Is Socrates a Hypocrite?

Socrates held that living well meant living with virtue. In turn, philosophy embodies virtue and therefore, life is philosophy. According to Socrates, the only life worth living is the life of philosophy; without philosophy, life is not worth living at all. In the Crito, Socrates states that he will suffer his punishment of death rather than disobey the state. In the Apology however, Socrates states that he will not stop philosophizing even if the state outlaws it along with the punishment of death. Although these two statements seem blatant contradictions, the validity of their non-contradictory nature is not hard to understand. Socrates' definition and view of philosophy and persuasion, respectively, help to eliminate the seeming incongruity between his two statements and aid to further his philosophy.

Socrates defines philosophy as the rational criticism of moral principles. Such criticisms serve as a test of the moral principles in question. If principles are inconsistent, mutual adjustment must occur among them, one that brings them into harmony with one another. Similarly, the principles of the state in conjunction with the principles of Socrates do not agree and therefore the two principles are inconsistent. Socrates, in the Apology, attempted to persuade the state into believing his principles were proper. His failure, however, allowed the principles of the state to supersede his. At the end of the trial, Socrates acknowledges his punishment and allows the state to preserve its principles. This adjustment is mutual, and therefore, brings Socrates and the state into accord. Although Socrates' principles were rejected, the mere fact of his endeavor to sway the state exemplifies his principles and thus he achieves harmony. The state achieves harmony simply through its defense and winning argument for its principles. Although Socrates awaits his death, Socrates attains the goal of actively philosophizing, which he stated he would continue doing, even if it meant death. Socrates clearly uses reason in both the Apology and the Crito and emphasizes that only by subordinating one's desires (life in Socrates' case) can one hope to achieve greatness.

The greatness Socrates achieves occurs because of his view of persuasion. Socrates believes that one must obey the commands of the city "or persuade it as to the nature of justice" (Plato). Socrates' defense, in this case, is his opportunity to persuade the court. He was granted an opportunity to attempt to sway the state in favor of his view. However, Socrates failed at persuasion, and therefore, according to his views, must obey the command of the city. His view of persuasion versus compliance allows for two outcomes: persuade the state and win one's principles, or, fail at persuading the state and therefore conform to its commands. Clearly, the second outcome was the fate for Socrates. To disobey the state would be to contradict himself, and by doing so the state is given more reason to believing his initial falsehood. In the Apology Socrates states "if I corrupt them [the youth] unwillingly, the law does not require you to bring people to court for such unwilling wrong doings, but to get hold of them privately to instruct them and exhort them". The state acted exactly in the way Socrates said it would in the above passage. Socrates was instructed to stop philosophizing, yet he refused. Punishment, therefore, is necessary, according to the law or any natural law of teaching.

The success or failure of an attempt to convince the state is irrelevant to the proposed contradiction between Plato's two works. An important fact to note is that Socrates attempted to justify and defend himself. By doing so, he did justice not only to himself but to his philosophy as well. In this case, Socrates actions speak louder than his words, and by accepting his death, he has not only achieved what his philosophy preaches, but also complies with the virtue his life runs on. Even if wronged, Socrates believes that the Gods, after death, will present him with a new trial, one that is made even stronger through his persistence and acceptance of his punishment. Socrates led by example, and his persistence was a very strong one. Perhaps he did make a mistake, but even so, running away from the state, and therefore his mistake, would be problematic and even more contradictory than his supposed incongruous statements in the Apology and the Crito.