"The Apology" was written by Plato, and relates Socrates’ defense at his trial on charges of corrupting the youth and impiety. Socrates argues that he is innocent of both charges. His defense is ultimately unsuccessful, and he is convicted and sentenced to death. Socrates concludes the Apology by arguing that a just man should have no fear of death. [Note that this introductory paragraph concisely does two things: it sets up the issue to be discussed, and it briefly presents the position of the Socrates on the main topics (his innocence and his view of death). Long background histories and so on are not needed in these papers – get straight to the point. Socrates defends himself against the charges brought against him by his prosecutor Meletus in two ways. One way consists of a description of Socrates’ motivation and method, which he hopes will explain to the jury why some people, including his prosecutors, dislike him. The second defense consists of Socrates responding directly to the two charges brought against him: “corrupting the young” and impiety, or more specifically, “not believing in the gods in whom the city believes” (p. 28). I’ll address these two lines of defense in turn. I wrote this second paragraph to clarify the argumentative structure of the paper. I could have also combined this second paragraph with the first one, but it seemed more natural to separate it in this case. When I thought about Socrates’ defense, it seemed to me that it had two main parts: the part where he explains why he has a bad reputation, and the part where he responds directly to the charges against him. The first paragraphs are usually the hardest ones to write. You have to stop and think about what the main thesis or theses of the paper are, and also think about the main argument(s) for them. Fortunately, once you’ve thought about these things, the rest of the paper usually falls into place. Socrates begins his defense by acknowledging that many people have accused him of “studying things in the sky and below the earth” and of “making the worse into the stronger argument” and teaching these things to others (p. 26). He replies that such accusa