Plato's Crito Flashcards
Should Socrates escape from prison? - a month after the trial
Crito says that if Socrates dies - then he would lose a friend and people would think that he is the one who caused this, because people think he could have saved Socrates if he was willing to spend more money, but that he did not care to do so, which means he values money over friendship - which would cause a bad reputation
- Also Crito thinks that what Socrates is doing is not just
- to give up your life when you can save it, and to hasten your fate as your enemies as your enemies would hasten it, and indeed have hastened it in their wish to destroy you
Also would be betraying his sons by going away and leaving them, when you could bring them up and educate them
- you show no concern for their fate
Socrates’ response: Majority opinion is irrelevant
Socrates says that one should value good opinions, not the ones that most people hold
If you want to get your body in good shape
Would you listen to the majority
Or someone who knows a lot about bodily health
He must then act and exercise, eat, and drink in the way the one, the trainer, and the one who does know
And if he disobeys the one, he ruins his body
This corrupts our body, making life not worth living
And is life worth living for us with that part of us corrupted that unjust action harms and just action benefits?
Or do we think that part of us, whatever it is, that is concerned with justice and injustice, is inferior to the body?
It is much more valuable
We shouldn’t think so much of what the majority says about us, but care about the opinion of someone who knows what is just and unjust
The only important consideration
- Whether we should be acting rightly
- Or whether in truth we shall do wrong in doing this
- We have no need at all to take into account whether we shall have to die if we stay here and keep quiet or suffer in another way, rather than do wrong
- The good, beautiful, and just life are all the same
The good life is the just life
- We don’t get an argument for this
- Let’s assume - living well is to be valued more highly than merely living
- What we want is to live well, not just to be alive
- It is never just to harm or do wrong to someone
- Is to do wrong, never good or admirable, as we have agreed in the past
- Since it is never just to wrong someone, one should never wrong them, including wronging them in return of their harm to you
- Its irrelevant of the verdict of Socrates trial, there was no wrong in terms of the legal system, but Socrates and their friend did nothing wrong, so it is wrong to execute him, so Socrates is being wronged
- They are not disagreeing about the jury verdict, they are arguing about whether Socrates should escape
- We can note that this raises the question of what Socrates thinks about punishment, specifically punishment by the state for a crime
- Will Socrates be harming anyone by escaping
- The law tells Socrates that he would be destroying them if he escapes
- Would Socrates be harming the laws and the city?
- Do you think it is possible for a city not to be destroyed if the verdicts of the courts have no force but are nullified and set at naught by private individuals?
The laws on obedience and commands
- You must either persuade the law or obey its orders
- And endure in silence whatever the law tells you to obey
- It would be wrong for Socrates to ignore the jury and escape prison
Socrates’ promise to disobey
- We acquit you on the condition that you do not practice philosophy
- Socrates says that he would disobey god rather than them, and as long as he is alive he will continue to practice philosophy
- It’s just for him to not escape and take the penalty
Solutions to the Apology-Crito Problem
- What the position in the Crito is - you must either persuade the jury or obey its orders - one must obey the commands of one’s city or country, or persuade it as to the nature of justice
- We could possibly think that lawbreaking is a form of persuasion to change the law
- Maybe these attempts of persuasion are acts of disobedience - like protesting
- Could Socrate’s disobedience to the court order as a way to persuade the court of something
Divine vs human commands
- “Be sure that this is what the god orders me to do, and I think there is no greater blessing for the city than my service to the god”
- If there is a conflict between obeying the gods or humans, obeying the gods would win
- Even if we take it as divinely commanded to practice philosophy - shouldn’t this extend beyond doing so in Athens
Disobeying unjust commands
- They gave many such orders to many people, in order to implicate as many as possible in their guilt
- My whole concern is not to do anything unjust or impious
Punishment:
If someone’s unjust behavior merits flogging, he should present himself to be whipped, if it merits imprisonment, to be imprisoned, if a fine, to pay it, if exile, to be exiled, and execution, to be executed
Socratic intellectualism and punishment
- Do we really only do wrong out of ignorance
- virtue/morality is a kind of knowledge
- This entails, that no one willingly does wrong
‘Do no harm’ and punishment
- Is punishment really a way of improving someone
- The only time harm and punishment are acceptable is if it were to improve someone - with the intention that one should never do any harm
- It’s not damaging, as in not harming, as it is making them better, as in more virtuous
