This article examines the relationship between wisdom, majority rule and social legitimacy through the philosophical perspectives of Socrates and Plato within the context of Athenian democracy. It further interprets these dynamics through the framework of Social Relativity Theory (SRT). The study argues that social truth and legitimacy are not absolute but depend on social reference frames, structures of power and collective perception. The trial and execution of Socrates represent a classical case of tension between intellectual truth and socially accepted truth. The article suggests that democracy does not decline merely because of majority rule itself, but when majority decisions are detached from intellectual and moral reference frames. Social Relativity Theory thus provides a structural explanation of how truth, authority and legitimacy are shaped by shared social perception.