Copyright © 2006 School of Abraham. All rights reserved. Ancient Greek Philosophy.

Copyright © 2006 School of Abraham. All rights reserved.

Ancient Greek Philosophy


Socrates in the Crito:The Philosopher in Prison


Justice and the Law: Moral Ethics


THE DEATH OF SOCRATES Jacques Louis David's monumental painting


The Socratic dialogues are dominated by the figure of Socrates. Socrates spent his time talking to people about ethical topics. He sought by this means to discover definitions of the virtues, thinking that in learning what virtue is, he would become virtuous, and that this would make his life a happy one.


Socrates appealed to some people, but he repelled many others; he also came to be associated in the public mind with anti-democratic factions in Athens.


Socrates also sought to expose other people's false conceit of knowledge about ethical matters, thinking that such conceit prevented them from becoming virtuous and happy.


Although a patriot and a man of deep religious conviction, Socrates was nonetheless regarded with suspicion by many of his contemporaries, who disliked his attitude toward the Athenian state and the established religion.


Socrates was obedient to the laws of Athens, but he generally steered clear of politics, restrained by what he believed to be divine warning. He believed that he had received a call to pursue philosophy and could serve his country best by devoting himself to teaching, and by persuading the Athenians to engage in self-examination and in tending to their souls. a


He was charged in 399 BC with neglecting the gods of the state and introducing new divinities, a reference to the daemonion, or mystical inner voice, to which Socrates often referred.


He was also charged with corrupting the morals of the young, leading them away from the principles of democracy; and he was wrongly identified with the Sophists, possibly because he had been ridiculed by the comic poet Aristophanes in his play The Clouds as the master of a “thinking-shop” where young men were taught to make the worse reason appear the better reason.


In 399 BC, Socrates was tried on a charge of impiety, convicted, and sentenced to death.

The manner of Socrates’ execution was to be the drinking of hemlock.

Picture of hemlock cups.


We can see the rotten core of the Athenian democracy at this point when we look at the numbers: although we don’t know the exact number of jurors in the case (500 or 501), we do know that Socrates is found guilty by a margin of 60 votes: 280 to 220 (or 221). Socrates fairly dares them to go through with their injustice, not helping a bit by offering a reasonable suggestion for punishment, which he is asked to do.


He suggests that he be treated as a state hero and be given the same free lunch every day for a year that is reserved for winners at the Olympics! When the verdict of death comes back, we find an overwhelming vote (an increased majority – over 2/3) for the death penalty, rather than a fine. This means that at least 50 jurors who had originally deemed Socrates not guilty sentence him to death!


Legend had it that Athens was once obliged to send King Minos of Crete an annual tribute of seven young men and seven maidens to be given to the Minotaur – a monster, half man and half bull, that he kept in a labyrinth. With the help of a thread given to him by Minos’ daughter Ariadne, Theseus, a legendary king of Athens, made his way….


…through the labyrinth, killed the Minotaur, and escaped, thus ending the tribute. Each year, Athens commemorated these events by sending a mission of thanks to the sanctuary of Apollo on the sacred island of Delos. No executions could take place in Athens until the mission returned from its voyage.1


Plato’s Crito opens with Socrates and his friend Crito rather calmly discussing whether or not the awaited ship had arrived.

Crito: “No the ship has not actually arrived, but it will probably be here today. Therefore, tomorrow, Socrates, will be the last day of your life.”


Plato's Apology gives the substance of the defense made by Socrates at his trial; it was a bold vindication of his whole life. He was condemned to die, although the vote was carried by only a small majority.


Led away to the city's prison house, his trial and last days became the subject of Plato's Crito and Phaedo. Visited by many people, he faced the prospect of death with characteristic unconcern, and even refused to be rescued and smuggled abroad by a group of friends.


In Crito, we see that Socrates' friends planned his escape from prison, but he preferred to comply with the law and die for his cause.


His last day was spent with his friends and admirers, and in the evening he calmly fulfilled his sentence by drinking a cup of hemlock according to a customary procedure of execution.



In prison, Socrates refutes the arguments that he should escape to save his life. The Crito is about virtue and justice in relation to the laws and the state.

Plato’s Crito is the intimate dialogue of two friends about to part forever, and their differing views of justice and ethics.


Crito, the person

In addition to being a contemporary of Socrates and of the same deme (i.e. township), Crito was also a dear friend. Socrates had a modest amount of money and entrusted Crito, who was wise in the affairs of business, to invest it for him.

