Examine the Apology and Crito and determine whether Socrates would be open to the possibility of civil disobedience as it is characterized by MLK in his Letter from Birmingham Jail.
Since the very formation of modern human civilization, mankind has continuously broke new boundaries in the fields of science, mathematics, medicine, technology, and more. From arithmetic in Mesopotamia, to artificial intelligence in 21st century Japan, the progress of man’s knowledge has been unlimited. One field of thought however, has stood stagnant yet upright for most of history; and that is moral philosophy. The standards for the virtue of man, and the questions we have about life have remained largely the same, with monumental figures all over the world continuously reinforcing the same ideals for our species, and questioning the same foundation for our modern world. Two such men, from starkly different backgrounds and different time periods had largely similar views, Martin Luther King Jr. and Socrates. One man grew up poor in the heat of the 20th century American south, and went on to question American democracy, the human spirit, and the will of god. The other grew up as a stone mason in the 470 BC city of Athens, and went on to criticize the state of Athenian democracy and question the will of modern man and the virtue of the Greek gods. So, even though the two men grew up in complete different hemispheres in completely different time periods, the two men asked very similar questions, and fought to use the same philosophical foundation to progress the world they lived in. Unfortunately, the two monumental figures fared the same fate. Both, were killed for transforming their respective worlds.
From my understanding of the texts Apology and Crito, Socrates would be open to the process of civil disobedience, as both King and Socrates once professed their idea of taking on the cause of the righteous, while condemning the unjust position, even if it is larger and more powerful. Additionally, Socrates would be in favor of MLK’s actions since he supported disobeying the rule of law, for not all laws are moral. In short, both men would support protests and civil disobedience since they both believed in criticizing the state, and pushing it to further itself, even if their respective societies felt that they were at their prime.
In Plato’s transcript of “Crito”, Socrates lies in his athenian prison cell, awaiting execution by hemlock. Just days before his death however, Crito, a disciple and old friend of Socrates visits the legendary philosopher, begging him to run away. During their conversation Crito asks about what will happen to his reputation, and what people will think when they find out that Crito allowed Socrates to die, even though it could have been prevented. To this Socrates responds: “But why, my dear Crito, should we care about the opinion of the many? Good men, and they are the only persons who are worth considering, will think of these things truly as they happened.” (Plato, Crito 44b). To put in short; Socrates suggests that an individual should only pay attention to sensible people who see the world around them and the actions of others in its true form. From my understanding Socrates goes on to claim that the opinion of others, who see the world in a false way whether it be just or unjust in nature, should not be paid attention to, for it hinders a person’s well being and a righteous cause. So when compared to the civil rights movement, and to Martin Luther King Jr’s Birmingham letter, Socrates would likely support the idea of civil disobedience, as he would feel that it is important to listen to the voices of the oppressed, who see the reality of 1960’s America, while ignoring the racist and biased rhetoric of those who oppose civil rights who see the world around them in an unjust nature. Socrates believes in taking up the just cause, even if the majority of people look down upon him. It is why he continued educating the youth on the streets of Athens, and why he dared to question athenian politicians and the state even when the vast majority of people frowned upon his actions. When Martin Luther King defied his fellow clergymen by stating that he must continue to fight for the oppressed, he took on the righteous cause, even though the majority of people at the time felt it was foolish and untimely. Socrates and MLK both feel that it is their moral duty to take on the just cause, even if it goes against the wishes of most people. For this, if Socrates were to see the oppressed situation of African Americans in 20th century America, he would likely be open to civil disobedience as a means of fighting for what is morally right.
In translated classical greek, the word “apology” means: to speak in one’s defense. During Plato’s Apology text, Socrates stands trial and aims to defend himself against Meletus and the other men of Athens who accuse Socrates of poisoning the minds of the youth, believing in false gods, and bringing instability to the state. In his defense, when Socrates is asked to discuss why he dares to disobey and reticule law and order, he states that his position in Athenian society is to play the role of the “gadfly”, pushing the Athenian “horse” to better itself. While defending his position on why he dares to disobey laws, Socrates states “Do not then require me to do what I consider dishonorable and impious and wrong, especially now, when I am being tried for impiety on the indictment of Meletus.” (Plato, Apology). Through these statements, and through Socrates’s actions as the “gadfly” I can determine that Socrates, much like MLK, draws a line between what is law and what is moral, and sometimes the two do not act hand in hand. So, according to the dialogue of the Apology, we can see that Socrates would be willing to disobey laws and criticize Athenian politics, because he believes it is his moral duty. In the same way, Socrates would be open to protesting the jim crow laws of the 1960’s, just like Martin Luther King Jr, since he feels that it is his moral duty to progress the state, and lift up the oppressed African American minority. Martin Luther King’s actions and statements reflect his similar beliefs to Socrates. For example in his Birmingham Letter, King states “One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws”. From this statement, we see that both MLK and Socrates have the same ideals for their societies, and thus both would be open to means of changing it, even if it means disavowing laws through civil disobedience.
There are some statements however that Socrates makes, that may seem to counteract his stances. For example, although Socrates believed in serving Athens as the “gadfly”, he also seemed to obey unjust laws on multiple occasions. For example, as states in the Crito text, Socrates refuses to accept Crito’s offer for escape and decides to accept his verdict and go through with his execution. Although those who refute my point may feel that this is an example of why Socrates would not be open to civil disobedience, it is actually quite the contrary. From what I understand, although Socrates questions Athens ideals and current structure, his goal is simply to further the Athenian society. Thus, he is not willing to escape, as it degrades the justice system and law in athenian society if a powerful figure, such as himself, simply rejects the fair jury’s decision and chooses to escape. Therefore, for the sake of order and stability in Athens, Socrates decides to accept his verdict, even if it means his death. This does not mean that Socrates is against civil disobedience, but rather, he feels that civil disobedience in his personal situation is not viable and would be dangerous for the future of athenian citizens.
For much of their lives and for most of their actions, Socrates and Martin Luther King Junior seemed to act almost in conjunction. Although the two men lived in very different worlds and grew up in extremely different settings, they both have changed the world in similar ways. Both men questioned the state of their respective democracies, and sought to progress it through teaching and influence. Socrates criticized the fallbacks of Athenian politics while MLK spoke out on the hypocrisy in American government. Both men today are revered for standing up with the minority, and taking up the righteous cause, even while the unjust opponents were far larger. In the end, even though both men were killed, one by bullet and the other by hemlock, they created an everlasting change on their worlds. Democracy today, would not be the same without their courage and bravery. Life today, would not be the same without their sacrifice and their deaths.
2018-3-19-1521498146