Ryan Bodine Final Paper

Majority Opinion

As Socrates sits in prison, calmly awaiting his execution, he is visited by his good friend Crito. In obvious distress, Crito begs Socrates to not let himself be executed. Socrates, not having any of this, disputes every argument Crito lays before him. By this point Socrates has embraced and accepted his fate, and in my opinion, is looking forward to it. I believe that because of this stubbornness to dispute Crito, he uses some counter-arguments that are ill constructed. At the same time, because it is a very sensitive situation, and because Crito admires Socrates greatly, he doesnt put up much of a fight. There are many arguments that Socrates lays down that are obvious masks for the fact that he has already decided he is ready to die, and will not change his mind. One of these arguments, which I will be discussing in this paper, is Socratess view on majority opinion. Socrates believes that majority opinion shouldnt matter. I believe that not only does majority opinion matter, but it is more important than individual opinion. In this paper, I will be using quotes from the first few pages of Crito in the Golden Age of Greece book, and nothing more, in order to analyze and dissect this issue. I will be bringing up topics such as calculating the value of opinions, how those opinions affect you, how majority opinions make up our culture, and how we shouldnt ignore those opinions regardless of our view of them. The conversation of majority opinion begins when Crito expresses his concern of what will happen to himself once Socrates is executed. The majority

Ryan Bodine Final Paper

opinion will be that Crito and the rest of Socratess friends didnt care enough to pay his way out of prison, or to help him escape. Crito is afraid that the majority will blame him for Socratess death. By this point, the power of the majority is already quite apparent, as the death of Socrates was a result of the majoritys view on him. Socrates responds to this by saying why should we care so much about what the majority think? After all, the most decent ones, who are worthier of consideration, will believe that matters were handled in just the way they were in fact handled. This is the first of Socratess ill constructed dodges. Socrates does not value majority opinion because he thinks one should only take into consideration opinions of those who are decent or worthy. Well the issue in this thought process lies in the form of value. Opinions do not have a universal, measureable value. The value of each opinion is designated by the person hearing the opinion. Every single opinion is given a different value by each listener. Because each opinion has a varying set of values, as defined by each individual, it is impossible to define which one is decent or worth listening to. The decency of each opinion is entirely subjective. It is the same reason that it is impossible to give a set definition for any single word, as every person has their own unique meaning of each word. If you think of this mathematically, it makes much more sense. Lets say that X represents the opinion, Y represents the value an individual gives to that opinion. The equation is quite simply X+Y. While X remains constant, the value of Y will change with every new opinion. Because everyones Y is different, the scores will be vary wildly. Because each opinion has an infinite number of values, it is impossible to say that any

Ryan Bodine Final Paper

opinion has one TRUE defined value. You may be able to find an average value of the opinion by taking all of the answers and creating an average, but the numbers average has very little use. Even if you knew its average, depending on the situation at hand, the value of each opinion will be changed, so the average does not necessarily matter. Lets look at a real world example. There is a father and a son. The son will often hold the opinion of the father in higher regard than many other opinions, even in situations where the fathers advice is wrong. At the same time, lets say that the father is a carpenter. Obviously his opinion on the craft of construction should be held at higher regard in that particular situation. That is the problem with defining some opinions as better than others. How can any one man define someones opinion as good or bad? I may see someones opinion as good and someone else may see it as bad. How do you determine who is right? This is why the terms agree to disagree and people have different tastes are so commonly used on our society. There really isnt any way to determine who is right. For this reason, it is best to not concentrate on whether or not someones opinion is good or bad, but how that opinion affects you. For example, lets say I am a suspect in a trial. Regardless of whether not I consider the judges opinion to be good or bad, his opinion is still important and affects my life greatly. This applies, of course, to majority opinion as well. For this reason, one should definitely care what the majority thinks. Socrates also mentions that the most decent ones, who are worthy of consideration, will believe that matters were handled in the way they were in fact handled. I cant imagine that this answer provided much comfort to Crito. The point