He appears in Plato's Euthydemus, Apology, Phaedo, and Crito. In the Crito, he is a main character, and he attempts to convince Socrates to flee prison.


Understanding the Crito

Think of the Crito as falling into three large parts. The first part introduces the two main characters and states Crito’s arguments for escaping. The second part reviews some of Socrates’ past philosophical principles. The last part applies these principles to his present situation and presents arguments for not escaping.


Key Features of the Crito

The Crito, an encounter in prison between Socrates and his old friend Crito, is elegantly structured. The dialogue opens with Crito waking Socrates at dawn. A brief interchange sketches the emotional differences between the calm Socrates and his perturbed friend.


Crito pours out a string of arguments, trying to convince Socrates that he should escape from jail. Socrates responds with two extended arguments. In the first, Socrates reviews the belief he and Crito have shared that wrong actions are harmful to the soul.


In the second, Socrates answers Crito's arguments by proposing that the state is like a caring parent who must be obeyed.

Thus, the dialogue falls into four brief acts. In the first act, we meet the emotionally opposed main characters.


In the second act, Crito, obsessed with the problem of his friend's imprisonment, steps forward to pour out a cascade of arguments urging Socrates to escape. In the next two acts, Socrates takes over the drama.


Socrates first turns Crito's attention away from the present by reestablishing the truth of their belief that the health of the soul is preserved through right action.


In the concluding act of the drama, Socrates focuses this belief upon the present situation to demonstrate that escape would be inconsistent with virtue.


True or False?

Because Socrates was unjustly convicted, he had no obligation to remain in prison.

Socrates’ obligation to the state to keep his just agreements (even if it leads to his death) is higher than his obligation to remain alive and raise his children.


As you read this work, look for Crito's reasons in favor of Socrates' escape and the main points in Socrates' argument in favor of remaining in jail.


“The laws and government come and interrogate me.”

Here Socrates is personalizing the argument by giving the laws a human form that speaks to him. This makes the abstraction of the argument more tangible and will provide Socrates an opportunity to eventually draw an analogy between the law and his parents.


The analogy between the law and his parents is a powerful analogy considering that parents, specifically the father, had virtually complete control over their children. Offspring, in return, were expected to honor and obey their parents without question.


You may be wondering…


…what sort of person Socrates really was, and how he could submit with such apparent lack of self-interest to the law of the state as the supreme ruler of human destiny. Good question.


Socrates (c. 469-399 BC)

There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance.

I was really too honest a man to be a politician and live.

Let him that would move the world first move himself.


Wisdom begins in wonder. What you cannot enforce, do not

command. Remember that there is nothing stable

in human affairs; therefore avoid undue elation in prosperity, or undue depression in adversity.




He is richest who is content with the least.

He who is not contented with what he has, would not be contented with what he would like to have.

If all our misfortunes were laid in one common heap, whence everyone must take an equal portion, most people would be content to take their own and depart.


Socrates' contribution to philosophy was essentially ethical in character. Belief in a purely objective understanding of such concepts as justice, love, and virtue, and the self-knowledge that he inculcated, were the basis of his teachings.


Plato portrayed Socrates as hiding behind an ironical profession of ignorance, known as Socratic irony, and possessing a mental acuity and resourcefulness that enabled him to penetrate arguments with great facility.


He believed that all vice is the result of ignorance, and that no person is willingly bad; correspondingly, virtue is knowledge, and those who know the right will act rightly.


View of the Assembly Where Athenians Made Laws

Photo: Kevin T. Glowacki and Nancy Klein


By now, you may have noticed a potential conflict between what Socrates says about law breaking in the Crito and what he says about it in the Apology. Here, he seems universally opposed to violating the law, while in the Apology there seem to be exceptions to this belief.


For example, at the trial he tells the judges that, if his punishment is to be freedom with the agreement that he will cease to do philosophy, he must refuse.


In Crito, Socrates speaks against “returning evil for evil, and injury for injury,

breaking the covenants and agreements which you have

made…”


He, likewise, opposed the government's actions on two other occasions: once when, at the trial of the generals, they chose a group trial rather than the individual trial that was prescribed by law, and once when the Oligarchy of the Thirty issued an order for the arrest of Leon of Salamis, planning to execute him without benefit of a fair trial.


