ESSAY ONE

Essay One: Summary and Evaluation of Crito

Andrew Daywalt
Intro to Philosophy PHI 1510
October 13, 2014

ESSAY ONE

2
Essay One: Summary and Evaluation of Crito

The dialog begins when Socrates is awoken in his prison cell by Crito. Crito tells Socrates that
he has made arrangements for him to escape his imprisonment and then help him flee Athens to live out
the rest of his life elsewhere. Content with his sentencing, Socrates denies the offer made to him. As a
result, Crito provides his argument as to why Socrates should avoid execution and flee the city.
Crito begins by telling him that his death will be a loss to his friends, including Crito himself.
He refers to Socrates as someone who cannot easily be replaced, or in other words, and one-of-a-kind
friend. By accepting his fate, set forth by the state, he would be hurting those close to him. The second
premise of his argument is that he needs not worry about the plan being successful or it being any
burden on any of his friends because the plan is taken care of and is entirely feasible. Crito then states
that by going through with the execution and turning down his offer to escape, people will think that he
is selfish and greedy because he values his money over his friendship with Socrates. Crito says that by
providing his own money as funds for the escape, it will show that he cares more about Socrates than
his own money.
Finally, he tells Socrates that throwing away his life is wrong for three reasons. He tells Socrates
that going through with the execution is doing what his enemies intended, being that they wanted to see
him put to death. Crito tells Socrates that their decision to kill him was unjust, so by allowing them to
go through with their plan, Socrates is also being unjust. Second, he claims that Socrates owes his
children and that when he is gone they will have no one to raise or educate them. In ancient Greece,
becoming and orphan could mean becoming a slave. And finally, Crito claims that accepting this fate
would be an act of cowardice and that Socrates' teachings have always been about doing the right thing
and being brave, but by essentially taking the easy way out, Socrates is not being brave, which is
inconsistent with his teachings. Through his reasoning by way of these premises, he concludes that it
would be the best and most just choice to Crito's offer to escape.

ESSAY ONE

Socrates still refuses to escape the prison cell with Crito and offers a counter argument to his
original reasoning. Socrates begins by telling Crito that he should not concern himself with public
perception, or not to worry about what the many think of his actions. One should not concern
themselves with how they look to the public, but they should only concern themselves with behaving
well. To base moral principles on the popular beliefs of the many is unwise and unhealthy. In addition
to this, he claims that one should not rely on the popular opinion on a matter, but one should consult
experts of a particular subject for more valuable input. He makes the claim that this should also apply
to law. The Athenian Government, who sentenced him to death, are the experts of law and justice,
and therefore provide a valuable stance on justice in Athenian society. Even in this situation, to listen to
wise advice is good and to listen to an unwise opinion is not.
Socrates brings up the importance of laws and what a citizen owes society. First he asserts that
laws are not independent from one another, but the law is a single entity. To break one law would be to
disobey all laws. Socrates notes the great importance that laws hold within a society, saying that
breaking the law is to do harm against Athens as a whole. If everyone was able to disregard the law
when it does not suit them, society would not hold up. Socrates asserts that the right course of action
would be to convince the law of his innocence and merely breaking the law would be wrong. Every
citizen of Athens obeys the law as a social contract, by which one owes Athens the obedience of laws in
exchange for citizenship and a sound society. One can be a gadfly, but if the state chooses to swat you,
then you should comply with the decision of the law. Socrates claims that he too should remain in
compliance with the law because it has allowed him to live a long and happy life, and to do otherwise
would go against his personal morals by disrespecting they very thing that provided his healthy and
comfortable life. He draws the conclusion that violating his social contract with the law would be the
wrong thing, and by doing so would mean going against his personal beliefs.
I think the credibility of Socrates' argument against Crito falls completely on what should be

ESSAY ONE

more highly valued, friendship and public interest, or structure and the government. Socrates attacks
the prior by saying that public interest is not a practical way of establishing the concepts of societal
rights and wrongs because public opinion is too fluid and chaotic to rely on and as a result does not
hold the same value as law. In fact, he goes as far as to say, or imply, that Athenian society could not
exists without valuing the law as the supreme operator. From an individual standpoint, at least in terms
of adhering to personal principles, I do believe that Socrates makes a good case for himself. Regardless
of whether or not the state does right by him in one instance, he owes his very existence to Athens. On
the other hand though, I don't necessarily believe that his argument holds true for society at large. His
argument is to say that all people should obey everything their government orders them to do. While I
firmly believe that structure is a key component of any large and developed society, its efficiency lies
on the crux, or contrast, between order and disorder. If this was not the case, the civil rights movement
in America, or similar social revolution, might have never happened.