Although I would not consider the Apology to be a perfect example of a classical Greek tragedy, the two share many similarities. For example, the skeleton of the tragic cycle is definitely visible if one looks at the timeline Socrates has presented to the audience. When he addresses the accusations of sophistry put against him, Socrates tells the audience the tale of why he has gotten “such an evil name” (22). He then goes on to relate the story of his old friend Chaerephon’s visit to the Oracle of Delphi. Chaerephon asked the oracle if any man was wiser than Socrates and the oracle replied that there wasn’t. After hearing this Socrates wonders at the meaning of this statement and seems to doubt the word of the gods, although he does point out the gods don’t lie (22). Still, he decides to test this statement by going out and questioning others to find someone smarter than himself to “go to the god with a refutation in my hand” (23) as he puts it. This explanation of why Socrates has gotten such a bad name is a great example of hubris. Socrates had shown pride against the gods by questioning their judgment on his wisdom. He even goes so far as to claim he desires to directly refute them. In the end he may have agreed with the oracle’s decree, but if he hadn’t questioned her in the first place he wouldn’t have made so many enemies along the way. Also, the fact that he even questioned the Oracle of Delphi leads one to believe he thinks himself wiser than the gods, though he may claim differently.

            On this same note the second part of the tragic cycle, ate, begins when Socrates starts questioning people and offending many of them. He first speaks to many reputable politicians and finds them inferior to himself, one of the reasons being that they think themselves wise, but Socrates believes himself to be better off than they for he at least knows he is not wise. Then Socrates goes to seek wisdom among the poets, who the Greeks believed could channel the gods through their poetry. This endeavor turns out similar to the last, the poets cannot explain the meaning of what they write and Socrates dismisses them for many of the same reasons as the politicians (23-24). This act is particularly blasphemous because of the reverence poets command from the public. Socrates has certainly become reckless on his search for knowledge by offending this particular group in Greek society. He’s not done yet though and he continues his search by speaking to the artisans, then offending them in turn after reaching much the same conclusion as before. Still, even after traversing society with his endless questions he continues to question those he meets, although he now claims it to be in service of the gods rather than to spite them. He may claim to be in service of the gods, but even this can be seen as reckless behavior because now he is acting on the gods’ behalf by inquiring about the wisdom of others and then stating “in vindication of the oracle I show him that he is not wise” (24).

            Socrates’ nemesis comes when prominent members of the groups he has offended step forth to put Socrates on trial. Socrates points out himself where exactly his three accusers have come from and who they speak for, “Meletus, who has a quarrel with me on behalf of the poets; Anytus, on behalf of the craftsmen; Lycon, on behalf of the rhetoricians” (25). The gods have sought retribution for Socrates’ pride in the form of those that he slighted on his search to prove the gods wrong. He has effectively reaped what he has sown. Socrates planted the seeds of resentment in these people and over the years that resentment flourished, fed by the continuation of his search for a man wiser than himself and his constant criticism of those who did not meet his standards.

            In the end, Socrates was wise. He conceded that the gods had prevailed and the oracle was right. Socrates states to his audience, “the truth is, O men of Athens, that God only is wise” (24). This could be interpreted as a kind of sophia. Socrates had always been wise in fact, but what he doesn’t gain is sophrosune, or humility. Yes, after relating the aforementioned account of how it is that he became so unpopular he seems to show humility in the face of the gods, but this humility does not last long (also it could be argued that this humility is simply a mask of words due to the fact that if he had truly learned humility he would have at least stopped questioning and condemning people in such an offensive manner). After his refutation of some of the claims made against him and tearing into Meletus (in language that could be considered sophistry), Socrates goes on to compare himself to Achilles. He claims that his decision to continue asking questions even if it brings death upon him is akin to the decision Achilles made to go to war rather than live in disgrace (29). Socrates also makes the claim that Athens is like a great horse and he, a gadfly that exists to prod this great horse from its sleep and into action. He makes the bold statement, “if you kill such a one as I am, you will injure yourselves more than you will injure me” (31) and tells his audience that he cannot be easily replaced. By comparing himself to a celebrated hero of war and stating that he is irreplaceable, a gift from the gods even, he is making very blatantly boastful statements of himself. His words convey the very opposite of humility. Even after he is sentenced to death Socrates displays his lack of sophrosune for the audience one last time by sharing his opinion on what will happen to him in death. He tells them death will not be so bad for him anyway, that he will either sleep for eternity or he will journey to another plane of existence (40). He fails to mention anything akin to the Christian idea of hell, although the Greeks certainly had the notion of such a place. So, his last display of pride is the fact that he doesn’t even consider hell an option for himself.