lOMoARcPSD|9568341

Plato - Crito

Introduction to Political Philosophy (Yale University)

StuDocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university

Downloaded by Rommel Quinones (rommel.quinones@deped.gov.ph)
 lOMoARcPSD|9568341

9/11
Plato - Crito ● I
● Socrates/Crito n
ti
m
a
t
e
s
e
tt
i
n
g
(i
n
c
o
n
tr
a
s
t
t
o
t
h
e
c
r
o
w
d
e
d
s
e
tt
i
n
g
i
n
t
h
e
A
p
o
l
o
g
y
)
● T
Downloaded by Rommel Quinones (rommel.quinones@deped.gov.ph)
 lOMoARcPSD|9568341

he question: ow killed
○ How far by a
far th demo
does e cracy
our au rather
obligati
on to th than
the ori a
state ty Com
go? of munis
■ Civ th t
il e dictat
dis la orshi
ob
ws p?
edi
en sh ● T
ce ou h
ld e
■ Wh p
en go
u
is it no z
legi m zl
tim att e
ate :
er
, if
wh ○ W
eve
r, o hy
to m d
bre ak o
ak es es
the th S
law oc
e
?
m ra
○ A
■ Do te
detour
from es s
“Who it re
should m fu
rule?” ak se
■ A e to
a o
q dif b
u fer ey
e en At
s ce h
t th e
i at ni
o So a
n cr n
at la
o es w
f wa s
s w
h h
Downloaded by Rommel Quinones (rommel.quinones@deped.gov.ph)
 lOMoARcPSD|9568341

e s ■ You
n h help
e your
enem
t d
ies
h
■ You
e n betra
y o y
r yours
t m elf
e s ■ You
l ● Crito’s betra
l argume y
nt for your
breakin sons
h and
g the
i law family
m ○ H ■ Concl
i usion:
t s “Man
o p up
o and
i get
s
n out,
t now”
t
o s ○ V
p : al
■ I u
q wil es
u l of
e los Cr
e ito
s
an :
t
irr ■ Self-
i ep intere
o lac st/pre
n ea serva
i bl tion:
n e life
g fri over
en truth
d and
t justic
■ Yo
h u e
e wil ■ Manli
l ness
e ha ○ A
s rm re
m pr
t
y es
a re e
b pu nt
l tat ati
i io ve
n
Downloaded by Rommel Quinones (rommel.quinones@deped.gov.ph)
 lOMoARcPSD|9568341

of the st just
many os law
■ Un ter ○ N
abl on ot
e re
e-
to all
ris fu
y
e el a
ab ed “t
ov no h
e tio e
rep n or
uta y”
of
tio of
nal jus ci
co tic vil
nc e di
ern an so
s d b
■ C vir e
o di
tu
e
n e nc
v ■ Na e
e rro ○ A
n w g
t util o
i ita o
o ria d
n fri
n
e
a pe n
l rs d,
, pe b
cti ut
r ve n
e : ot
l a
co n
a st- int
t be ell
i ne ec
o fit tu
n an al
a so
aly
l ul
sis m
, of at
br e
a ea ● S
n kin o
d g c
an r
t a
un
e t
Downloaded by Rommel Quinones (rommel.quinones@deped.gov.ph)
 lOMoARcPSD|9568341

es’ counter- re at
arguments im e
○ His po re
points: rta as
■ Ign nt o
ore to n
the re ■ Injusti
voi ctif ce is
ce y alway
of th s an
the an evil
ma to
ny, sa
mo ve
ral his
ex life
per ■ Le
ts avi
● C ng
a th
r e
e cit
s y
wit
m ho
o ut
r pe
e rs
ua
a di
b ng
o it
u is
t do
in
t g
r inj
u us
t tic
h e
to
t in
h no
a ce
n nt
s
l ● Crito
i doesn
f ’t
e under
■ Inj stand
usti ○ U
ce lt
is i
mo m
Downloaded by Rommel Quinones (rommel.quinones@deped.gov.ph)
 ■ “We ought not to retaliate or render evil for evil to anyone, whatever
evil we may have suffered from him
■ Deontological principle
● The Laws’ counter-argument(s)
○ Stylistic break
■ Rhetorical move to persuade, rather than convince
■ Stunning imagery: prosopopeia
■ From dialogue to monologue
■ Threatening, intimidating tone
○ Disobeying one law corrupts the legitimacy of the whole system
■ Argument from stability
○ What if the law was unjust/incorrect?
■ Commitment to the procedure, regardless of singular outcomes
○ Proto-Social Contract Theory
■ You either participate and try to reform the laws, or you obey them
● In-Class Debate:
○ How do we make sense of the contradiction between the Apology and the Crito?
○ How do we reconcile the views put forward by the Laws in favor of absolute
obedience and Socrates’ claim to obey only his own daimon/logos?
■ Going back to the “testosterone fueled, manly” point, Socrates wants to
make a scene and prove worth in front of many people, but in front of
his closest friend he expresses how he truly feels
■ In Apology
● He was breaking an interpretation of the law
● Convince people that the laws are unjust
● Implores the use of argument to prove the laws wrong
● Trying to reform the law during his trial
■ In Crito
● Already in jail
● He’s already failed to convince people so now he has to deal
with the consequences
● Choosing death to prove the laws wrong
● Bound to the law, obeys the structure of the charge
● The only way to convince Crito is to explain it in terms he can
understand
● Parallel with MLK
○ “One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws”
○ Fight back
○ “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere”
■ One bad law can corrupt them all
○ Opposite of the argument of the Laws in Crito
○ Moral responsibility of every citizen → action!
○ How do when know when to break the law?
■ Two types of laws: just and unjust
 ■ Just laws = moral laws
○ Socrates and MLK
■ Similarities:

Protagoras:
What is political virtue? Can it be taught?
How does it answer “Who should rule?”