Socrates and Meletus

I ended my preceding post, ‘The dating of the Cratylus’, by quoting Socrates’ parting words in the Euthyphro as an indication that Socrates was confident that he would win his case against Meletus. But someone might argue that Socrates’ words suggest the opposite. For as Euthyphro was departing, Socrates exclaimed: ‘Oh my friend, what are you doing? You go away and leave me cast down from the high hope I had that I should learn from you what is holy, and what is not, and should get rid of Meletus’s indictment by showing him that I have been made wise by Euthyphro about divine matters and am no longer through ignorance acting carelessly and making innovations in respect of them, and that I shall live a better life henceforth.’ (Translation H.N. Fowler.)

But Socrates never intended to refer to Euthyphro at his trial. All those things he in the Euthyphro says he would do with reference to Euthyphro, as his teacher, he actually did, or attempted to do, better to say, with Meletus, asking him to be his teacher. In the Apology he says:

‘What then (Ti/ dh=ta), Meletus (w} Me/lhte;}? Are you at your age so much wiser than I at my age (tosou=ton su\ e0mou= sofw&teroj ei] thlikou/tou o1ntoj thliko/sde w!n), that you have recognized (w#ste su\ me\n e1gnwkaj) that the evil (o3ti oi9 me\n kakoi/) always do some evil (kako/n ti e0rga/zontai a0ei/) to those nearest them (tou\j ma/lista plhsi/on e9autw~n), and the good (oi9 de\ a0gaqoi/) some good (a0gaqo/n); whereas I (e0gw_ de\ dh/) have reached such a depth of ignorance (ei0j tosou=ton a0maqi/aj h3kw) that I do not even know this (w#ste kai\ tou=t’ a0gnow~), that (o3ti) if I make any of my associates bad (e0a/n tina moxqhro\n poih/sw tw~n cuno/ntwn) I am in danger (kinduneu/sw) of getting some harm (kako/n ti labei=n) from him (a0p’ au0tou=), so that I am doing this great evil voluntarily (w#ste tou=to to\ tosou=ton kako\n e9kw_n poiw~), as you say (w(j fh\|j su/;)? I don’t believe you this (tau=ta e0gw&? soi ou0 pei/qomai), Meletus (w} Me/lhte), nor anyone else in the world does (oi]mai de\ ou0de\ a1llon a0nqrw&pwn ou0de/na)! but either I do not corrupt them (a0ll’ h2 ou0 diafqei/rw), or if I corrupt them (h2 ei0 diafqei/rw), I do it involuntarily (a1kwn), so that you are lying in both accounts (w#ste su/ ge kat’ a0mfo/tera yeu/dei). But if I corrupt them involuntarily (ei0 de\ a1kwn diafqei/rw), for such involuntary errors (tw~n toiou/twn kai\ a0kousi/wn a9marthma/twn) the law is not to hale people into court (ou0 deu=ro no/moj ei0sa/gein e0sti/n), but to take them and instruct and admonish them in private (a0ll’ i0di/a| labo/nta dida/skein kai\ nouqetei=n). For it is clear (dh=lon ga/r) that (o3ti) if I am told about it (e0a\n ma/qw), I shall stop doing (pau/somai) that which I do involuntarily (o3 ge a1kwn poiw~). But you avoided associating with me and instructing me (su\ de\ cuggene/sqai me/n moi kai\ dida/cai e1fugej), and were unwilling to do so (kai\ ou0k e0qe/lhsaj), but you hale me in here (deu=ro de\ ei0sa/geij), where it is the law to hale in those who need punishment (oi[ no/moj e0sti\n eisa/gein tou\j kola/sewj deome/nouj), not instruction (a0ll ou0 maqh/sewj). (25d8-26a7)