chairephon of the prophecy that "Socrates is the wisest of all men." Socrates, who set out to search for the meaning of this prophecy, first went to Anytos, a statesman, and tried to show that Anytos, who thought himself wise, did not know anything, and earned his hostility.
Socrates later went to the poets and craftsmen for the same purpose, and when he saw that they thought they were wise, he refuted their wisdom.
Socrates thinks that Meletus was chosen for the bards, Anytus for the craftsmen and statesmen, and Lycon for the orators. Provoked by all these events, Meletos officially accused Socrates in this case, in which he was brought before the court.
Is there a plausible explanation?
25 centuries later, no plausible explanation has been offered for the Athenian citizens' decision. We only indirectly know the evidence and prime examples of the moral decay expressed by the Parliament. The homosexual implications are obviously not tenable; because this was not considered a crime in Athens. The second subject of accusation is the insinuation about an intangible god who does not fit the description of the gods worshiped by the Athenians and who reveals himself to Socrates as his personal demon, the famous Daimon.
As the centuries progressed, the Assembly's verdict acquired the appearance of monstrous injustice, and its acceptance by Socrates was interpreted as an expression of admirable Stoicism in the face of the injustice of the Athenians. All school and university books and all encyclopedias agree on this. Thus, the philosopher became a hero who courageously accepted death and defended the truth, almost gaining a Messianic identity.
Many historians have viewed Socrates' accusation as the result of the folly and influence of his accusers, Anytus, Lycon, and Meletus. Assuming that they were truly stupid and evil, such a defense would have little relevance to the majority of Athenians who voted for execution: more than 300 out of 500 people. So there must be a lot of stupid and bad people in Athens.
The reality must be different from this
In 399 BC, Athens was emerging from the Peloponnesian War that had devastated it, as well as from two bloody tyrannies: the tyranny of the oligarchy rulers, also called the 100s, in 411 BC, and the tyranny of the Thirty in 404 BC. The burgeoning young Athenian democracy was nearly destroyed. However, among the rulers of both of them were students of Socrates, Charmides and Critias. Plato had already named two of his “Dialogues” after them.
Worse still, Socrates himself said, “There are two things in the world that I love, Alcibiades and philosophy.” Alcibiades, the person he is talking about in this sentence, was the man who caused the destruction of Athens; He was an unruly, provocative, and indecent adventurer whose reputation had been tarnished by a terrible scandal. Together with a group of friends, they castrated the statues of Hermes, which were placed as protection stones in the city. But he was a rich and handsome young man. He left Athens for the arch-enemy Sparta and showed its rulers how to deprive his native city of its resources: by seizing the silver mines in Laurion, which were guarded only by slaves. After the defeat of Athens and the fall of the long walls protecting the Port of Piraeus, this hated person who made it his business to stir up trouble returned alone, as if he were a king, on a ship with crimson sails.
Charmides, Critias, and Alcibiades thus became the three most detested figures of Athens' young protodemocracy. All three were close to Socrates. Of course, Socrates taught them neither cruelty nor tyranny, but ultimately his teaching was likely to contain some destructive elements.
Therefore, unlike what is claimed, the philosopher's trial may not be due to the irritability of a few narrow-minded citizens or the need to find a scapegoat, but may be based on confirmed suspicions. Surely he could have defended himself more skillfully by replying to his judges: "Are you calling me here when I should be in the Prytaneion (that is, the public building where he is fed and accommodated at the expense of the city)?"
Events That May Cause Him to Accept the Death Penalty
It is possible that he accepted the death penalty because he was heartbroken by Alcibiades' betrayal. Although he did not have the privilege of being a citizen of Athens, he had a precious place in the heart of this city. He was old. Could he have preferred death and wanted to teach him one last lesson?
Thus, for centuries, the Assembly of 500 was seen as a kind of people's court that gave more importance to punishment than justice. However, this accusation has no substance: This palace consisted of the most educated men of the city, and it is not possible to think of them as having a sudden hatred towards the sage whom the oracle of Apollo drew attention to a few years ago.