One way to avoid this apparent inconsistency is to surmise that Socrates saw a distinction between a true law and an "edict." The former must always be obeyed while the latter need not. Indeed, "edicts" would be abuses of power and, in principle, violations of the law on the part of the rulers of the State.


Such an interpretation would allow a contemporary disciple of Socrates to disobey rulers that usurp the law.

A second way to resolve the apparent conflict is to argue that the Crito is not implying that the law must always be obeyed but, rather, that we must always do what is just.


Obviously, this would not only permit but require civil disobedience at certain times.

Based on this argument, Socrates is accepting his death sentence. He has concluded that death is of no real harm!


In other words,

Socrates concludes that: Having established that the good life is equal to a just and honorable life, the justice or injustice of escaping the law's judgment is the only issue to be considered. Hence, all of Crito's personal arguments for escape are laid aside.


“[Dear friend Crito], let us consider the matter together, and do you either refute me if you can, and I will be convinced; or else cease, my dear friend, from repeating to me that I ought to escape.”


“The only question which remains to be considered is, whether we shall do rightly either in escaping or in suffering others to aid in our escape and paying them in money and thanks, or whether we shall not do rightly; and if the latter, then death or any other calamity which may ensue on my remaining here must not be allowed to enter into the calculation.”



“The unexamined life is not worth living.”

Socrates


Let’s discuss each of these statements.





Socrates, of course, would answer this False.


Essentially, Socrates argues as follows:

1. One must perform right actions, because wrong actions harm the soul, the most valuable part of the self.

2. Keeping one's implicit agreement with the state not to violate its laws is a right action that comes before all other agreements (for example, the implicit agreement to raise one's children).

3. Therefore, one must not escape from jail, because this would be a wrong action, violating one's implicit agreement with the state.


What is the strongest argument you could make against Socrates'

position?



Socrates would answer this True.


Of all of Crito's arguments for escaping, Socrates' obligation to remain alive and care for his children often strikes students as the strongest. But what if Socrates argued, as he well might, as follows?


"If I escape from jail, then I will provide my children with the example of a coward, who, through fear of death, abandoned his values. however, by going to my death I leave my children with the memory of a father they could truly love and respect, a man who died preserving his values."


What would be your response?



“Someone will say: And are you not ashamed, Socrates, of a course of life which is likely to bring you to an untimely end? To him I may fairly answer: There you are mistaken: a man who is good for anything ought not to calculate the chance of living or dying;


“…he ought only to consider whether in doing anything he is doing right or wrong -- acting the part of a good man or of a bad.


“The hour of departure has arrived, and we go our ways -- I to die, and you to live. Which is better God only knows.”

Socrates


As the hour drew near, everyone in the room broke down and wept except for Socrates himself, who continued to treat the affair as if it were nothing at all, at one point turning to them and saying almost in humor:


'For me the fated hour calls. In other words I think it's about time I took my bath. I prefer to wash before drinking the poison rather than give the women the bother of washing me when I'm dead.'


His final request was to ask a friend to sacrifice a cock to Asclepius, the god of healing, as a way of thanking him for being delivered from the painful disease of life.


Having maintained that 'the unexamined life isn't worth living' and by always insisting upon obeying his own conscience, Socrates had shown the Athenians a new way to live, and to die.


Socrates profoundly affected the entire subsequent course of Western speculative thought.


Rather than honor, he believed in principle, and through his sacrifice he helped create a new sense of what it meant to be human being, leaving a deep impression not only on the Athenians, but all of Western civilization.


See you online.

This presentation has but started you on the road to knowing more about Ancient Greek Philosophy.

There is much more to be learned.


The End


CREDITS

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761573200/Socrates.html

http://www.socratesway.com/weblinks.html Landscape of Wisdom: A Guided Tour of Western Philosophy,

by Christopher Biffle. Mayfield Publishing Company, 1999. http://socrates.clarke.edu/aplg0416.htm Readings in Ancient Greek Philosophy: From Thales to

Aristotle, by S. Mark Cohen. Hackett Publishing Company, 2005.

http://www.pbs.org/empires/thegreeks/ http://lilt.ilstu.edu/DRJCLASSICS/texts/socrates.shtm

Date post:	12-Jan-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	matthew-goodman
View:	214 times
Download:	0 times

Copyright © 2006 School of Abraham. All rights reserved. Ancient Greek Philosophy.

Documents