The Citizen's Debt to the Law
With escape bribed and waiting, does a condemned man owe obedience to the very laws that have sentenced him to die?
Crito's offer is practical and the reproach is sharp — a father should not abandon his children when he could flee. Socrates refuses on principle: one must never return wrong for wrong, and breaking Athens' laws after seventy years of accepting their protection would do exactly that. He lets the Laws themselves speak, claiming his lifelong residence as a tacit agreement to obey — an early germ of social-contract theory, and one that sits uneasily beside the Apology's vow to disobey any order to stop philosophising.
- justice
- political obligation
- consistency
- social contract
- duty
- authority
- retaliation
- loyalty
- civil disobedience
- consent
- death
- friendship
- moral character
Enter a dialogue
- When a citizen is punished by a law he believes wrongly convicted him, does he still owe it obedience?
- Crito says a father who could escape and live instead abandons his children by dying. Why is he wrong?
- If one must never return wrong for wrong, what must a person surrender even when the state wrongs him?
- Where is the line between the obedience you owed Athens and the disobedience you promised at your trial?
- You let the Laws claim your lifelong residence as a promise to obey. Is staying really consent?