Ryan Bodine Final Paper Crito was trying to make was that Socrates dying made his life more difficult because of the way the majority would respond to this incident. It is not a matter of which opinions are better or worse, it is a matter of how the opinions affect you. Lets take this and turn it into a metaphorical example. You are playing a video

game. In the video game you are placed in a large building with 300 people who may or may not be hostile. The objective of the video game is to survive and not be killed. You begin playing on Easy mode. Of the 300 people, only one of them is hostile towards you. Obviously you will likely survive. Now, lets put it on Socrates didnt take my advice and let himself be killed mode. The majority of them will be hostile towards you. Your chances of survival are slim. Regardless of what value one gives to each opinion, they still affect you. It does not matter if I value my enemys opinion of me or not; if hes trying to murder me I have to take his opinion into account if I am to survive. One can not simply pass some opinions off as useless when every opinion affects you. The world is shaped entirely by majority opinion. Even great individuals, whos opinions we often give much value to, would not be admired had they not taken majority opinion into account in seeking their goals. Even when an individual doesnt commonly deal with the majority all at once, even the opinions of the people he encounters will more often than be the same or similar to the majority. Lets say for example we talk about someone whose opinion is often held in high regard. Abraham Lincoln goes down as one of the most respected world figures of all time. Most people would say his opinion is very valuable. However, had he not taken majority opinion into account while navigating life, he likely wouldnt have been

Ryan Bodine Final Paper

successful in life. Not only does majority opinion matter, but it is a deciding factor on whether or not an individual is successful in life. Not to mention that in most parts of the world, majority opinion is what shapes the societys structure and laws. In democratic states, the effects of majority opinion are obvious. Even more than that though, culture is simply a manifestation of majority opinion. It decides what traditions, customs, clothes, languages, and religions are acceptable. It is impossible to ignore majority opinion when it makes up the very world around you. Crito also brings up the fact that, while one may choose to ignore majority opinion, it still has an impact. But you can surely see, Socrates, that one should care about majority opinion too. Your present situation itself shows clearly that the majority can do not just minor harms but the very worst things to someone whos been slandered in front of them. To which Socrates replies I only wish, Crito, that the majority could do the very worst things, then they might also be able to do the very best ones- and everything would be fine. But as it is, they can do neither, since they cant make someone wise or unwise, the effects they produce are really the result of chance. This is by far one of the biggest dodges Socrates pulls in this conversation. He, without explanation, claims that the majority cant do the very worst or best things. This is preposterous. One glance through a history book will show that the majority is capable of astonishing great feats, both good and evil. But this is a philosophy class, not a history class, so I have to dive deeper. How can Socrates say they cant do the very worst things? It is the majority which put Socrates in the situation he is in now. Id imagine that to Crito, the situation at hand is the worst

Ryan Bodine Final Paper situation. Therefore, the majority CAN do the very worst things. By that logic they should definitely be able to do the best things as well. Socrates is once again stubbornly avoiding admitting defeat on this topic. We established earlier that there is no set definition for the value of an opinion. By the same accord, there is technically no set definition for worst or best either. Once again, we come to the conclusion that it matters not that the

things the majority does are good or bad. It is a pointless argument. What does make the majoritys actions matter though, is how they affect us personally. Lets say I live in a purely democratic state where every single law or decision is put to a vote; A place where the majority always decides what takes place. Lets also imagine that the majority votes to legalize murder. Whether or not I think that that is good or bad, I still have to try and not get murdered. So whether or not the things the majority does is good or bad, the point is they DO THINGS. Things, which need to be taken into careful consideration when navigating life, and things which constantly affect us as individuals. Ignoring the majoritys opinion doesnt make it any more or less important. I can choose to ignore the train coming towards me, but that doesnt keep it from hitting me. The next point Socrates brings to the table is that the majority can neither make people wise or unwise. This is him tip-toeing around the subject again. It is only because Crito gives up that the statement doesnt get debated. Of course the majority has the capability to make someone wise or unwise. The majority has the capability to educate individuals just as it has the capability to deny them education. We discussed earlier that majority opinion is what decides culture. Lets say it is