What were the teachings of Socrates and why did they attract criticism?
The contemporary historian will ask questions about possible immoral elements in Socrates' teaching: it is very difficult, even impossible, to find evidence for this attempt. Because Socrates wrote nothing, and we know this doctrine only from the writings of Xenophon and especially his most devoted student Plato. Moreover, the admiration felt for him by Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Emmanuel Kant or Frederich Hegel would make such a bold analysis unfounded. However, one clue stands out:
After his death, Socrates was not unanimously respected by everyone in Athens, as the tributes would lead one to believe; This is demonstrated by the ridiculous and even immoral character that the satirist Aristophanes wrote based on Socrates in his three comedies 1) Clouds, 2) Birds and 3) Wasps: A braggart who corrupts the youth and tells nonsense. Here, we also see a widespread prejudice in Athens against philosophers called "sophistry": Accordingly, the empty ideas of philosophers stun the young people, alienate them from the "gymnasium", and this is ultimately against the interests of the city.
In this case, the "accusation of corrupting the morals of the youth" is almost confirmed - through the eyes of an Athenian citizen. The success of Aristophanes' comedies reveals the distrust of Socrates by at least some of the Athenian population. The doubt may perhaps be clarified: in a chapter of Plato's "Minos" Socrates explains that only those who possess "knowledge" can rule, knowledge given by the sky and to which no ordinary man, even a virtuous man, can lay claim. However, there are fundamentally anti-democratic views here: These views strengthened the cause of the oligarchy rulers, that is, the aristocrats who twice endangered the Republic. He confirmed that Socrates' intellectual influence gave courage to the oligarchy rulers when making a coup.
Plato, who was already one of Socrates' closest students, is well-known for his hostility to democracy: Athens' riches were shared with the poor, and by "feasting on the Athenians and offering them everything they desired" they became "lazy, lax, talkative, and greedy for money." He lashed out at men like Pericles who caused this. Economic democracy was the thing he most loathed. After joining his master's court, he entered the service of Dionysios, tyrant of Syracuse.
Finally, regarding the accusation of honoring foreign gods leveled against Socrates, it can be assumed that the reference is to what the Athenians said about the philosopher's "Daimon", whose commands were stronger than the Athenian religion. But there is one thing for sure: the Athenians had good reason to suspect Socrates. He might have been acquitted, but he was undoubtedly fed up with life.
The philosopher warned his audience against professors and all those who have the authority to declare the truth. The Socratic method was a method of critical dialogue; The aim was for the person being spoken to to automatically admit that he did not know what he was talking about, that he was repeating concepts taught to him by others, in short, that he was repeating commonplace thoughts. David's famous painting, The Death of Socrates , which shows him pointing his index finger in a professorial manner, is the ultimate absurdity in this respect: Socrates was precisely opposing this instructive index finger.
Punishment and Alternatives
Socrates' case was a case in which there was no definitive punishment prescribed by law, but rather the defendant's punishment would be determined by the court; In such cases, the court would make a choice by considering the alternative sentences offered by the plaintiff and the defendant. Socrates stated that he was not afraid of the punishment deemed worthy of him, and therefore would not accept imprisonment and exile; At the insistence of Plato, Crito, Kritoboulos and Apollodoros, he also offered to pay thirty milliona in return for his acquittal. However, upon the dissatisfaction of the judges, Socrates said that what he deserved was "to be sentenced to eat and drink in the Prytaneion", so he was sentenced to death and thrown into the dungeon.
After the decision to send him to death is approved, Socrates evaluates his situation as follows: “For every danger, there are many ways to save a person from the hands of death, as long as that person is so broken in the artery that he can say or do anything! It is not that difficult to escape from this, that is, death, but it is much more difficult to escape and escape from evil. Because he runs faster than death. I, being old and slow, was caught by the slower, while my accusers, being skillful and quick, were caught by the faster evil. “I now leave you having been condemned to death penalty by you, and they having been condemned by the truth to corruption and injustice.”
