An Aporetic Reading of the Apology

The thesis of this paper is that Plato’s Apology has an internally structured dialogue which may be read aporetically and may be used to read its monologic external structure as a dialogue proper. The aporia of the Apology has to do with the notion of ‘justice’ (dikē). Drawing from Hesiod’s observations as to the ambiguity of the term ‘justice,’ I argue that the same type of ambiguity is implicitly exploited by Socrates in the Apology. It is traditionally the case in Plato’s aporetic dialogues that Socrates’ interlocutor(s) are the ones reduced to a state of aporia. I argue that under this reading, the jury plays a dual function, acting both as Socrates’ audience and interlocutor, and that they find themselves at an impasse (aporia) as to what justice is and whether they have acted justly.