Plato, `Crito’

 

1.   Socrates can escape relatively easily if he wishes. This dialogue is his argument for not doing so.

 

2.   Socrates’s first premise : We should respect only some opinions of only some people. (Question: what does `respect’ mean here? Believe? Take seriously? Think worthy of dignifying with counter-arguments?)

 

3.   Premise: In deciding what is just we should respect only the opinions of those with wisdom about justice.

 

4.   Premise: If we do not act on the basis of a correct conception of justice, we will harm that aspect of our selves that is improved by justice and harmed by injustice.

 

5.   Premise: This aspect of ourselves is more valuable to us than bodily well being.

 

6.   Premise: Bodily well being is necessary for a good life.

 

7.   Conclusion: Therefore, from (4), (5) and (6), acting in accordance with the correct conception of justice is necessary for a good life.

 

8.   Conclusion: Therefore, from (2), (3) and (7), we should ignore the opinions of the multitude.

 

9.   Objection: But the multitude can do us great harm if we ignore them. At worst, they can kill us.

 

10.                   Reply: Living well is more important than merely living (premise (5) reiterated).  Note that premise (5) was merely asserted. It follows from no argument given here.

 

11.                   Conclusion: By (10) plus (7) we block the objection. However, this depends on the merely asserted premise (5).

 

12.                   Premise: We should never act unjustly. This is stronger than any premise or conclusion stated above.

 

13.                   Conclusion: Therefore, from (12), we should never answer an injustice with another injustice.

 

14.                   Premise: It is unjust to break an agreement.

 

15.                   Conclusion (from 13 and 14): One should keep to one’s side of an agreement even if the other party has broken his.

 

16.                   Premise: By voluntarily living in the Athenian state and receiving its goods, Socrates has agreed in his actions to live by its laws, or to persuade the keepers of the laws that the laws are unjust if he thinks they are.

 

17.                   Premise: Socrates has been lawfully sentenced to death. Note: he also thinks (p. 65) that he’s been unjustly sentenced to death. Thus the law, as an abstraction, is implicitly distinguished from the human implementation of law. As far as we can tell, this is the first appearance in Western history of this idea.

 

18.                   Conclusion: From (15), (16) and (17) Socrates should accept, and not try to evade, his sentence.