Apology, Crito, and Phaedo of Socrates — John Shaqi
Apology, Crito, and Phaedo of SocratesPlato
PhilosophyPhilosophy
Apology, Crito, and Phaedo of Socrates
Plato
Socrates, 470 BC-399 BC
In "The Crito" Socrates is represented in conversation with a friend of
his named Crito, who had been present at his trial, and who had offered
to assist Socrates in paying a fine, had a fine been the sentence
imposed. Crito visits Socrates in his confinement to bring to him the
intelligence that the ship, the arrival of which was to be the signal
for his death upon the following day, would arrive forthwith, and to
urge him to adopt the means of escape which had already been prepared.
Socrates promises to follow the advice of Crito if, upon a full
discussion of the matter, it seems right to do so. In the conversation
which ensues Socrates argues that it is wrong to return evil for evil
and that the obligations which a citizen owes to his State are more
binding than those which a child owes his parents or a slave his master,
and, therefore, it is his duty to submit to the laws of Athens at
whatever cost to himself. Crito has no answer to make to this argument,
and Socrates thereupon decides to submit to his fate.
Plato is said to have had two objects in writing this dialogue: First,
to acquit Socrates of the charge of corrupting the Athenian youth; and,
second, to establish the fact that it is necessary under all
circumstances to submit to the established laws of his country.
"The Phædo" relates the manner in which Socrates spent the last day of
his life and the circumstances attending his death. He is visited by a
number of his friends, among whom are Phædo, Simmias and Crito. When his
friends arrive they find him sitting upon a bed rubbing his legs, which
have just been released from bonds. He remarks upon the unaccountable
connection between pleasure and pain, and from this the conversation
gradually turns to a consideration of the question of the immortality of
the soul. He convinces his listeners of the pre-existence of the soul;
but they are still skeptical as to its immortality, urging that its
pre-existence and the fact that it is more durable than the body does
not preclude the possibility of its being mortal. Socrates, however,
argues that contraries cannot exist in the same thing at the same time,
as, for example, the same object cannot partake of both magnitude and
littleness at the same time. In like manner, heat while it is heat can
never admit the idea of cold. Life and death are contraries and can
never coexist; but wherever there is life there is soul, so that the
soul contains that which is contrary to death and can never admit death;
consequently the soul is immortal.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account