Socrates Vs Crito A Decision Of Life

Essay, Research Paper

Socrates vs. Crito:

A Decision of Life

Courtney

Intro. to Philosophy

May 29, 2000

Summer Pre-Session

Socrates vs. Crito:

A Decision of Life

The dialogue Crito, by Plato, recounts the last days of Socrates, immediately before his

execution was going to take place in Athens. In the dialogue, Socrates? friend, Crito, proposes

that Socrates escape from prison. Socrates considers this proposal, trying to decide if escaping

would be ?just? and ?morally justified.? Eventually, Socrates concludes that the act is considered

?unjust? and ?morally unjustified.? Socrates decides to accept his death penalty and execution.

Socrates was a man who would pursuit truth in all matters (Kemerling 1999). In his

refusal to accept exile from Athens or a commitment to silence as a penalty, he takes the penalty

of death and is thrown into prison.

While Socrates is awaiting his execution, many of his friends, including Crito, arrive with a

foolproof plan for his escape from Athens to live in exile voluntarily. Socrates calmly debates

with each friend over the moral value and justification of such an act.

?…people who do not know you and me will believe that I might

have saved you if I had been willing to give money, but that I did

not care.?

-Crito (Plato 569)

Crito believed that by helping Socrates to escape, he could go on to fulfill his personal

obligations. Also, if Socrates does not follow the plan, many people would assume that his

friends did not care about him enough to help him escape or that his friends are not willing to give

their time or money in order to help him. Therefore, Crito goes on to argue that Socrates ought

to escape from the prison.

After listening to Crito?s arguments, Socrates dismisses them as irrelevant to a decision

about what action is truly right.

?Now you, Crito, are not going to die to-morrow-…-and therefore

you are disinterested and not liable to be deceived by the circumstances

in which you are placed.?

-Socrates (Plato 571)

In the arguments that Socrates makes, what other people think does not matter. The only

opinions that should matter are the ones of the individuals that truly know. ?The truth alone

deserves to be the basis for decisions about human action, so the only proper approach is to

engage in the sort of careful moral reasoning by means of which one may hope to reveal it?

(Kemerling 1999). According to Socrates, the only opinion that he is willing to consider would

be that of the state.

?…if you go forth, returning evil for evil, and injury for injury,…we shall

be angry with you while you live, and our brethren, the laws in the world

below, will receive you as an enemy; for they will know you have done

your best to destroy us.?

-Socrates (Plato 577)

Socrates? argument moves from one of a general moral decision to the morality of his

specific case. He basically says:

-One ought never to do wrong,

-But it is always wrong to disobey the state,

-Therefore, one ought never to disobey the state (Kemerling 1999)

Since avoiding the sentence handed down by the jury would be disobeying the state, Socrates

decides not to escape. Socrates chose to honor his commitment to truth and morality, even

though it cost him his life.

One of the main arguments made by Socrates,

?Think not of life and children first, and of justice afterwards, but

of justice first…For neither will you nor any that belong to you be

happier or holier or juster in this life, or happier in another, if you

do as Crito bids.?

-Socrates (Plato 577),

is one of the most important and crucial in the Crito dialogue.

Socrates provides a very convincing argument of why he should not escape from the

Athenian prison. He states that if he does as Crito suggests and escapes, it will not be justifiable

nor true. Although his family and friends will be much happier if he escapes, he will not follow

the justice or moral code of the state in which he was born and raised.

Socrates also gives the idea that if he were to escape, his family and friends would be

happy for him, but their fellow citizens and their state in which they reside would not. The

government and citizens of the state may take their frustration of this injustice out on the friends

and family of Socrates.

In this argument, Socrates believes that the state would say, ?think not of life and children

first, and of justice afterwards?(Plato 566). He says this as a counter-argument to statement made

by Crito saying that he should think of the children that he would be abandoning by not escaping.

Crito said that he should escape and raise and teach his children, instead of keeping his penalty.

Socrates? statement instead comes from the other end, where he should not think of his children

first, but of the truth and morality of the state in which his children will live and grow. If he does

escape, the state will lose some of that morality, and his children will be looked down upon. Also,

his children will not receive the same kind of justice that they may have gotten if he had not

escaped.

Justice seemed to be a very important factor to Socrates, and is part of his pursuit of truth

for all matters. Justice and truth, in the Crito dialogue, go hand-in-hand. Without truth, justice

cannot prevail over the wrongdoing in life.

Socrates believed that it is always wrong to break an agreement, and continuing to live his

life voluntarily in the state of Athens, constitutes disobedience against the state. He argues that

obeying the state is a requirement right up until death. He says that by not obeying the state that

he was raised in, is like not obeying his parents that raised him.

Socrates was a man who chose his commitment to truth, morality and philosophy over life.

He had a great commitment to his state, therefore by disobeying it, he would be committing

suicide in a sense. If Socrates had disobeyed his state, he would never be allowed to enter it

again, nor would any other allow him to live peacefully.

His arguments throughout the whole dialogue were very strong and made sense. Socrates

looked out for his state, while Crito?s arguments were based on himself and how others would

view him. Socrates? conclusion to stay in the prison may have cost him his life, but saved the

morality and truth of Athens.

Bibliography

Kemerling, Garth. ?Socrates: Philosophical Life?. 29 May 2000

*http://people.delphi.com/gkemerling/2d.htm*.

Stumpf, Samuel Enoch. ?Plato: The Problem of Intellectual and Moral Consistency?.

Philosophy:History & Problems. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994.

Kemerling, Garth. ?Socrates: Philosophical Life?. 29 May 2000

.

Stumpf, Samuel Enoch. ?Plato: The Problem of Intellectual and Moral Consistency?.

Philosophy:History & Problems. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994.