Thomas Brickhouse and Nicholas Smith offer a comprehensive historical
and philosophical interpretation of, and commentary on, one of Plato's
most widely read works, the Apology of Socrates. Virtually every modern
interpretation characterizes some part of what Socrates says in the
Apology as purposefully irrelevant or even antithetical to convincing
the jury to acquit him at his trial. This book, by contrast, argues
persuasively that Socrates offers a sincere and well-reasoned defense
against the charges he faces. First, the authors establish a consensus
of ancient reports about Socrates' moral and religious principles and
show that these prohibit him from needlessly risking the condemnation of
the jury. Second, they consider each specific claim made by Socrates in
the Apology and show how each can be construed as an honest effort to
inform the jurors of the truth and to convince them of his
blamelessness. The arguments of this book are informed by a critical
review of the scholarly literature and careful attention to the
philosophy expressed in Plato's other early dialogues.