As a result, Plato is demonstrating social disobedience, by highlighting how anyone who questions authority will face a similar fate as Socrates. (Plato, 2007) In Crito, Socrates has been found guilty of his crimes and is awaiting his death sentence in an Athenian prison cell. On an early morning, his friend Crito pays him a visit and offers to help him escape. He feels that if Socrates is able to go into exile, he can question the actions against him and offer a service to young adults though his guidance. (Plato, 2007)

However, Socrates refuses to accept Crito's offer. This is because he claims that he is a citizen of Athens and must follow their laws. The only way that he can stay in compliance with these moral obligations is to accept his fate. Evidence of this can be seen with Plato writing, "If we think that we're acting unjustly by doing these things, I don't think we should take into consideration whether we will die if we hold our ground and keep our peace, or anything else we will suffer, rather than whether we're acting unjustly. Do we say that we should never willingly act unjustly, or that we should in some instances and not in others? Or is acting unjustly never good or noble, as we often agreed on previous occasions? Whether the many agree or not, and whether we must additionally suffer harsher things than these or gentler, nevertheless acting unjustly is evil and shameful in every way for the person who does it. And so one should not repay an injustice with an injustice, as the many think, since one should never act unjustly. They must neither repay an injustice nor cause harm to any man, no matter what one suffers because of him. So think carefully about whether you yourself agree and believe it and let us begin thinking from here, that it is never right to act unjustly or to return an injustice or to retaliate when one has suffered some harm by repaying the harm." (Plato, 2007)

This is illustrating the tension in Plato's dialogues by offering a direct contradiction about...

During the proceedings, he questioned the motives and actions of those around him. While in Crito, Socrates is complacent about his fate and feels a moral obligation to see it through to the end. These different tensions are Plato's way of showing critical challenges through contrasting tones and dialogues. (Plato, 2007)
Can we reconcile these inconsistent positions?

These inconsistencies can be reconciled. This is because Socrates believes that if he were to fight against the system, it will embolden his enemies. Instead, by accepting his fate, he is becoming a martyr through showing the injustices and corruption in society. This is when he will become larger than life with his ideas continuing to endure long after he has died. In this aspect, Plato is using these inconsistent positions, to illustrate how Socrates had a lasting impact on philosophy. This was achieved through engaging in a pattern of civil disobedience and then becoming a symbol for future generations. (Plato, 2007)

Clearly, Plato's intentions were to show that Socrates was morally superior to his enemies. This occurs through him questioning the trial and the charges brought against him. Then, once he has the chance to escape (after being condemned to death), is when he wants to see it through. This is because Socrates knows that his death will force future generations to question the actions of society and world around them.

It is at this point, when his ideas will endure and become a basic part of philosophical thinking. This is exactly what happened, as these actions are illustrating how Socrates understood that he was a symbol of resistance, openness and the questioning of authority. These ideas are what Plato is demonstrating through the conflicting positions taken in both works.