Socrates’ apology was not exactly an apology, well in modern day definition. Socrates was just explaining how he was innocent in casual plain conversation. He went out and tried to disprove the oracle by finding other wiser men by doing that he proved that these men weren’t wise at all. In result, he had a group of followers that were doing the same. That is where the charges came to be, claiming that Socrates is corrupting the youth and Socrates is non believer.
Socrates counter argument for corrupting the youth is that ‘doing harm around others would lead them to cause harm to others’. (Somewhere along those lines) Looping back to him looking out for his well-being. Saying that his followers would harm him, making this accusation a weak one. The other accusation is Socrates lack of belief in the gods. Socrates counter was ‘anyone who participates in divine activities believe in some type of god. (Paraphrasing) On Socrates account, he claims he par take in divine activities rendering him into a believer which proves another weak accusation. Although weak accusation can be brought up it still make for strong arguments that is why Socrates was still sentence to death.
With this reading my reflection is an understanding on the decision of the jury although Socrates made a compelling case. His actions are one of heretic and in a society a traditional as ancient Greece it is frown upon very much. Eliminating doubt within a society to keep everything under control and at bay. Cutting off the source so power will not feed to the sub generators is the main priority.