Socrates' Determination
As can be understood from the above statements, Socrates proved in his defense in the Apologia (before the Athenian judges) that he did not give up defending his philosophical lifestyle and that he risked death for this cause. Because, according to Socrates in Apologia, death is either "a kind of sleep" or "the passing of the soul". Socrates, who finds both possibilities positive, sees this as a gain, especially if the soul changes location, thinking that he will test people there as well. According to Socrates, there is no reason to fear death; Because he believes that no evil will happen to a good man, either during his life or after his death.
Socrates, whose death sentence was confirmed, had to live for thirty more days; because the trial coincided with the Delos festivals, when the Athenians sent a ship to Delos to celebrate Apollo, and it was forbidden to carry out executions in the city until the delegation sent during this period returned from Delos.
In the time between the day the death sentence was given and the day he drank hemlock poison, Socrates preferred not to escape but to wait for death and continued to maintain the lifestyle he defended (Apologia) in the presence of the judges; He did not compromise on his mission.
In his defense (Phaidon) in the presence of his friends who suggested escape and various alternatives during this period, he tried to show the immortality of the soul and that there is a better life for the soul that is freed from its body and purified after death.
Plato's Phaedo (Phaidon of Elis was taken captive along with his homeland and had to live in a terrible house; he only had a relationship with Socrates, and eventually, with the effort of Socrates, Alcibiades or Crito and his circle paid a ransom and saved him. After that, he regained his freedom and devoted himself to philosophy. ) his work; It is about what Socrates said before his death and how he died, when he responded to Xanthippe, who said that he died unjustly, by saying, "Do you wish I had deserved death?" In other words, Phaedo is the dialogue containing Socrates' last philosophical discussions with his friends. Phaedo, who was personally present during these philosophical discussions and witnessed what happened, expresses his feelings about Socrates' stance in the last moments of his life with these impressive words: “Indeed, I had strange feelings while I was there. Even though I was present at the death of a man who was my friend, I felt no sympathy. Because he seemed happy with his attitude and words. Ekhecrates; "He had such a fearless, noble attitude at the end of his life that I realized at that moment that he was going to Hades with a divine share and that when he got there, he would be happier than anyone else has ever been."
Socrates' philosophical theses in his defense to his friends can be summarized as follows:
- The true philosopher wants to comprehend the essence of beings, each thing itself and its unmixed state with anything else.
- In order for full understanding to occur, the soul must remain alone. Because physical pleasures and needs hinder him and physical senses mislead him. In this case, the soul must be freed from the body.
- The surest way for the soul to be free from the body is death. Death is a means by which the soul leaves the body and remains on its own.
- In this case, it does not make sense for philosophers to fear death while going to Hades, the place where they will attain pure wisdom. Because death is a step on the path to salvation and immortality.
At the end of his defense in the Phaedo, Socrates emphasizes that preparing for death in a "purified" way is only the job of true philosophers, while he also states that those who reach Hades in a sinful state without reaching the mysteries to prove the justification of their own death will lie there in the mud; On the other hand, he expresses that those who arrive there in a purified state and who have attained the mysteries will be with the gods (Although Plato used traditional religious terminology, his main purpose is to strengthen the claim of "immortality of the soul" by using the myth of mysteries), and for a true philosopher, death is a "gain". confirms that it is.
At the end of these analyses, the question continues to preoccupy us: Is Socrates' Death an Execution by Poisoning or a Concealed Suicide?
RESOURCES
1) Messadie G. 4000 Years of Historical Hoaxes. Trans. Kaya SE. Istanbul: Pegasus Yay., 2013:36-41.
2) Sönmez-Yakut A. Defense of Socrates in Plato's Phaedo. Archivum Anatolium 2017;11(1):129-142.
3) Plato. Defense of Socrates. Trans. Akderin F. Istanbul: Say Publications, 2016:32-38.