Cornell University Press gratefully acknowledges a grant TO HARRY V. JAFFA from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation that aided in bringing this book to publication. Copyright © 1979 by Cornell University All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in a review, this book, or parts thereof, must not be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the publisher. For information address Cornell University Press, 124 Roberts Place, Ithaca, New York 14850. First published 1979 by Cornell University Press. Third printing, 1988. International Standard Book Number 0-8014-1127-0 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 78-11532 Printed in the United States of America Librarians: Library of Congress cataloging information appears on the last page of the book. Contents Around the hero everything becomes a tragedy; around the demigod, a satyr-play; and around Preface 9 God everything becomes-what? perhaps a "world"?- PART ONE I Apology of Socrates: Translation -NIETZSCHE, Introduction to the Translation 15 Beyond Good and Evil Translation 21 Notes to the Translation 50 PART TWO I Plato's Defense of Socrates: Interpretation 1. The Introduction (Proem) (17a-18a6) 71 2. The Charge of the First Accusers (18a7-24b2) 81 3. The Charge of the Present Accusers (24b3-28b2) 134 4. Socrates as Public Man (28b3-31c3) 151 5. Socrates as Private Man (31c4-34b5) 181 6. The Epilogue (34b6-35d8) 201 7. Second Speech: The Counterproposal (35el-38b9) 208 8. Third Speech: Parting Words to the Jury (38cl-42a5) 222 Appendix: Analytical Outline of the Apology of Socrates 233 Bibliography 236 Index of Authors 241 7 Preface This book is a translation and interpretation of Plato's Apology of Socrates. Following the structure of the dialogue section by section, I discuss each part both by itself and as it contributes to the argument of the whole work. Wherever appropriate in the course of the commentary, the broader questions of Plato's polit­ ical philosophy are also addressed. The translation, with its ac­ companying notes, has been included as an aid for the reader who does not know Greek. Currently available renditions of the Apology lack the requisite precision for a close scrutiny of the .text. The notes to the translation elucidate theimportant Greek terms and identify the references that Socrates makes to Athe­ nian political.events and contemporary personages. My reading of the Apology of Socrates· relies principally upon the textitself. I have not entered into the question of what hap­ pened at the trial of the "historical" Socrates because that ques­ tion is unanswerable and, I believe, not very important. What matters for us is Plato's portrayal of the event, for it is Plato's Socrates who has truly made history. The Apology of Socrates is above all a philosophic document. Writing with extreme care, Plato supplies us through his words alone with most of the information neededto understand the work. Its parts are bound to one another with the same rigorous necessity as are the parts of a living being. Every sentence, every word, seems endowed with significance in the elaborately fashioned whole. Hence an account of the Apology, as of any Platonic dialogue, resembles the exegesis of a finely crafted poem. To do justice to its depth 9 Preface Preface and subtlety, the interpreter must discover and expound the opinions of the Athenians. Socrates' philosophic .questioning, articulation of the work's parts: he mustbring forth its logos, the which disputes the canons that the city holds sacred, weakens reasoned thought or plan that animates and bestows unity upon the cohesion of the political order by undermining those opin­ the whole. Such is the aim pf the present commentary. ions. In the course of his analysis Socrates tentatively proposes a The Apology of Socrates is the most often read dialogue of means of resolving this tension between philosophy and poli­ Plato, and for good reason: it occupies a central position in the tics: the philosopher, rather than the poet, must undertake the body of his works. Socrates' future trial and death are alludedto education of his political community. If successful, he would frequently in other dialogues, and the conflict between the establish a fundament of shared beliefs sympathetic to philoso­ philosopher and his city, here vividly dramatized, is an explicit phy upon which new political modes and orders could be con­ subject of conversation in the Republic, the Gorgias, and else­ structed. Socrates' solution, however, cannot be executed so where. The questions at stake in that conflict lead, as the Apol­ long as the philosopher has not transformed his love of wisdom ogy. shows, to other major themes of Plato's writings: education, into knowledge. For if the philosopher who "knows that he justice and punishment, politics and the laws, rhetorical and knows nothing" cannot answer the greatest questions-those