Are these two things, are these two goods as it were, freedom of mind and political life, are they compatible or are they necessarily at odds with one another? That seems to me to be, in some ways, the fundamental question that the Apology asks us to consider. I would even say, the necessary and inevitable conflict, between the freedom of the mind and the requirements of political life. No other work of which I am aware helps us better think through the conflict. Socrates is charged, as we will see, by the city for corrupting the youth and impiety toward the Gods, right? In other words, he’s accused of treason, a high capital offense.

From its very beginnings, philosophy and the city, philosophy and political life, have stood in a sort of tension with one another. The Apology puts on trial not merely a particular individual, Socrates, but puts on trial the very idea of philosophy. And, secondly, the Apology demonstrates also the vulnerability of political philosophy in its relation to the city, in its relation to political power. It shows Socrates speaking in a public forum, defending the utility of philosophy for political life. First, it shows Socrates, the reputed founder of our discipline, the founder of Political Science, and I will say a little bit more about that later on today, explaining himself and justifying himself, justifying his way of life before a jury of his peers. This is the best introductory text to the study of Political Philosophy. Professor Steven Smith: Today we start with Plato, Plato’s Apology of Socrates. Introduction to Political Philosophy PLSC 114 - Lecture 2 - Socratic Citizenship: Plato, ApologyĬhapter 1.

Platos the apology