\u00abSobre la Apolog\u00eda de S\u00f3crates y el Crit\u00f3n de Plat\u00f3n\u00bb \/ I<\/span><\/p>\n Le\u014dnardus Str\u016bthi\u014d (1899-1973)<\/span><\/p>\n \u0112RVD\u012aTI\u014cRIBVS <\/span>***<\/span><\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n\n S\u00f3crates cre\u00eda que iba a ser condenado por una amplia mayor\u00eda; por eso hab\u00eda hablado como si todo el jurado estuviera convencido de su culpabilidad o le fuera hostil. Para su sorpresa, fue condenado por una peque\u00f1a mayor\u00eda. Si acert\u00f3 al juzgar el estado de \u00e1nimo inicial del jurado, debe admitirse que su defensa hab\u00eda convencido a no pocos de sus miembros. No tenemos derecho a suponer que no hab\u00eda miembros del jurado que lo consideraban inocente o simpatizaban con \u00e9l desde el comienzo. S\u00f3crates a\u00f1ade que si Meleto<\/a> hubiera sido el \u00fanico en acusarlo y \u00c1nito<\/a> y Lic\u00f3n<\/a> no hubieran acompa\u00f1ado la acusaci\u00f3n, habr\u00eda resultado absuelto. Es de lamentar, por lo tanto, que s\u00f3lo haya refutado a Meleto.<\/span><\/p>\n \u00abEste era [\u2026] un caso en que no hab\u00eda pena prescripta por la ley\u00bb y en el cual \u00abel tribunal tuvo que optar entre las penas alternativas propuestas por la acusaci\u00f3n y la defensas\u00bb (Burnet). Meleto hab\u00eda propuesto la pena de muerte. S\u00f3crates propone lo que merece. Para determinarlo, debe considerar tanto su m\u00e9rito como su necesidad. En cuanto a su m\u00e9rito, nunca en su vida se ha quedado quieto, pero descuid\u00f3 las cosas a las cuales la mayor\u00eda nunca deja de dedicarse: el dinero, la administraci\u00f3n de la casa, los generalatos, el \u00e9xito en la oratoria pol\u00edtica, otros tipos de preeminencia pol\u00edtica, las conspiraciones y las sediciones. Como lo indica mediante esta enumeraci\u00f3n, todas esas actividades est\u00e1n manchadas por la injusticia. Se consideraba en verdad demasiado bueno como para ocuparse de su propia preservaci\u00f3n mediante tales actividades, por las cuales no podr\u00eda ser de utilidad alguna para los atenienses ni para s\u00ed mismo; el \u00fanico motivo plausible para entrar en pol\u00edtica es la preocupaci\u00f3n por la autopreservaci\u00f3n (cf. Gorgias<\/em>, 511a4 y sigs.). Con anterioridad hab\u00eda atribuido su abstenci\u00f3n de la pol\u00edtica al daimonion<\/em>, si no al or\u00e1culo de Delfos<\/a>, sin expresar abiertamente desd\u00e9n por la vida pol\u00edtica; pero ahora habla de su \u00fanico m\u00e9rito y, por lo tanto, guarda silencio sobre ambos tipos de incitaciones sobrehumanas, al mismo tiempo que es muy expl\u00edcito sobre la baja jerarqu\u00eda de la actividad pol\u00edtica (y econ\u00f3mica). En lugar de hacer las cosas que hace la mayor\u00eda, confiri\u00f3 a cada hombre el mayor de los beneficios al exhortarlo a la virtud. Empero, por ser pobre, carece de tiempo libre para realizar su obra ben\u00e9fica. Por la conjunci\u00f3n de ambas razones \u2014su m\u00e9rito sobresaliente y su pobreza diez mil veces mayor\u2014, merece que se le d\u00e9 de comer en el pritaneo<\/a>. Este honor es concedido a los vencedores de los Juegos Ol\u00edmpicos<\/a>, aunque estos hombres s\u00f3lo hacen que los atenienses parezcan ser felices, mientras que S\u00f3crates los hace verdaderamente felices; adem\u00e1s, aquellos no necesitan sustento, y \u00e9l s\u00ed.<\/span><\/p>\n Perge ad sequ\u0113ns caput<\/a><\/p>\n Redde ad prius caput<\/a><\/p>\n Perge ad initium paginae huius<\/a><\/p>\n Perge ad indicem<\/a><\/p>\n Socrates had expected to be condemned by a large majority; hence he spoke as if the whole jury were convinced of his guilt or hostile to him. To his surprise he was condemned by a small majority. If he judged rightly of the initial mood of the jury, his defence must have convinced not a few of its members. We have no right to assume that there were no members of the jury who regarded him as innocent or were friendly to him from the beginning. Socrates adds that if Meletos<\/a> alone had accused him, if Anytos<\/a> and Lykon had not come forward to accuse him, he would have been acquitted. One may therefore deplore that he refuted only Meletos.