Watch this first! The Philosopher in Prison (powerpoint presentation)

 

Crito Comments Background on Crito (click for further info) Crito is a long-time follower of Socrates, and is deeply distraught at the prospect of Socrates' impending execution. Crito, and some of Socrates' other friends especially g the political turmoil in Athens at the end of the 5th century B.C. The Laws are given a voice in the Crito because, for the Greeks, just or unjust action is something that one does to someone else. Socrates wants to say that escaping from prison would be unjust, but he must also say whom he would be wronging. His best answer is that he would be wronging the Laws of Athens, but in order to do so, he must treat these Laws as a human being with a human voice. Thus, Plato is not simply employing a rhetorical device in giving the Laws a voice, he is also substantiating the argument. If Socrates were to break from prison now, having so consistently validated the social contract, he would be making himself an outlaw who would not be welcome in any other civilized state for the rest of his life. And when he dies, he will be harshly judged in the underworld for behaving unjustly toward his city's laws. Thus, Socrates convinces Crito that it would be better not to attempt an escape. Analysis and Themes Though brief, the Crito is a confusing and somewhat muddled dialogue. The difficulty Plato faced in composing the dialogue was to somehow justify Socrates' decision to stay in prison rather than try to escape after his wrongful condemnation. To do this, Plato had to draw out a distinction between the just Laws, which Socrates must obey by staying in prison, and the unjust behavior of Socrates' accusers, who sentenced him to death. The problem, of course, is that Socrates' accusers have unjustly sentenced him by using the Laws. By giving the Laws their own voice, Plato hopes to distinguish them as a separate entity, making them something human toward which Socrates might be able to act unjustly. However, it is highly debatable how far one can truly separate the laws of a state from the people who apply them. In this instance, we have the people of the state condemning Socrates and the Laws of the state following suit and persuading Socrates that he must face death in order to avoid breaking them. But if both the people and the Laws have ruled that Socrates must be executed, either the people are siding with the Laws or the Laws are siding with the people. And regardless of which of these is the case, it seems odd to assert that the Laws are just and must be respected and that the people are unjust and should not be respected. It seems Crito, who is trying to persuade Socrates to escape, and Socrates are in a sense talking past one another. One of Crito's strongest arguments in favor of escape comes at 45c, where Crito suggests that Socrates would be abetting the wrong-doing of his enemies in following through with their wishes. Socrates' reply to this argument is that he would in fact be harming the Laws, which are just. If the Laws are just and the people are unjust, but both are willing the same thing, then it seems Socrates is in a quandary. If Socrates stays in prison, he will be siding with his unjust accusers, and if he escapes he will be acting against the just Laws. Ultimately, it seems that it is better to accord oneself with the Laws than to side against the people. The Crito's distinguished reputation rests largely on the idea of the social contract that Socrates introduces. It is the first suggestion in Western civilization that a legal system exists as a result of a kind of contract between the individual and the state, and this idea has had a tremendous impact on the modern world. Also, the very confusion a reader finds in wading through these arguments is a great motivation to sort through issues of justice and law oneself. After all, Plato's goal is not ultimately to present the final word on any particular issue. He chooses the dialogue form precisely because he wants to encourage us to think for ourselves.   (Egan, David. SparkNote on Crito. 23 Oct. 2006.  <http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/crito>)     Time and Setting of Crito (click for further info)   Plato's Crito takes place two days before the execution of Socrates. His friend and neighbor Crito visits Socrates in prison early in the morning. At the age of seventy Socrates does not resent having to die. Crito urges Socrates to escape and offers to make all the arrangements for him, assuring him that he is willing to contribute the money and run the risks of punishment. Crito also has found several friends who are willing to help Socrates run away. However, Socrates believes that he must first determine whether it would be right for him to get away without an official release. Certainly one should never willingly do wrong, and they agree that even after being wronged or injured it is still not right to do wrong or injure in return. Socrates asks if escaping will injure the laws of the state. The state has provided much for him, and he believes he should never do violence to his country. He could have chosen banishment as a legal punishment at his trial; so why should he change his mind now against the sanction of the state? Socrates would also be endangering his friends, who would be breaking the law in helping him to escape, and he questions the quality of life he would have as a fugitive. Finally Socrates decides to reject returning wrong for wrong and the breaking of agreements and covenants, and he refuses to injure his country and his friends. Plato's Phaedo describes the last day of Socrates' life. Several of his friends gather and are admitted into the prison in the morning as the guard is taking the chains off Socrates' legs. Noting the odd sensation of pleasure after the pain, Socrates comments that pleasure and pain often follow after each other. Having had many dreams urging him to cultivate the arts, Socrates has recently been putting some of Aesop's Fables into verse. Socrates believes that philosophers welcome death and even seek to purify the soul from the body. However, suicide is not considered proper, because it is as though they have been given a duty by the gods and must not leave their post until they are released by some other agency. Since God is their keeper, it is good to stay alive; but Cebes asks if the sensible person grieves leaving such a master, fools then might rejoice. Socrates answers that the good go to even better divine masters after death. Crito interrupts to convey the concern of the guard that if Socrates talks too much he may have to administer extra doses of the poison; but Socrates tells him to be prepared to do that if necessary. Socrates wants to explain that it is natural for those who have