..."By Asking Questions"

           Upon reading "Apology" or "Apologia" by Plato, I automatically took the definition as the "lens" I would read the essay with. The essay is a defense speech, a defense speech that exposed to me a lot more questions on questioning and who could question. Does how we respond to our circumstances of existence by asking questions depend on our economic class? Does reputation and social status determine if you will be asked questions that acknowledge your circumstance and your existence? Does how we respond to our circumstances depend on the questions asked and answered by other people? I explore how Socrates's defense speech answers yes to all of the above answers with the evidence he shares in court. Evidence that remains true in modern day society.

How Should We Respond to Our Circumstances of Existence by Asking Questions?

Plato’s essay “Apology” is everything but an apology. The essay is an account of the Ancient Greek judicial proceeding of Socrates, in which Socrates defends himself against the charges made by Meletus. Socrates defended himself against his incriminating reputation by explaining that he was seeking to understand things by questioning all whom he could question. Although he was trying to defend himself from years of rumors in the span of a day’s court proceedings- Socrates opens up an endless platform of revelations just by simple questions and answers.

“Furthermore, the young men who follow me around of their own free will, those who have most leisure, the sons of the very rich, take pleasure in hearing people questioned; they themselves often imitate me and try to question others. I think they find an abundance of men who believe they have some knowledge but know little of nothing” (p. 22-23).

            One of the biggest rumors to haunt Socrates is that he was one to have corrupted the youth by spreading his beliefs amongst the youth. Although he addresses the rumor, he also introduces a very huge question: does how we respond to our circumstances of existence, by asking questions, depend on our economic class? This question resonates heavily from the above excerpt since he distinctly labels the type of person who could take part in his discussions of understanding: “the sons of the very rich”.  He even mentions that “…they themselves imitate [him] and try to question others” (p. 23), does this mean only those who have the leisure time to be engrossed in discovery are the ones asking all the questions?

            I’d argue that Socrates defended his arguments with the heavy burden of his economic status always in mind. That he was “poor” was a reoccurring notion, and that the youth that followed him are rich was clearly understood. How we respond to our circumstances with questions definitely is determined by money. The sons of the rich have more leisure time and liberty now as they did then. The circumstances and the types of questions one would ask are even reflective of ones economic status. Socrates exposes how the “…success of [their] craft, thought [themselves] very wise in other most important pursuits” (p. 22). Socrates’s pursuit of understanding provided a visualization of who thought they already knew everything, and that being those who validated understanding with success and monetary power.

            Those with the highest success also had a strong reputation following them, and solidifying them. Could economic status be the only factor in how we respond to our circumstances with questions? No. Plato argues in court:

“I found that those who had the highest reputation were nearly the most deficient, while those who were thought to be inferior were more knowledgeable” (p. 21-22).”

Now the question stands: does reputation and social status determine if you will be asked questions that acknowledge your circumstance? If you are thought to be “inferior” does that mean you cannot ask or be asked questions that acknowledge your existence? I would argue yes. The reputation Socrates had accumulated came from a long span of questioning and exposing the elite who had success. For those who had not achieved such success, and were not afraid of not knowing everything, Socrates did not offend them. He did, however, offend the social elite who had attained much success as they felt their wealth made them wiser than those whom hadn’t been as successful.

            Those who are successful attain a certain aura at times, that make people more trusting in their wisdom, because they have achieved a success others aspire for. The truth is the level of success is still measured today as it was during the times of Socrates. The kinds of questions asked about your circumstance are reflective of the social elite- being their standards, their expectations, and their wisdom. It could totally be that a whole entire section of society is ignored and not questioned because they have not achieved a level of success that compares to the social elite. I could be that a whole section of society doesn’t ask questions because they aren’t part of the social elite.

            Just like a whole section of society is left out because of their social class, couldn’t it then also be that the way a person responds to individual circumstances is dependent on the questions and answers of the social elite? Definitely. Socrates begins to delve into his sentencing of death and says:

“To fear death, gentlemen, is no other than to think oneself wise when one is not, to think one knows what one does not know” (p. 27).

He provides the argument that he doesn’t fear death, because he doesn’t know what life after death is like, that fear however was taught. It was taught and instilled into Greek society by the teachings of those in power, of the elite. Essentially a whole multitude of questions are automatically answered before even asked, and those whom do not have the power entrust in these answers. Some questions are not asked; because the answers that have been provided are the answers you have to believe. Some questions, some people do not have the luxury to be able to ask.