Study Questions for Plato’s Crito

 

  1. With what reasons does Crito try to persuade Socrates to escape? (43a-46a) Which of these are the best in your opinion?  Why?
  2. What is the point of Socrates' analogy with a physical trainer? (47b-c) It's part of a larger argument of Socrates'. (47a-48b) What is that argument?
  3. "The most important thing is not life, but the good life." (48b)  What do you think Socrates means by 'the good life'?  Would you agree that it is better to die than to live badly?
  4. Socrates says that one should never inflict wrong on another, even when one has been wronged oneself. (49b-e)  What do you think about this?
  5. So far Socrates has been reminding Crito of some general principles that they both accept.  Beginning at 50a Socrates uses these general principles to argue that it would be wrong for him to try to escape his sentence.  He puts these arguments in the voice of the Laws of Athens.  How does he argue that he has made an agreement with Athens to obey its laws?  Do you agree that he has made such an agreement?  Why or why not?
  6. Even if Socrates had made an agreement to obey the laws, one might think that he had a right to back out of that agreement under some circumstances (say, when he is about to be unjustly executed).  But Socrates seems to think that he has no such right.  He says he must persuade the city that he is right or obey its lawful commands. (52a) What do you think of this doctrine?
  7. To which of his general principles does he appeal at the end (54c)?
  8. Crito doesn't put up much of a fight.  Do you think he has a better reply to Socrates' argument? What would it be?
  9. If you were in Socrates' position, would you attempt to escape? Why or why not?
  10. In the Apology, Socrates said that if the Athenian court forbade him to practice philosophy from then on, he would refuse to obey. In the Crito he seems to say that one must always obey the legal authorities, even when they command what is unjust.  Is there a way to reconcile what he says in these two works?  Can you think of a way to make his statements consistent with one another?  Try to formulate a position on this question that you'd be willing to defend in class discussion.