devoted their lives to philosophy to be cheerful in facing death in expectation of the greatest blessing in the next world. True philosophers are preparing themselves for dying and death. Socrates asks if death is not the separation of the body from the soul. The true philosopher directs more attention to the soul than to the body and is freer of physical pleasures in searching for reality. Socrates explains that the body and its desires block the pursuit of philosophy and can lead to wars. For the body constantly keeps us busy by the need for food; and if diseases fall upon it, they hinder our search of reality. And it fills us with many of the passions and desires and fears and fantasies of all kinds and nonsense so that it is said in truthful reality because of it being inborn in us one can never think at all. For wars and factions and battles are caused by nothing other than the body and its desires. For all wars occur because of the gaining of money, and we need to gain money because of the body, slaving in its service; and out of this we bring no leisure to philosophy because of all these things.5 To know anything clearly one must be released from the body and observe the actualities with the soul by itself. So the greatest knowledge is more likely after death, and those who live clearest of the body and its follies are more likely to perceive the truth. Thus would it not be ridiculous for one who has trained oneself to be in a state most like death to be distressed when death approaches? Thus true philosophers make dying their profession and find it less alarming than others. To be distressed by death is proof that one does not love wisdom but the body and its wealth and reputation. Thus philosophers have greater self-control and courage than others who practice courage out of fear of something worse. Others practice moderation so that they can indulge in pleasures with less pain. Only truth cleanses moderation, courage, justice, and wisdom.     Hemlock Cups Socrates refers to the legend that souls do exist in another world after leaving here and return again to this world, being born again from the dead just as the waking come from the sleeping. If the living did not come from the dead, eventually everyone would die. Socrates also uses the learning theory of recognition to show that souls must have known things before they were in human form. Comparing the soul to the body, Socrates says the soul is more like the invisible, divine, immortal, intelligible, uniform, indissoluble, constant in itself, invariable, and governing while the body is more visible, human, mortal, unintelligible, multiform, dissoluble, not constant in itself, variable, and servile. Philosophy endeavors to free the soul from the body by gentle persuasion. Simmias and Cebes still have doubts about the immortality of the soul. Simmias asks about the Pythagorean theory that the soul is a harmony, and Cebes wonders whether the soul may not eventually die after having inhabited many bodies in succession the way a man wears out many coats but dies in the end. The harmony theory is easily refuted, because it lacks many of the obvious characteristics of the soul such as intelligence, governing, and it is clearly just the effect of the musical instrument not its life essence. To answer Cebes, Socrates tells how he got the idea from Anaxagoras that the mind is the cause of all things; but in exploring the ideas of Anaxagoras further he was disappointed that he brought in other physical causes instead. If mind is the cause, then everything should be designed for a purpose, as things are arranged for what is best. Socrates notes the absurdity of thinking that he is sitting there because of his muscles and bones and other physical causes instead of because of the spiritual causes that the Athenians decided he should be imprisoned and die and because Socrates believes it is best for him to remain there and submit to their penalty. If his body were deciding what is best, his legs would have taken him to Megara.     Socrates then explains the doctrine of ideas - that there are such realities as absolute beauty, goodness, magnitude and so on. The soul is defined as that which brings life to the body. As the principle of life the soul cannot admit its opposite any more than beauty could be ugly, snow not be cold, or fire not be hot. Thus the soul must be immortal. Like God as the essence of reality it must be everlasting and imperishable. Thus when death comes to the body, the soul as the immortal part retires and escapes unharmed and indestructible. Then Socrates draws the ethical implications of this theory. If the soul is immortal, then it is necessary to take care of her not only for this time which we call life, but for all time, and the danger now also seems to be terrible if one does not take care of her. For if death were a release from everything, it would be a god-send for the evil who in dying would be released from the body and at the same time from their evils with the soul; but now since it appears to be immortal, no one can escape from evils nor be saved in any other way except by becoming as good and wise as possible. For the soul goes into Hades having nothing else except her education and nurture, which it is said greatly helps or harms the dead in the very beginning of the journey there.6 Socrates describes how souls go to their proper level guided by angels until it is time for them to return to earth again. Those more attached to the body are dragged there by force and in pain. Those having done unjust murders are shunned by others and wander in confusion, while those who lived moderately and purely are guided to marvelous places. Socrates describes the next world not in exact terms but by analogies. Souls undergo purifications for their sins and are rewarded for their good deeds. Unjust murderers are hurled into Tartarus from which they cannot escape. Those who repent eventually are thrown back out. Those who have lived holy lives dwell in pure and beautiful regions that are indescribable. Those who have been most serious about learning prudence, justice, courage, freedom, and truth are best fitted for the journey in the next world. Thus Socrates encourages his companions to take good care of themselves. When Crito asks how Socrates wants to be buried, Socrates laughs and says he'll have to catch him first. Then he explains to him it is only his body that they will bury. Finally Socrates drinks the cup of hemlock. When Apollodorus and the others break down crying, he reprimands them for the disturbance, saying it is best to make one's end in a peaceful consciousness. He asks them to calm down and be brave. Socrates dies, and Phaedo concludes the dialog calling him the best, most prudent, and most just.   Copyright © 1998-2004 by Sanderson Beck

