With
hopes of persuading the old man to escape, Crito visited Socrates in
prison the day before his execution. Crito offers several ideas that
he believes will motivate Socrates to abandon his date with death.
Firstly, Crito uses an emotional plea that demonstrates the sadness he
will encounter if Socrates passes on. The sincerity of this plea
becomes diluted once Crito elaborates on his second plea. He states
that his reputation is at stake if he is unsuccessful in coaxing Socrates
to escape. The third reason that Crito stretches for incorporates
the ideal of the hardships Socrates' children will face without their
father. This plea seems like Crito is attempting to balance out the
selfishness substantiated within his first two reasons.
Expectedly, Socrates'
attitude towards Crito's attempted persuasion is one of disagreement and
counter persuasion. For instance, Socrates addresses Crito's statement
regarding his own potentially frayed reputation with a commonly reiterated
Socratic ideal. He explains, "But why, my dear Crito should we care
about the opinion of many? Good men, and they are the only persons who are
worth considering, will think of these things as truly as they
happened" (From The Crito). In regards to Crito's attempted
persuasion through the welfare of Socrates' children, the old man states
that escaping, with his children at the helm of his decision, will do them
much more harm than good. In other words, not only will his exile
add an educational ambiguity to their lives, but also, his escape will be
perpetually negating any values he has instilled in his children and will
instill in his children. Honestly, since Crito has probably had
numerous opportunities to benefit from Socrates' extraordinary wisdom, I
wonder if Socrates was offended by the ignorant nature displayed by
Crito's attempted persuasion.
Dear Crito, your zeal is invaluable, if a right
one; but if wrong, the greater the zeal the greater the evil; and
therefore we ought to consider whether these things shall be done or not.
For I am and always have been one of those natures who must be guided by
reason, whatever the reason may be which upon reflection appears to
me to be the best; and now that this fortune has come upon me, I
cannot put away the reasons which I have before given: the
principles which I have hitherto honored and revered I still honor,
and unless we can find other and better principles on the instant, I am
certain not to agree with you; (From The Crito)
Socrates' intellectual, emotional, and spiritual life has been guided by
extensive ponderous reason. His whole human existence has been spent
questioning the scheme of things in order to achieve a more accurate
understanding of "the good". Through his own impeccable
reasoning, he deduces that no good will be created by his escape. He
realizes that illegal departure from the cell would directly oppose the
sturdy foundation that his life has relied on. Therefore, all the
time spent on his quest of rationalization for "the good" would
almost be non-existent if he succumbs to Crito's irrational argument.
"Answer, Socrates, instead of opening your
eyes: you are in the habit of asking and answering questions. Tell us what
complaint you have to make against us which justifies you in attempting to
destroy us and the State? In the first place did we not bring you into
existence? Your father married your mother by our aid and begat you. Say
whether you have any objection to urge against those of us who regulate
marriage?" None, I should reply. "Or against those of us who
regulate the system of nurture and education of children in which you were
trained? Were not the laws, who have the charge of this, right in
commanding your father to train you in music and gymnastic?" Right, I
should reply. "Well, then, since you were brought into the world and
nurtured and educated by us, can you deny in the first place that you are
our child and slave, as your fathers were before you? And if this is true
you are not on equal terms with us; nor can you think that you have a
right to do to us what we are doing to you. Would you have any right to
strike or revile or do any other evil to a father or to your master, if
you had one, when you have been struck or reviled by him, or received some
other evil at his hands?- you would not say this? (From The Crito)
In the preceding quotation, Socrates analyzes the hypothetical perspective
of the state if he decides to escape. In Socrates' mind, even if the
charges and sentence are a representation of the wrong, if he escapes, he
will be disrespecting all "the good" the state has supplied him
throughout his life. His righteous journey to the land of "the
good" would have not been possible without the state's supportive
intervention. Firstly, he realizes that the state enabled his mother
and father to produce his life. Also, his nurturing and education
would have not been available without the states existence. He
understands that disregarding the law would be along the lines of taking
the love his mother and father have shown him totally for granted without
any reciprocation on his end. Furthermore, in my opinion, Crito is
probably dumbfounded by the sharp cleverness of Socrates' retort towards
Crito's request.
The most clever and powerful argument Socrates gives in support of his
stagnation comes from the blatantly hidden hypocritical factor that would
arise along with his escape. For example, the two charges that have
lead to his death sentence are as follows:
1)Atheism towards all of the gods
2) Corruption of the young.
If Socrates escapes, the two false accusations against him would be
validated. More specifically, during his judgment he swore an oath to the
gods confirming his agreement to any punishment passed on to him.
His escape would be automatic dishonor towards the gods and actually prove
his disregard for their existence. Also, Socrates was probably the
best known commoner in Athens. His decision to escape would send a
morally damaging message to the youth of Athens. To sum it up, if he
put himself on trial, he would discover guilt within his mind and heart.
Socrates, in the early dialogues of Plato, is depicted as claiming to know
nothing, as having no superior doctrine to offer even as he confounds and
defeats his interlocutors by his pointed questions. This famous Socratic
'profession of ignorance' is also regarded as an instance of Socratic
irony, of his saying less than he thinks or means (as the root of the term
in the Greek eiron, a dissembler, suggests). He adopts this affectation,
it is said, simply to avoid being subjected to the same critical treatment
himself. It would seem, however that there was nodissembling involved. (Kierkegaard)
The decision of Socrates to remain in prison and die personifies the
theory of Socratic irony. More specifically, Socrates, in his own
mind and heart, is aware of his actual innocence. However, he accepts the
false accusations as if they were true in order to maintain his tenacious
stance supporting his theory of "the good".
The
long term importance of Socrates' choice to be put to death is almost
unsurpassable. As discussed in class, if Socrates chose to take
Crito's unsubstantiated path, the world of today would function on a
totally different wavelength. For example, Plato would have never felt the
obligation to immortalize Socrates' mind. Therefore, Socrates' legacy
would not have been spread throughout the world and, in not doing so, the
billions of minds that have been influenced by his direction would
probably travel on a completely different road of life than the one they
stumble, stroll, and sprint on today.
Works Cited
"The Crito." ,http://www.eserver.org/philosophy/plato/crito.txt
Kierkegaard, S. "Socratic Irony". Xrefer. 25 September
2002 http://www.xrefer.com/entry