Download Why Did Socrates Drink The Hemlock? Plato\`s Crito presen

Why Did Socrates Drink The Hemlock?
Plato's Crito presents us with an aging Socrates in an Atheni
an jail, awaiting his execution for crimes against the state. Among the charges he was convicted of
was impiousness towards the Athenian god's and corruption of the youth. Socrates is visited by his c
lose friend Crito, who assures and urges Socrates that he could escape form jail rather easily. Socr
ates refuses to run away from his predicament and as a result eventually drinks the Hemlock a few da
ys later. Socrates decision was made much like most of his other decisions, by following a rational
method known as the Elenchus. The method pursues reason above all else to make decisions. Socrates b
elieves that in order to live a good life one must be just and honorable. To lead such a life means
abiding by the laws of the state and the principles of one's character. Socrates ultimate goal is to
lead such a life. By escaping from jail for crimes of which he was found guilty, Socrates would dis
obey the government and ultimately everything he stood for in the Apology. Therefore in order for So
crates to realize the life he desires, he is justified in having great reverence for the Athenian go
vernment because this reverence is a result of applying the principles he holds dearest. Socrates re
alizes that method is above all else in achieving a set of principles. He is aware of his situation
and proceeds rationally to come up with a conclusion to his dilemma. Convinced that the opinions of
many cannot necessarily be the basis for his actions, he refutes Crito's claim that his escape is ju
stified because a number of the citizens of Athens desire it. Rather Socrates searches for a more so
und foundation, one which can prove to hold up against counterarguments. He comes up with the princi
ple that a good life is more desirable than anything else. "Do we suppose that the principle, whatev
er it may be in a man, which has to do with justice and injustice, to be inferior to the body?...Cer
tainly not"(Crito, 47E7). A good life then entails one of honor, and justice, "A good life is equiva
lent to a just and honorable one"( Crito, 48B7). Leading such a life is more important than any othe
r desire, even the desire to live as opposed to die. We must now consider exactly what being honorab
le and just is. Socrates questions if by escaping he will be doing an injustice against the citizens
of Athens. Again Socrates must abide by the strict methodology of the Elenchus. It is clear to Socr
ates that if man commits an intentional wrong then man has acted unjustly. The same could be said fo
r a man who commits a wrong act in retaliation for a wrong act, "We ought not to retaliate or render
evil for evil to any one, whatever evil may be suffered from him" (Crito, 49D). We must also consid
er if by escaping he wrongs not only himself but the Athenian government. According to Socrates he w
ill harm both. In determining whether not to do evil or act accordingly, man must not look to any ot
her means other than his own personal convictions, "Ought a man to do what he admits to be right, or
ought he betray the right?...He ought to do what he thinks is right" (Crito,49C).If one were to bel
ieve that a certain action is right or wrong then their basis for judgment cannot be rooted in the b
eliefs of other individuals or institutions. This is where Socrates seems to create a contradiction
in determining whether or not he must drink the hemlock. According to many critics, Socrates goes ag
ainst his convictions in the Apology and places the state higher than the individual in assessing hi
s decision in the Crito. His concerns for man to follow what he thinks to be right suddenly now seem
subordinate to what the state believes to be right. "Has a philosopher like you failed to discover
that our country is to be valued than any mother or father or any ancestor...he must do what his cit
y or country order him"(Crito, 52A3). If this were the case then Socrates must believe himself that
his actions which defended ardently in the Apology, were in fact wrong. Socrates abiding by the laws
of his punishment must not be viewed as a result of adhering to the state for no other reason other
than because it is the state and one is obligated to follow its every order. His decision must be d
etermined by whether or not he believes his punishment is justified by the laws of Athens, and wheth
er or not these accusations against him were unjustly made. Socrates was in fact guilty therefore hi
s sentence is in accordance with the laws. Whether he believes that his trial is unjust is what seem
s to spark the controversy. In the Apology we seem to think that Socrates was dealt an unfair hand.
