BLOG 2 - REVISED

        To say the charges that Socrates was placed with were legitimate, to me would be a false statement. The conversation between Euthyphro and Socrates were one of many where Socrates had tried to speak in all possible directions to prove his point. Socrates had been placed with the charges of corrupting the youth, and not believing in the Gods. Who's to say these charges are justified? Some would say Socrates was an educator, and rather than him ‘corrupting the youth’ he was educating them. Although Socrates was charged for not believing in the Gods, the knowledge he spread helped rather than hindered the community. They were able to see the various views on situations, and Socrates helped unlock the knowledge they already had, just like teachers do to students.  

            As the trial began Socrates was placed with charges that were presumed rather than justified. Socrates began to share his opinion of why he was charged, and as I read what was being spoken it seemed as though he was falsely placed on trial. Meletus declared how Socrates was able to "make the worst argument appear the [strongest]" (Plato 22). He seemed to use that as fuel towards his argument about Socrates being guilty. I believe just because Socrates has a way with words, doesn't mean he's doing anything wrong to the point at which he is being argued that he is corrupting the youth. Socrates is known to be a wise man, and the way he pleaded his case clearly indicated his innocence. His wisdom is what got him in misfortune but having and spreading knowledge should not be a crime. 

                To me Socrates was humble enough to accept his punishment, although was it deserved? In all honesty I don't believe so. One shouldn't be placed on trial for preconceived notions, however Socrates was able to sway votes but not the amount he needed in his favor.    That still goes to show how eloquent he is, but was he fooling everyone with his words? As punishment Socrates received the death penalty, now that's a bit drastic. With the votes being 281 to 220 (in the favor of being guilty) doesn't that show some of his innocence? With regards to how close the votes came. I don't believe it was a fair trial, and I understand that "innocent until proven guilty" may not have applied back in that time period, but death is a permanent thing. What Socrates had been accused for may be fixed, but fixing his death I think that's taking it to a level that's not required.