 

How to Read a Book | Chapter 4: Teachers, Dead or Alive Teaching, as we have seen, is the process whereby one man learns from another through communication. Instruction is thus distinguished from discovery, which is the process whereby a man learns something by himself, through observing and thinking about the world, and not by receiving communication from other men. It is true, of course, that these two kinds of learning are intimately and intricately fused in the actual education of any man. Each may help the other. But the point remains that we can always tell, if we take the pains to do so, whether we learned something  we know from someone else or whether we found it out for ourselves.

 

To think about... The Wilderness of Words   I read somewhere of a young couple who settled in the wilderness. While the man cleared the land, his wife tended things about the homestead. Occasionally, the cow would get into the garden, and the husband would complain. One day, as he left to get supplies, he said in a sarcastic way, “Do you think you’ll be able to keep the cow in while I am gone?” She thought she could; she would try. That night a terrible storm arose. Frightened by thunder, the cow escaped into the woods. Several days later the husband returned to an empty cabin and an apologetic note: “A storm came up, and the cow got out. I am so sorry, but I think I can find her.” He searched; neither had survived. The author concluded the incident with these words: Boys flying kites haul in their white-winged birds; You can call back your kites, but you can’t call back your words. “Careful with fire” is good advice, we know; “Careful with words” is ten times doubly so. Thoughts unexpressed will often fall back dead. But God Himself can’t kill them, once they are said! (Will Carleton, The First Settler’s Story). It is painful to be the victim. But have you not yet learned how much more painful it is to be the offender? How precious is that spiritual balm of Gilead, for there is a spirit in man.   (Boyd K. Packer, “Balm of Gilead,” Ensign, Nov. 1987, 16.  © 2006 Intellectual Reserve, Inc.  All rights reserved.)