> Because I am afraid of the penalty of death which Meletus proposes?

Which is to say, the plaintiff. No different than in court today where the prosecution asks the court for a sentence that is up to the judge to decide. And just like our own courts the defense can offer a counter proposal, which Plato goes into a discussion why he won't do that (well, he proposes a fine which would clearly not satisfy the crime he was accused of). The entire next passages are his reasons rejecting the likely mercies he could be offered (and would be expected to plead for).

Just like making a plea for a guilty sentence comes with the expectation of a potentially lighter sentence in our own court systems, a plea for extenuating circumstances during sentencing is often made by the defense. For example, an elderly person requiring care may avoid prison and plead for home arrest.

Now imagine the circumstance where pre-sentencing, facing a recommendation of the death penalty from the prosecution, the defendant stands before the judge and explains in great detail why he won't accept any of the potentially lesser sentences he might get, rejecting them one by one. That is explicitly what Plato is showing Socrates to have done.

Consider: does it makes sense to argue against a more lenient sentence when your life is on the line, especially when it is likely you would receive it? Why would Socrates seemingly act against his own interests?

Yes, this is what I originally stated, that it is his prosecuters arguing for death.

You seem to be ignoring the passages where he explicitly suggests a fine as the sentence, however you may also argue that he does this in jest/sarcasm.

Yes he argues against exile etc, but in no way does he ever suggest death is a prefered option in my opinion.

Let's examine your opinion here, which of course you are entitled to. Socrates could have three opinions: Exile is worse than death, exile is equivalent to death, exile is better than death.

Let us consider the first case, where Socrates actually believes that exile is better than death. You could make the argument: Socrates would choose exile but he is too proud to beg for his life. That is, his subsequent explanation as to why he believes a life of exile would not be worth living is a ruse. It would render the famous line "the life which is unexamined is not worth living" as just pure cope. Actually, we are to see Socrates not as a principled man but rather a vain one. Otherwise, how do we explain his refusal to argue for that which is better? You could argue: Socrates is not wise as we have been led to believe in countless dialogues by Plato, but rather a fool who does not speak honestly.

Maybe you have a better argument for that case? I would be interested to hear it.

But if we take his explicit rejection of the option during his counter-plea at face value, it seems unreasonable to stake the position that he thinks exile is better than death (although, you may decide to hold that opinion and even forward a better case for it than I have).

That leaves the two options: Socrates thinks exile is equivalent to death and Socrates thinks exile is worse than death. I think a case for the first is possible but a stretch.

But let's not worry about resolving that, since Socrates attacks the problem in a different manner:

> When I do not know whether death is a good [agathos] or an evil [kakos], why should I propose a penalty which would certainly be an evil?

It seems clear to me that Socrates is saying: I know that exile is bad but I do not know that death is bad. If you do not see that as a preference towards death over exile then I would like to hear your counter argument.

edit: I will add, since it may not be clear or obvious to some, that the logic that separates the final two options only applies when the initial option (exile is better than death) has been removed. Which is more or less the question that Plato (and my original comment which kicked off this thread) wants us to ask: why would Socrates discard that first option?

> why should I propose a penalty which would certainly be an evil? Shall I say imprisonment? And why should I live in prison, and be the slave of the magistrates of the year—of the Eleven? Or shall the penalty be a fine, and imprisonment until the fine is paid? There is the same objection.

He was not talking about exile at this point, but every punishment which is considered evil[kakos], shown by the fact that he mentions fines and imprisonment immediately after. He goes on to mention exile third after these 2. This leads me to believe he thinks death is better than any punishment, as death is the only punishment which contains an unknown.

After mulling the outcomes of imprisonment, fines, and exile, he settles on proposing a fine (be it in sarcasm or not).

In my opinion there is nothing specific about death vs exile here, only a man showing he is not afraid of death.

> Socrates could have three opinions: Exile is worse than death, exile is equivalent to death, exile is better than death.

You know what? He could also have the opinion that death is better than a kick in the testicles, but in the same way it is not mentioned in this text ;)

The fact that he proposes a fine is strong evidence that he doesn't (and is one reason it may be included at all, to counter this assumption effectively). Nor would he reasonably think a slap on the wrist would be worse than death. I don't think your use of "any" in this context is appropriate and only serves to advance your case rather than engage honestly.

> He could also have the opinion that death is better than a kick in the testicles

Again, as I have said time and time again, Plato is asking us to consider particular alternatives to death. He spends one sentence on imprisonment and then two large paragraphs on exile. That is evidence of the relative importance he places on the specific alternatives. Note he does not bother addressing your "kick to the testicles" opinion. Perhaps you can write an essay on that which will stand the test of thousands of years of consideration.

I think you are committed to exile in a personal sense and you are refusing to engage with this dialogue as it was meant in order to avoid facing its implications. I am sorry to treat you so cynically and I wish you luck in your continued intellectual journey.