truthful speech, the nature of being, opinion and ignorance, concerning the best way of life for a human being-how could self-knowledge, soul and body, virtue and vice, and the worth he responsibly educate others? of the philosophic life. The Apology of Socrates affords an appro­ The drama of Socrates' trial and death illustrates this priate introduction to Platonic thought generally and is indis­ dilemma, in which the philosopher can neither accept the way pensable to anyone who wishes to understand the, principles of of life prescribed by his tradition nor discover an unquestionable classical political philosophy. alternative to· it. Socrates defies his jury, insisting that he will My chief complaint against the writings of contemporary never stop philosophizing, no matter what they threaten him scholars on the dialogue concerns their general assumption that with or do to him. Although he appears to put himself forward Socrates was right and Athens wrong. This assumption can be boldly as the only man in Athens who knows how to educate traced to the faith inherited from the eighteenth century that the young, the same Socrates submits to the sentence decreed science and thought are the highest authority for the conduct of by that jury and proceeds ca~mly to his death. Plato's brilliant life. Matters were different in the time before the popularization defense of philosophy in the Apology must not blind us to the of philosophy. It was then observed that the deracinated human necessity of the conflict between the claims of the philosophic understanding is evidently better equipped to debunk ancestral life and the conditions of decent politics. customs than to instruct men in their proper duties. The case of Socrates, who openly proclaimed his ignorance of life's pur­ I wish to acknowledge the guidance and aid I have received pose, posed the problem with particular clarity. Accordingly, from teachers, friends, and acquaintances. I am grateful above Plato's.Apology of Socrates approaches philosophy less as a self­ all to Leo Strauss, who first made me aware of the leading evident good than as something questionable that calls for jus­ themes of the Apology of Socrates during. a course he taught at tification. Claremont in 1969. I regard Strauss as our century's best teacher The structure and argument of the dialogue convey a com­ of how to read the great authors of the Western tradition. His prehensive teaching about the nature of political life, particu­ writings on classical political philosophy in particular provide a larly about who rules and who ought to rule. Socrates' implicit standard of excellence for the interpretation of the ancients. analysis reveals the hidden but potent hierarchy of governors I thank Harry V. Jaffa for his generous encouragement of my and governed: the politicians elected by the people are them­ work. His thoughtful exposition of the great issues of philoso­ selves unknowing followers of those. poets who have formed the phy and politics has been a valuable spur to my own under- 10 11 Preface standing. I am grateful for the time I have spent with Harry Neumann, especially for his insistent questioning of thepossi­ bility and value of philosophy itself. I also thank Allan Bloom, PART ONE who first gave me an inkling of the breadth and beauty of po~ti- cal philosophy. ' John Alvis deserves particular gratitude for his careful, con­ scientious editorial and critical help with the book. The Press's Apology of Socrates two anonymous readers raised objections that were, I think, almost always right; I have adopted most of their recom­ mendations, and I thank fhem for their comments. James M. TRANSLATION Nichols, Thomas Silver, Ken Masugi, and Patrick Coby also read the manuscript, and each of them provided detailed remarks and suggestions that have been consulted throughout my re­ visions. Likewise, George Anastaplo proposed useful altera­ tions in the translation and notes. I especially thank Father Placid Csizmazia· and Thomas L. Pangle for the time they de­ voted to a critical comparison of the translation with the Greek text. My wife, Grace Starry West, helped extensively with the translation and the proofreading; she listened patiently and re­ sponded with sympathetic criticism while I was thinking out the argument of the book. Finally, I express my appreciation to the Deutscher Akadem­ ischer Austauschdienst (German Academic Exchange Service) for a research grant, and particularly to the Earh,art Foundation for the grant that supported my revision of the original manu­ script and the preparation of the translation. THo,MAs G. WEST University of Dallas 12 PART TWO Plato's Defense of Socrates INTERPRETATION CHAPTER 1 The Introduction (Proem) (17a-18a6) An "apology" is a speech of defense against an accusation of injustice. The word apo-logia itself denotes a "speaking-away," an explanatory discourse intended to repulse a charge against oneself.