Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: In Plato’s Apology of Socrates, Socrates in his only public defence speech does his best to show that his way of life is fundamentally distinct from, and in irreconcilable conflict with, politics. Since we are told in the Crito that Socrates need never have gone to trial (45e), we must conclude that Socrates’ antagonism of his jurors in court was intentional. Many scholars have provided compelling arguments explaining why Socrates chose to pit himself against the city in this way. There has also been much debate over which side was more justified; Socrates or the city. I will contend that Socrates, and Plato, defend philosophy in the Apology by publicly defending education as preparation for philosophy. Specifically, they defend the education required to attain the first stage of philosophic conversion: Socrates’ “human wisdom”, i.e., knowledge of his ignorance of the “greatest things”.