If given a second chance would not Socrates continue to preach to the youth and spread the thirst f
or a greater knowledge? Would he continue to be impious towards the Gods of Athens? Many argue tha
t he would, because by following such laws he would be going against what he believed was right. Is
there an obvious Contradiction? Or are both texts misinterpreted? Arguments arise that there is in f
act no real contradiction between Socrates statements in the Apology and those in the Crito. Some l
ike Woozley believe that if one were to closely analyze the text, they will find that would be contr
adictions are never actually realized. Woozley regards his actions and intentions in the Apology to
be of a different nature than in the Crito, " what in the Apology Socrates is prepared to do agains
t the court is not the same as what in the Crito he is not prepared to do against the court"(Woozley
, 4). He argues that Socrates was presented with an optional discharge with conditions, not a condit
ional discharge. Therefore he maintains that even in the Apology Socrates has complete respect for t
he law, knowing that if accepted the discharge he would not live up to its conditions. Therefore his
decision to face execution represented not only his determined conscious but also an endearing resp
ect for the Athenian Government. Richard Kraut also maintains that Socrates did not compromise his o
wn integrity for blind obligation to the government in the Crito. Rather Socrates used his own value
s in determining whether or not he must adhere to the state. He suggests that Socrates realized that
he had committed a crime against the state, not that he had committed a crime against his own consc
ious. If Socrates believes he had not acted unjustly he would still be determined to comply with his
agreement, and that is exactly what happened when seen form Kraut's point of view. Socrates does no
t argue that his sentencing came about unjustly: He respects the courts decision and is willing to a
bide by it, although he may not fully agree with it. Accounting for Plato's treatment of Socrates in
both the Apology and Crito are numerous interpretations and theories. One such theory is that Plato
view on civil disobedience changed between the time the Apology and Crito were written. (Grote, Vol
. 1). Grote believes that Plato saw the flaws in the Apology and tried to make up for them in the C
rito. Plato realized that Socrates came off rather arrogant and uncompromising in the Apology, and t
hat many saw his defense in front of the court as viscous attempt to slander the established governm
ent and the laws it administered. Woozley explains Grote's position best: "Plato then, According to
Grote, deliberately set out in the Crito to do whatever he could to correct the unfortunate public
impression which Socrates had made, and to restore his reputation"(Woozley, 2). This position howeve
r discredits the Crito altogether as being an independent work and assumes it to be merely a post sc
ript to the Apology. However viewing both of these dialogues together allows us to see the correlati
ons in Plato's train of thought. It is easy to view the Apology as a more passionate work. Socrates
in front of a court ardently defending his actions would inspire anyone to take a stand against evil
. This however was not Plato's intention, and he does not consider the government evil. In reality S
ocrates respects the court, for if he didn't he would not have agreed to his sentencing as being jus
t. His participation and compliance with the method of the trial itself shows Socrates respect for t
he law. At no point did the Athenian court act unjustly while Socrates defended himself. He was give
n all the time necessary to sate his case and elaborate on his points. Socrates was well aware of th
is and expressed it in accepting his sentence. The same attitude is expressed by Socrates in the Cri
to. Plato never expresses that the state was right in their decision, but rather suggest that the de
cision of the state cannot be refuted unless the means themselves which determined Socrates fate wer
e flawed and unjust. Socrates praises the state for its just system not for its decision against him
. It is true that if Socrates had escaped form prison he would have committed an unjust and in honor
able act. However he would commit this act unjustly only because he agreed to his sentencing in the
first place. If one was to recall the Apology, Socrates was given the option of excommunication or d
eath, he obviously chose death. In effect Socrates demonstrated that he was willing to die for what
he held to be right. By staying and facing his execution he demonstrates his convictions in his beli
efs, and his loyalty to the state. The harm that would be implemented outside his own character if h
e were to escape would not only be to the state but rather to the youth and citizens of Athens, of w
hich he leads by example. To leave would to be acting unjustly against these individuals, the Atheni
an government, and him. Socrates realizes that although he believes in his own principles he must re
spect the decision of the government and uphold it, for one questionable act does not merit another
in return. It is for these reasons that he will not escape from jail and disobey the Athenian Govern
ment. Rather he must face his execution with dignity. The systematic method of the Elenchus seems to
be back in gear. socrates drink hemlock plato crito presents with aging socrates athenian jail awai
