Crito and Socrates, Essay Example

Staying True to Your Beliefs

Personal beliefs, morals and principles are meaningless if individuals do not remain true to them. Holding true to personal beliefs in the face of negative consequences is, in essence, the true test of such beliefs. It is relatively easy to admit to holding certain principles or beliefs, but it is not always as easy to stick to those beliefs when challenged, or when remaining firm may lead to punishment or other consequences. Philosophical discussions about this issue are as old as humanity, and Socrates, one of history’s most respected philosophers, is credited with making a strong argument in favor of remaining true to one’s principles. Socrates did, according to Plato, make one of the most compelling and timeless arguments about the issue of personal conviction and accepting consequences in a conversation between Socrates and his friend Crito. Socrates was facing an Athenian court on numerous charges, and was sentenced to death by the government of Athens. Out of concern for his friend, Crito attempts to convince Socrates to flee the city of Athens to avoid being executed, arguing that Socrates has many supporters who would be willing to help him escape and survive. Socrates, however, argues with Crito against running away, and chooses to stay in Athens to take his punishment. Socrates makes a compelling and persuasive argument to Crito, asserting that the “opinions of the many” should not be considered as valid reasons to support the act of making moral decisions. As Socrates saw it, staying true to one’s personal beliefs was an important part of what it meant to be a good person, and he further argued that the threat of violence was not enough to convince him to run away from his beliefs and principles. To do so, Socrates argued that would make life not worth living. Socrates believed that fleeing his charges would cause be to view him as a coward. When one makes a choice based upon his/her beliefs, he/she must be willing to face the consequences because that is the true test of morals and values is the willingness to meet ill fate as a result of beliefs.

Crito attempts to talk Socrates into fleeing by using several different lines of reasoning. Crito first tried to convince Socrates that allowing the government to execute him will reflect poorly on Crito. He asks Socrates to consider what he will have to struggle with after Socrates’ death, when “it will seem to many who do not know you and me closely that I could have saved you” (Plato, 3). Crito believes that he will be blamed for Socrates’ death, and that he will face disgrace and judgment from those who supported Socrates. After hearing this argument, Socrates responds by making his primary objection about the opinions of the many, and explains to Crito that the opinions of many foolish people are not as valid as the opinion of even a few wise people.

Socrates was interested in the idea of wisdom, as opposed to simply knowledge, and told Crito that the opinions of wise men should be the ones that are valued.  Socrates provides Crito with the great example of the athlete who is in training, asking “does the athletic man practicing this pay attention to the praise and blame and opinion of every man, or to the of only one who happens to be his physician or trainer?” (7). Socrates rightly maintains that it is more important to listen to the opinions of people with knowledge and experience, rather than people who are foolish.  In the face of the opinions of foolish people, he is not about to change his course of action or give up on his beliefs and run away from a bad situation.  He says directly of listening about “the many” that “for they are able to make one neither wise nor unwise, but they do whatever happens by chance” (3).

The concerns of Socrates, and his argument against letting public opinion control one’s action is something that someone even nowadays can relate to. Here in San Jose State University, or in life in general, it can be really easy to go along with the crowd, to do what seems popular with people at any given moment; it is a lot harder to think for oneself and to hold one’s own convictions, whether they go along with the crowd or not.

The argument that Socrates makes to Crito in this instance is as relevant today as it was in the time Plato wrote this work. For example, when one thinks about the struggles that African Americans went through during the Civil Rights Movement. Yes, they knew that they were breaking the laws of the land, but the belief that they should have equal rights led them to display civil disobedience. Nonetheless, they were willing to face whatever consequences they faced as a result of their disobediences.  They did not attempt to elude police officers when they knew they would be arrested; they went willingly. They faced public opinions. Many felt they should just remain in their designated places and enjoy the separate but equal laws. So, Socrates was arguing against the idea of being easily persuaded by public opinion, and asserting that it was better to take advice from someone with real knowledge or understanding of an issue when making a moral decision. Such advice has particular relevance to students and young people who are developing the morals and belief systems that will guide them through the rest of their lives. Too much pressure can often convince people to make decisions they believe or even know to be wrong, and the advice offered by Socrates is a reminder that sticking to moral codes and beliefs is the right thing to do, even if it is not always the easy thing to do.

Socrates recognizes that Crito is not entirely convinced about this view of public opinion, if for no other reason than the fact that public opinion is often backed up by the very real threat of force or violence. Socrates sees that Crito will argue this with the idea that “really, some might say, the many can kill us” (8), meaning that the opinions of the many count because, if someone loses their good opinion, there is always the threat of violence against the offender.  In this case, the threat of violence is more than just a threat: Socrates is under sentence of death, but even in this situation, Socrates will not betray his beliefs and comes to what is the most important conclusion of all “that it is not living that is best but living well” (8).  In other words, Socrates believes that it is more important to lead a moral life and to hold true to your beliefs – even if it means that you are killed for your beliefs – than to act against those beliefs to save yourself.

Socrates thinks that, since the state helped his parents to marry and to raise him and to educate him, that the state is something like a father to him and that it would be morally wrong for him to go against it now.  Socrates conveys that because he chose to live in Athens, he also chose to abide by its government. He feels it would be immoral to back out of that now, that the state could rightly say to him, “Come on, what fault do you find with us and the state that you are attempting to destroy us?” (12). Plainly put, acting morally is more important than even considerations like personal safety. By making the choice that he makes, Socrates is supporting his belief in social contract. This act is just conveying that a political society is needed and very valuable to people. Although Socrates does not say which laws should be obeyed and which ones should be disobeyed, he is alluding to civil obedience. He agrees that a degree of government intervention is needed to ensure that universal rights are upheld. Finally, he reminds Crito that he has had a great life in Athens. His final position is that government is valuable and should be obeyed.

Socrates, in the final part of his conversation with Crito, makes some very good points about the consequences of going against ones beliefs.  He realizes that if he turns his back on his beliefs now, if he flees from Athens rather than face his punishment, he will have lost his moral authority and will confirm in the minds of the judges who sentenced him that he did, in fact, deserve to be sentenced.  He sees that it would be hypocritical of him to try and teach people about morality when he himself has violated his own moral code, that he would have no way in which to help instruct people on how to live a good life.  He does not wish to “avoid the states with good laws and the most civilized men” (15) and does not think that “in doing this, will life be worthwhile to you?” (15). Socrates reiterates, as he stated earlier in the conversation, life itself is not to be valued, but a good life, one which is lived on one’s own moral terms.

In conclusion, Socrates offers one of the best known arguments for living by one’s principles and beliefs even when it is uncomfortable or even dangerous to do so.  It is, in fact, when one’s beliefs are tested in situations where those beliefs could make you unpopular that you truly find out what you do believe.  The “opinions of the many”, of foolish people, should not factor greatly into moral actions and those opinions should not be held in very high regard. Even if there are risks involved in living by your code of morality, the risks of not doing so could far outweigh them; the risk of losing yourself, of not being true to the principles you hold for.  Socrates’s decision to remain in Athens was undoubtedly the most effective way to show that he was steadfast in his beliefs and willing to face any consequence that he might receive for not abandoning what he believed in.

Works Cited

Plato. Crito.  Translated By Sanderson Beck. The Wisdom Bible. Web.  3 March 2014