Was Socrates a Relativist?
The paper examines validity of the First Complaint against Socrates as it was formulated by Plato in the 'Apology'. A close examination of the indictment demonstrates that the accusation did not contain a compelling evidence of the presumed fact that Socrates was an atheist. The complaint used an inductive argument, which was fragmentary and therefore inconclusive. The accusers only insinuated that Socrates was omniscient and that he refused to believe in gods. They did not construct a strong case to support their assumptions. So if the accusation is read literally, as it was pronounced, ie. without assuming that there might have occurred some facts unknown to us today, the traditional interpretation, which fully exonerates Socrates, sounds credible and convincing.
CEJSH db identifier