ting execution crimes against state among charges convicted impiousness towards athenian corruption
youth socrates visited close friend crito assures urges that could escape form jail rather easily re
fuses away from predicament result eventually drinks hemlock days later decision made much like most
other decisions following rational method known elenchus method pursues reason above else make deci
sions believes that order live good life must just honorable lead such life means abiding laws state
principles character ultimate goal lead such life escaping from jail crimes which found guilty woul
d disobey government ultimately everything stood apology therefore order realize desires justified h
aving great reverence athenian government because this reverence result applying principles holds de
arest realizes that method above else achieving principles aware situation proceeds rationally come
with conclusion dilemma convinced opinions many cannot necessarily basis actions refutes crito claim
escape justified because number citizens athens desire rather searches more sound foundation which
prove hold against counterarguments comes with principle good more desirable than anything else supp
ose principle whatever which justice injustice inferior body certainly good then entails honor justi
ce equivalent just honorable leading such more important than other desire even desire live opposed
must consider exactly what being honorable just questions escaping will doing injustice against citi
zens athens again must abide strict methodology elenchus clear commits intentional wrong then acted
unjustly same could said commits wrong retaliation wrong ought retaliate render evil evil whatever e
vil suffered from also consider escaping wrongs only himself government according will harm both det
ermining whether accordingly look other means than personal convictions ought what admits right ough
t betray right what thinks right were believe certain action then their basis judgment cannot rooted
beliefs individuals institutions this where seems create contradiction determining whether drink he
mlock according many critics goes convictions apology places state higher individual assessing decis
ion concerns follow thinks suddenly seem subordinate believes philosopher like failed discover count
ry valued mother father ancestor city country order this were case believe himself actions defended
ardently apology were fact abiding laws punishment viewed result adhering reason because obligated f
ollow every decision determined whether believes punishment justified laws athens these accusations
unjustly made fact guilty therefore sentence accordance trial unjust seems spark controversy seem th
ink dealt unfair hand given second chance would continue preach youth spread thirst greater knowledg
e would continue impious towards gods many argue following going believed there obvious contradictio
n both texts misinterpreted arguments arise there fact real contradiction between statements those s
ome like woozley believe closely analyze text they will find contradictions never actually realized
woozley regards actions intentions different nature prepared court same prepared court woozley argue
s presented optional discharge conditions conditional discharge therefore maintains even complete re
spect knowing accepted discharge live conditions face execution represented only determined consciou
s also endearing respect richard kraut also maintains compromise integrity blind obligation rather u
sed values determining adhere suggests realized committed crime committed crime conscious acted unju
stly still determined comply agreement exactly happened when seen form kraut point view does argue s
entencing came about respects courts willing abide although fully agree accounting plato treatment b
oth numerous interpretations theories theory plato view civil disobedience changed between time writ
ten grote grote flaws tried make them realized came arrogant uncompromising defense front court visc
ous attempt slander established administered explains grote position best according deliberately wha
tever could correct unfortunate public impression made restore reputation position however discredit
s altogether being independent work assumes merely post script however viewing these dialogues toget
her allows correlations train thought easy view passionate work front ardently defending inspire any
one take stand however intention does consider reality respects didn have agreed sentencing being pa
rticipation compliance trial itself shows respect point while defended himself given time necessary
sate case elaborate points well aware expressed accepting sentence same attitude expressed never exp
resses their suggest cannot refuted unless means themselves fate flawed unjust praises system true e
scaped form prison have committed unjust commit only agreed sentencing first place recall given opti
on excommunication death obviously chose death effect demonstrated willing held staying facing execu
tion demonstrates convictions beliefs loyalty harm implemented outside character escape youth citize
ns leads example leave acting these individuals realizes although uphold questionable does merit ano
ther return reasons disobey face dignity systematic elenchus seems back gearEssay, essays, termpaper
, term paper, termpapers, term papers, book reports, study, college, thesis, dessertation, test answ
ers, free research, book research, study help, download essay, download term papers