what were the background & the incidents w/c instigated socrates' detractors to put him on trial?

Question

in plato's 'the apology of socrates'

Answer 1

If you read ONLY 'The Apology of Socrates', it's going to make Socrates look like he was without fault. Some say that this isn't too surprising, because it was written by one of Socrates' star pupils. But you have to ask yourself - Socrates had been making his viewpoints well-known for decades and in very public places... so why would Athenians wait so long and consider his crimes so serious as to merit death? There is quite obviously more going on the Plato is allowing.

The problem with figuring out what Socrates was actually doing and encouraging others to do is that there is no account left by Socrates himself. Everything we know about him was written by pupils or critics. But there are two of his ardent pupils who are often glossed over in discussions of Socrates: Alcibiades and Critas.

From these two gentlemen we can learn a somewhat different side of Socrates... traces of which also can be found in Plato's 'Republic'. Among the many other things Socrates questioned, one was the Athenian way of life. As he knew all too well from his questionings of common folk, most people did not really give much thought into deeper matters. He called them sheep. Sheep in need of a shepherd. And not equal members of a republic.

It was Alcibiades who took this first to heart. One of Socrates' favourite politicians, he had fled to Sparta to avoid being tried for defacing religious structures. There, he assembled support and returned to overthrow the republic and discard the constitution as Socrates had advocated so many times. What had seemed like harmless mockery to the Athenians suddenly became a lot less funny.

It was Critias, however, who COMPLTELY ruined the scene. Alcibiades was deposed after just four months, but Critias was not only far longer lasting, but many times more brutal. He is universally described as cruel, inhumane, and a fan of Socrates. Critias united a group of thirty wealthy landowners to seize the rest of the city and rule it with an iron first. Literally thousands we executed and thousands more exiled before the democracy was able to re-establish itself.

As you can imagine, Socrates and his criticism of Athens' system of government was no longer even vaguely seen as funny (you can see part of the OLD view of Socrates in the play 'Clouds' by Aristophanes... a play which Socrates even reported attended). But as part of the return to power, the democracy had granted amnesty to all citizens. Nothing he had done before could be considered against him.

That might have been the end of that, if Socrates had perhaps been a little wiser and not returned to the streets to once more decry the way things were. Once more he attracted a band of young pupils. And - whether it was related to Socrates or not - there was even another failed uprising.

Enough was enough. To the people of Athens, this was now TREASON, not just philosophy. It probably only took them so long to get around to it because Socrates himself was old and poor... they probably hoped he would just keel over and save them the trouble.

Instead (as you probably know) Meletus, Anytus, and Lycon decided to step forward and proffer charges. If Socrates and his pupils were so opposed to democracy, then (many thought) perhaps there was something democracy could do about it...

Answer 2

Socrates was accused of corruption of minors and not believing the gods. The corruption was his exposing them to the Socratic method of inquiry; his heresy was in saying Good was not determined by the gods.
See the following for details:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Socrates