Post: #1

I just read Crito, where Socrates' friend Crito tries to convince Socrates to escape from prison, but due to loyalty to the Athenian state, Socrates decides to stay and await his fate.

Socrates basically argues that since the State has been good, and generally provided him with many benefits throughout his life he should obey its decisions, even if unjust, because to disobey would be an attack on the state. ny man who can flaunt the laws of a state in doing so harms the state in his reasoning by his disobedience.

It left me wondering to what degree this account may have been true. The writing style of Platonic Dialogues leaves me feeling that no discussion could have ever really proceeded as such, with someone agreeing with Socrates every step of the ay until Socrates laya out his point.

Also, it was really unsatisfying reading a man justify his own unjust execution. The feeling of disgust it produced in me was like reading The Sun Also Rises where the narrator debases himself by enabling his love interests slutty behavior with the Bull Fighter. Like reading about someone castrating themselves.

His sense of loyalty to the state and willingness to leave his children fatherless on principle that it would be unjust to disobey the state shows a loyalty that is so foreign to me, I can not really comprehend it.

Post: #2

(08-22-2014 08:53 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  I just read Crito, where Socrates' friend Crito tries to convince Socrates to escape from prison, but due to loyalty to the Athenian state, Socrates decides to stay and await his fate.

Socrates basically argues that since the State has been good, and generally provided him with many benefits throughout his life he should obey its decisions, even if unjust, because to disobey would be an attack on the state. ny man who can flaunt the laws of a state in doing so harms the state in his reasoning by his disobedience.

It left me wondering to what degree this account may have been true. The writing style of Platonic Dialogues leaves me feeling that no discussion could have ever really proceeded as such, with someone agreeing with Socrates every step of the ay until Socrates laya out his point.

Also, it was really unsatisfying reading a man justify his own unjust execution. The feeling of disgust it produced in me was like reading The Sun Also Rises where the narrator debases himself by enabling his love interests slutty behavior with the Bull Fighter. Like reading about someone castrating themselves.

His sense of loyalty to the state and willingness to leave his children fatherless on principle that it would be unjust to disobey the state shows a loyalty that is so foreign to me, I can not really comprehend it.

You have to remember, Sonsowey, the context of these dialogues. Plato wrote them not as historical records, but as a way of expounding his own philosophical principles. The "Socrates" of the Dialogues was Plato's mouthpiece; in him, Plato puts his own ideas about truth, beauty, justice, ethics, and metaphysics.

But in the Crito, the historical Socrates is probably not far from Plato's portrayal.

Socrates did indeed refuse several opportunities to escape imprisonment in Athens.

Even during his trial, Socrates refused several opportunities to receive exile from his judges. He basically did everything but ask for the death penalty. (Christ behaved similarly, by refusing to retract his statements. So did Giordano Bruno in the 16th century before being burned at the stake). So, in the end, they gave him what he wanted.

Socrates was an old man. He was tired. He probably felt that his execution would serve a better purpose than him going into exile. In some ways, it was the ultimate act of revenge against the Athenian government. With execution, he could achieve immortality. And he did.

Post: #3

Quintus, I do not know the context of the dialogues, as you say.

Anything you could share shedding more light on them would be great. I enjoy reading Ancient Greek sources but have very little background information honestly, and often find myself acutely aware I am missing a lot of background knowledge.

Do you mean to imply that all his statements about doing the right thing, and the goodness of the Athenian state, are not to be taken literally, and that in the dialogue the entire moral justification is just a show of morality when really he wanted to achieve immortality for himself and/or get revenge on the Athenian state?

Post: #4

(08-22-2014 09:50 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  Quintus, I do not know the context of the dialogues, as you say.

Anything you could share shedding more light on them would be great. I enjoy reading Ancient Greek sources but have very little background information honestly, and often find myself acutely aware I am missing a lot of background knowledge.

Do you mean to imply that all his statements about doing the right thing, and the goodness of the Athenian state, are not to be taken literally, and that in the dialogue the entire moral justification is just a show of morality when really he wanted to achieve immortality for himself and/or get revenge on the Athenian state?

No, I'm not saying this at all. Absolutely not.

Without doubt Plato was sincere in his beliefs, and I'm sure Socrates believed basically the same things.

Plato was trying to reach a wide audience. The easiest way of making philosophy accessible to the common educated man was to use the "dialogue" format. It reads like a conversation, and is much more easy to digest than just a turgid treatise.

Once Socrates was executed, Plato left Athens, embittered. He never forgave the Athenian government for their crimes against philosophy. He wanted to immortalize his teacher Socrates. This doesn't mean that he was making things up. I'm just trying to mention his mental frame of reference.

The best way to get a grip on the Dialogues is to read a short commentary about them. Any of the major ones will do. The chapter on Plato in Will Durant's "Story of Philosophy" is a great summary.

Post: #5

I wouldn't be so quick to say that everything Plato has Socrates say is necessarily what he thought, as opposed to what he though others should hear. Generally speaking, the characters in Platonic dialogues are meant to be representation of certain topological categories of people, which Plato made a point of arguing that need to hear different things depending on the state of their soul. Socrates was famous for his irony both in the dialogues, and in real life, and I believe it is in the 7th letter, that Plato states that he has never written down a single word of philosophy (in his view philosophy cannot be written down, only participated in), but that his dialogues are meant to be an artistic expression of what philosophy is like. Finally, I forget which classical author argued it, possibly Xenophon, that Socrates intentionally meant to get himself executed so as to become a martyr for philosophy, knowing full well the Athenian hostility towards his way of life.

Post: #6

(08-22-2014 10:24 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  

(08-22-2014 09:50 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  Do you mean to imply that all his statements about doing the right thing, and the goodness of the Athenian state, are not to be taken literally, and that in the dialogue the entire moral justification is just a show of morality when really he wanted to achieve immortality for himself and/or get revenge on the Athenian state?

No, I'm not saying this at all. Absolutely not.

Without doubt Plato was sincere in his beliefs, and I'm sure Socrates believed basically the same things.

(08-24-2014 01:14 PM)Aristophanes Wrote:  Finally, I forget which classical author argued it, possibly Xenophon, that Socrates intentionally meant to get himself executed so as to become a martyr for philosophy, knowing full well the Athenian hostility towards his way of life.

OK when you guys figure this out, let me know

Ancient Greece man...