The Crito
Introduction
Condemned to death and awaiting execution, Socrates is visited before dawn by one of his closest friends. Crito has already done everything a loyal friend could possibly do. The prison guards have been bribed, safe passage has been arranged, and enough money has been gathered to protect everyone involved. By sunrise, Socrates could be beyond the reach of Athens. Under those circumstances, escaping seems reasonable; however, Socrates refuses.
Why?
Throughout the Crito, Crito tries to save his friend's life, as most friends would, but Socrates focuses on whether the principles that guided him in court should continue to guide him now. Last week’s Apology taught how to test another person's reasoning in court, but testing our own reasoning when reputation, family, or even life itself hangs in the balance is far more difficult. That is the question Plato leaves with the reader:
What becomes of our reasoning when following it begins to cost us?
Reason Under Pressure
Few decisions are made under ideal conditions. More often, we are forced to reason when time is short, emotions are high, and the consequences matter deeply to us. That is precisely why the Crito remains important. It teaches us how to reason under pressure. Throughout the dialogue, Socrates protects his reasoning from the pressures most likely to distort it. As your child reads, encourage them to return to these three questions.
1. Protect Your Reasoning from Consequences
Would I still believe this if the outcome were different?
To persuade Socrates to escape, Crito points to everything at stake: his friends' reputations, his children's future, his enemies' satisfaction, and the life he could save. These are all serious concerns, and Socrates doesn’t dismiss them.
However, he refuses to allow them to serve as answers to a question they couldn’t answer. Instead, he asks whether escaping is just. Consequences tell us what is at stake, but they do not determine what is true.
The same principle applies today. A student may desperately need a higher grade, but a teacher should award only the grade that is deserved. Although the outcome matters, Socrates reminds us that wanting something to be true has never been evidence that it is.
2. Protect Your Reasoning from Changing Standards
Would I apply the same standard if the consequences were easier?
Crito's argument appeals to an exception. Athens has acted unjustly toward Socrates, so surely the usual principles no longer apply. If the city has abandoned justice, why should Socrates remain bound by it?
Socrates responds by asking, "If it is wrong to commit injustice, is it ever morally permissible to do so?" Once again, Crito's exception seems reasonable, but Socrates redirects the conversation to a fundamental principle: injustice remains wrong regardless of the circumstances. Despite having been wronged himself, Socrates refuses to lower his standards of justice simply because doing so would benefit him.
This lesson extends far beyond ancient Athens. Honesty often seems important until telling the truth becomes uncomfortable. Yet if everyone lowered their standards whenever it suited them, justice—and society itself—could not endure. Plato reminds us that principles are tested precisely when keeping them becomes difficult.
3. Protect Your Reasoning from Yourself
If I had to argue the opposite side, what is the strongest case against my conclusion?
Near the end of the dialogue, Socrates develops the discussion further by giving a voice to the Laws of Athens themselves, constructing what is, ironically, the strongest argument against his own escape.
Like Crito, people are often naturally biased toward the conclusions that benefit them most. Socrates, however, introduces a different approach: he challenges his own reasoning before accepting it. Before trusting the decision that would save his own life, he insists on hearing the strongest argument against it.
The ability to understand the opposing side is essential in every area of life. Whether in politics, relationships, or business, clinging too tightly to one conclusion often causes more harm than trying to understand another perspective.
Final Question
If the consequences changed tomorrow, would your reasoning stay the same?
Reading Rooms
Reading Rooms is raising support to continue building resources like these. If someone comes to mind who believes in this mission, we'd be grateful for an introduction.
Check us out at: readingrooms.org
“a parent and teachers’ entire English department for less than an hour of tutoting”
Thank you for Reading!
