Plato's "Apology" and "Crito"

Plato’s Apology and Crito (Eva P-G)

“PROMOTE A REVOLUTIONARY FLOOD AND TIDE IN ART. Promote living art, anti-art, PROMOTE NON ART REALITY to be grasped by all peoples, not only critics, dilettantes, and professionals,” reads the Fluxus manifesto. Fluxus refers to a broad, international coalition of artists who rejected high culture of the 60’s cold, refined, and archaic aesthetic for a minimalist, do-it –yourself, regenerative sensibility. But the Fluxus movement was about much more than who gets to define art and set the standard for value, beauty, and truth. It was- at its core-a wakeup call, a reaction to the arrogantly un-examining and un-questioning art world. After reading Plato’s Apology and Crito, I think Socrates would have approved of Fluxus!

Plato’s Apology is about the nature of the ideal and consummate Philosopher. It’s like a short play about the Philosopher in idealized abstraction with Socrates playing the lead role. The trial setting is of secondary importance-it just provides a reasonable excuse to explore the intellectual and ethical virtues of the Philosopher’s mind frame. So according to the Apology, what is the ideal Philosopher like? For one, he knows intuitively that the “unexamined life is not worth living.” His interactions and thoughts always take the shape of dialogues (the Philosopher’s educational weapon of choice). Socrates demonstrates the ideal Philosopher’s mental courage to examine life with his skeptical, critical disposition to Athens. His distinct method of inquiry within the Apology itself exemplifies the Philosopher’s signature cool reasoning and mental agility (I might add that many in class perceived this as arrogance).

According to the Apology, the ideal Philosopher is wise. But what does it mean to be wise in this text? Socrates would argue that the answer is not obvious (he had to consult an Oracle and interview myriad men before he could come to any conclusion!). According to Plato, a man is wise when he knows that his knowledge is worth little or nothing; that things are not how they seem; and that he shouldn’t take himself too seriously. The ideal Philosopher is firm in his pursuit of nothing less than the truth. And guess what? Socrates also passes this test! He could have appealed to his accusers with emotion. He could have run away. But Plato makes a rather dramatic (I’d argue unbelievable) point of the fact that Socrates did not do any of the above. I think Plato thought quite highly of his teacher Socrates. By the end of the Apology, he’s made his argument plain: the Philosopher is Hero.

While most can sympathize with Socrates’ apology, his reasoning in Crito is harder to swallow. For all its linear and logical reasoning, one can’t help but feel that somewhere, buried in the Critos’ dialogue, there’s a major faulty premise upon which Socrates’ death made sense. I personally ran into trouble when Socrates distinguished the Laws of Athens from their enforcers and described the relationship between the State and himself as analogous to that between a father and a son. In separating his accusers from the Law under which he’s been indicted, Socrates exonerates those responsible for his unjust execution. Many in class argued that Socrates died for what he believed in-that his death was the ultimate symbol of rebellion. I disagree. If you read very carefully, Socrates chooses to die not because he wants to stick it to his accusers, but because he’s come to the conclusion that it’s the only moral thing to do. He actually thinks he should die! That’s an idea I can’t wrap my head around.  Ultimately, the major philosophical questions posed in Crito are 1) What/Who is the State? 2) What exactly is implied in the tacit agreement between the State and the individual?  Not surprisingly, we’re still asking these questions today.  Where there’s power, there’s conflict.

Here’s a work of art inspired by Fluxus ideas (which are rooted in the spirit of hyper self-examination championed by Socrates). Notice how un-pretentious it is materially (it’s a matchbox) and conceptually (it is saying-basically- ‘let’s burn down the barriers separating art from the masses’).

http://www.moma.org/interactives/exhibitions/2011/fluxus_editions/works/total-art-matchbox-from-flux-year-box-2/