Crito
In contemporary discussions, the meaning of Crito is debated to determine whether it is a plea for unconditional obedience to the laws of a society.
The text is one of the few Platonic dialogues that appear to be unaffected by Plato's opinions on the matter; it is dated to have been written around the same time as the Apology.
Historians are not aware of the exact location of Socrates' cell but according to archaeologists, the ancient Athenian prison is about 100 meters (330 ft) southwest of the Heliaia court, just outside the site of the agora.
Some researchers have said Crito is part of Plato's middle dialogues, which are characterised by a Socrates who dismantled opposing arguments by asking questions and then pointing out the flaws in the opposition's theory.
[6][7] According to Mario Montuori and Giovanni Reale, Crito was written closer in time to the Laws than to the Apology, whose date is controversial.
Finally, Crito argues that Socrates should not worry about the potential punishments that he and his conspirators could face as they feel that the risk is worth taking.
A person's goal should be to live a virtuous and just life rather than a long one, thus escape from the prison would rely on a discussion on justice.
To solve this question, he creates a personification of the Laws of Athens and speaks through its point of view, which is to defend the state and its decision against Socrates.
As a fugitive in a well-established state, good citizens would be suspicious of Socrates because he would be suspected of violating the laws in his place of exile.
Unlike Plato's other works, Socrates took a more objective stance on epistemology, being optimistic about the knowledge coming from experts in a subject.
[12] Sandrine Bergès proposed a Liberal interpretation of the law in which the agreement between the state and the individual implies a mutual obligation.
[12] A number of critics, however, argue this could not be inferred from the text; rather, in the event of a failure of the conviction attempt, unconditional obedience to the law was demanded.
The representatives of this approach assume the personification of the laws is to be understood in an authoritarian sense but either disagrees or partially agrees with Socrates' own position.
[citation needed] Although Socrates is impressed by the reasoning of the laws, according to the weaker version of this hypothesis this does not mean he identifies with all of his reflections and affirms their consequences.
[39] According to representatives of this interpretation Socrates, at the end of the dialogue, compares the effect the pleading of the Laws has on him with the "frenzied dervishes of Cybele seem to hear the flutes".
In Plato's works, Socrates appears as a philosopher who always acts rationally and stuns admirers with his extraordinary self-restraint while being exposed to strong emotions.
The comparison with these "dervishes" is an indication there is a difference between the radical, suggestive demands of the law and Socrates' philosophically reflected position.
[41] According to Weiss's hypothesis, this was the reason Socrates let the Laws appear and assigns them the task of making it understandable to Crito – that is, authoritarian – that an escape would be wrong.
[42] Thomas Alexander Szlezák also said the justification for Socrates' attitude towards his friend is emotional rather than not philosophically demanding because it is inevitably based on Crito's level of reflection.
[46] Multiple researchers have claimed that there is a purposeful rhetorical incongruity between the Apology and Crito from Plato's representation of Socrates' dialogues.
[47] In the Apology, Socrates explained that he would not obey a hypothetical court verdict that forced him to renounce public philosophising on pain of death, for such a demand would be an injustice to him.
Scholars have tended to suppose that Plato, at this early point in his career, simply has not yet worked out all the features of the soul: is it a self-mover, the principle of life?
[55] Campbell agrees that Plato was the first, but he argues that Plato's psychology was developed earlier, such that readers of earlier dialogues such as the Phaedo can observe the casual oscillation between different roles that the soul plays; he maintains that the soul is a thinker and a mover at the same time because it moves things by means of its thoughts.
[56] Roman philosopher and politician Cicero interpreted Crito to mean citizens are obliged to serve the state out of gratitude.
[65] The philosopher David Hume (1711–1776) made reference to Crito as the only ancient text that holds the idea of a citizen's implicit promise of loyalty.
[67] Crito was esteemed by literary analysts including Paul Shorey,[68] William Guthrie,[13] and Thomas Alexander Szlezák, the last of whom said its "speech, argumentation and character are masterfully matched".
[73] Danzig added that in contemporary specialist literature, Plato is considered to be only concerned with making Socrates understandable to his readers rather than philosophically presenting and justifying universal principles.
[75] Hellmut Flashar argued that despite its initial appearances, Crito's depth can be discerned through dialogue and that in doing so, it may be revealed as a difficult text.
[12] Romano Guardini emphasised the Crito's inherent correctness, it being "the basic philosophical experience of validity" exists beyond empiricism.
If he chose to go into self-exile as Crito had suggested, he would undermine the fundamental system the state he pledges allegiance to was based upon.