<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cThis was\u2026 a case in which no penalty was prescribed by law\u201d and in which \u201cthe court had to choose between the alternative penalties proposed by the prosecution and the defense.\u201d (Burnet) Meletos had proposed the death penalty. Socrates proposes what he deserves. In order to determine it, he must consider both his merit and his need. As for his merit, he has never in his life kept quiet but neglected the things to which the many never cease to devote themselves\u2014money-making, management of the household, generalships, success in political oratory, other kinds of political pre- eminence, conspiracies and seditions. As he indicates by this enumeration, all these activities are tainted by injustice. He regarded himself as in truth too good to attend to preserving himself by such activities by which he could not be of any use to the Athenians or to himself; the only plausible motive for going into politics is the concern with self-preservation (cf. Gorgias<\/em>, 511a4 ff). Previously Socrates had traced his abstention from politics to the daimonion<\/em>, if not to the Delphic oracle<\/a>, without openly voicing contempt for the political life; but now he speaks of his unique merit and is therefore silent on both kinds of superhuman promptings, while being very vocal on the low rank of political (and economic) activity. Instead of doing the things which the many do, he conferred the greatest benefit on each man by exhorting him to virtue. But being poor he lacks the leisure for his beneficial work. For both reasons taken together\u2014his outstanding merit and his ten-thousandfold poverty\u2014he deserves to have his meals in the prytaneion<\/a>. This honour is awarded to the victors in the Olympian games<\/a>, but these men make the Athenians only seem to be happy, while Socrates makes the Athenians truly happy; and they do not need sustenance but Socrates does.<\/span><\/p>\n Perge ad sequ\u0113ns caput<\/a><\/p>\n Redde ad prius caput<\/a><\/p>\n Perge ad initium paginae huius<\/a><\/p>\n Perge ad indicem<\/a><\/p>\n El texto en lengua inglesa fue publicado de manera p\u00f3stuma en un volumen en honor al prof. Jacob Klein: Essais in Honor of Jacob Klein<\/em> (Annapol\u012b, \u0113 Typographe\u014d Acad\u0113m\u012bae S\u0101nct\u012b I\u014dhannis MCMLXXVI). Aunque nosotros tomamos como base lo aparecido en una antolog\u00eda dedicada a escritos del prof. Str\u016bthi\u014d en ingl\u00e9s en 1983: Studies in Platonic Political Philosophy<\/em> (Sicag\u012b, \u0113 Typographe\u014d \u016aniversit\u0101tis Sicag\u012b MCMLXXXIII). La versi\u00f3n castellana es obra de Aemilia Aquad\u012bs, aparecida en la traducci\u00f3n del volumen mencionado anteriormente (Bon\u0101eropol\u012b, \u0113 Typographe\u014d Am\u014drrort\u012b MMVIII). La publicaci\u00f3n de estos fragmentos promueve la difusi\u00f3n en castellano de la obra del profesor Le\u014dnardus Str\u016bthi\u014d con fines acad\u00e9micos y de formaci\u00f3n. Conminamos a visitar su biblioteca m\u00e1s cercana o adquirir el volumen f\u00edsico en su librer\u00eda de confianza.<\/span><\/p>\n Perge ad sequ\u0113ns caput<\/a><\/p>\n Redde ad prius caput<\/a><\/p>\n Perge ad initium paginae huius<\/a><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/atriumphilosophicum.es\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Leo_Strauss_USA_1939-239x300.jpg\")
<\/p>\nVersi\u014d hisp\u0101nica Aemili\u0101 Aquad\u012bt\u012b auctr\u012bce 14<\/span><\/h1>\n
Le\u014dnard\u012b Str\u016bthi\u014dnis verba 14<\/span><\/h1>\n
I\u016bra<\/span><\/h1>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/atriumphilosophicum.es\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/creative-commons-symbols-300x111.jpg\")
<\/p>\n