Plato

Vladyslav Dyenyezhka

Reaction Paper #1

PHIL-100

02/25/14

     In the Crito Socrates insists that he must respect and obey the laws of Athens even after he had been sentenced to death. Socrates, in his usual way of doing things, provides arguments that support his choice to obey a legal decision that is unjust and harmful towards him. First of all, Socrates believes that he and the city of Athens are not on the same footing and that whatever is right for Athens to do to him is not right for him to do to Athens, as the city gave him everything he had (nurturing, education) and so he is the offspring and servant of the city and must obey its laws. For better understanding of his point, Socrates provides us with an analogy of the way an individual must treat his parents and teachers (Masters) who could do different things to him, but he did not have a right to retaliate them. For example, if they would beat him up, he never would beat them up in response and so with many other similar things and situations. Moreover, Socrates considers the city and so its laws to be superior even to his parents, forefathers and teachers altogether. So, it would be not right from his side to undertake any action that could harm his city. If he would violate laws of the city, by that he would harm the city and show his intention to destroy the city by these actions. As Socrates imagined theoretical argument laws of Athens would make, “It is not pious to bring violence against your mother and father; it is much more so to use it against your country” (Plato, Five Dialogues: Crito 51c).

     Worth mentioning that Athens provided every citizen with a right to “take possessions and go wherever he pleases” at any time after reaching the voting age, at which person could discover affairs of the city and how they are done and then logically make its own decision about what he or she thinks about the city’s laws and whether like them and live in the city in accordance to what they say or do not like them and depart. But Socrates stayed in the city and even had children, which showed his choice of acceptance of the city’s laws and affairs, so coming to an agreement that he, Socrates, choose to stay in the city and obey and respect its laws. Socrates imagines a logical response that the laws would give him in the case if he would escape the prison, “You, Socrates, are breaking the covenants and agreements which you made with us at your leisure, not in any haste or under any compulsion or deception, but having had seventy years to think of them, during which time you were at liberty to leave the city, if we were not to your mind, or if our covenants appeared to you to be unfair” (Plato, Five Dialogues: Crito 52e). Therefore, he, Socrates, should fulfill an agreement and stay bound to respect the laws of his city, as to go against the decision of the city (in this case his sentencing to death) would be a wrongdoing, especially after having a legal right to escape that death sentence by choosing exile.

     There is an important point which states that if Socrates would disobey the laws, he would do wrong not only to the reputation of the city, but also to his parents, who chose the city with its laws as a place to bring him up, and finally, if he chooses to merely disobey and escape, he actually shows by this action that he does not try to persuade the city to do better, but rather merely wants to destroy it.

     However, what is the most important to Socrates is a Truth and it is the reason of how he acted and what he said during his whole life and during the trial in particular. Knowing that, escaping the prison and avoiding the death penalty would be the least thing Socrates should undertake, if he really believes in what he said during his life and during the trial in particular. Socrates claimed during the trial that he is not afraid of death and also that he obeys the laws, so to escape the prison would show that he actually does not believe in what he claims to believe, it would show that he is afraid of death and afraid so much that he is not going to obey the laws. This single action of escaping from the prison would prove his guilt to everyone and cross his whole life as a philosopher, proving that his words and practices worth nothing. It is also clear that he is likely to live but a short time more. If he is so greedy for life that he transgressed the most important laws, many disgraceful things would be said about him. According to Socrates, the laws would conclude, “Will you then, not now stick to our agreements? You will, Socrates, if we can persuade you, and not make yourself a laughingstock by leaving the city” (Plato, Five Dialogues: Crito 53a). After all, if Socrates would escape the prison and go to nearby cities – Thebes or Megara, he would arrive as an enemy to their government because of the following reason, “….all who care for their city will look on you with suspicion, as a destroyer of the laws. You will also strengthen the conviction of the jury that they passed the right sentence on you, for anyone who destroys the laws could easily be thought to corrupt the young and the ignorant” (Plato, Five Dialogues: Crito 53b-53c).

...