Ryan Bodine Final Paper

understood in that particular culture that women should not be educated. Obviously this has the capability make her unwise. On another note, what if the culture decides that women are to be executed at birth. This is obviously going to prevent her from ever growing up and being wise. With these two examples I prove that society can make people unwise. Society also has the capability to make people wise. For example, A large part of wisdom comes from an understanding of human nature. In order to understand human nature, you have to study humans. Without studying the majority, one will simply not have a large enough sample size of humans to say that they truly understand human nature. Not to mention humans act differently when part of a majority. Therefore, in order to be considered wise, one has to have at leat a basic understanding of the way the majority works. For example, lets say Socrates is teleported to modern-day America. Although he is considered one of the wisest men of all time, if here had no knowledge of the majority or its culture he would likely be considered an unwise idiot by someone who didnt know who he was; or for that matter, a pervert by todays standards for condoning the practice of sex with boys. He may just end up right back in jail. Socrates later brings up some more specific examples. For instance: Come then, what of such questions as this? When a mans primarily engaged in physical training, does he pay attention to the praise or blame or opinion of every man or only to those of the one man whos doctor or trainer? Only to those of one man. Says Crito. Then he should fear the blame and welcome the praise of that one man, but not those of the majority of people. Socrates states. Clearly. Responds Crito. So his actions and exercises, his eating and drinking, should be guided by the

Ryan Bodine Final Paper opinion of the one man, the knowledgeable and understanding supervisor, rather than on that of all the rest? Socrates asks. While everything Socrates states is technically true, he should look at it in a larger context. Why is it that the trainer and the doctor strive to become the best? Who are they aiming to please? What standard are the setting out to match? The answer is simple; it is the majority they are attempting to please. Without the majority to decide what is beautiful, successful, and acceptable, the doctor and the athlete would be without jobs. They may be using their expertise to create a

common outcome, but that common outcome is a product of the majoritys choosing. Our every day actions are decided by the majority; especially what activities we choose to partake in. Now of course when Socrates is giving his example, he is stating that when one is attempting to achieve a certain goal, one should only take advice and guidance from people who have expertise and experience in said goal. I am not denying that. However, Socrates is using it to argue that majority opinion is less important than individual opinion. If you look at life as a whole, most of the decisions we make are a result of the majority. Either you are responding to a situation the majority has created for you, or you are attempting to please the majority. While consulting individual opinions are important, they are merely stepping stones to reacting to and appeasing the majority. College is a fine example of this. While we constantly consult expert opinions in order to achieve our scholarly goals, the goals weve choses were most likely effected by the majority in some way. Most of us are likely trying to accomplish these goals in the first place because the majority has decided that those goals are good.

Ryan Bodine Final Paper Lastly, society would not be as great or as just as it is without majority opinion. Imagine a society where majority opinion did not matter. A world where noo one cared what the majority thought of them or their actions. This would be a world of chaos. Society would fall apart. We would be nothing but animals. Keeping majority opinion in mind is one of the things that keeps people from hurting eachother. It is majority opinion that decides the speed limits on the roads, the safety ratings of vehicles, the value of a college degree, and the value of the money we use to pay it. Majority opinion keeps the country and the people running in check. A

ruler without majority opinion in mind will most likely end up a dictator. The reason democratic states are considered just is because they hold majority opinion over individual opinion. I believe one of the reasons for Socratess demise is because of his habit of ignoring majority opinion. He does not censor his thoughts or actions because he does not care about the majoritys view on him. This is why he was seen as such a radical, and ultimately why he was unable to argue himself out of being executed. This is further proof that majority opinion should be taken into consideration even more than individual opinion. His ignorance of majority opinion doesnt only hurt himself. Crito will most likely face much criticism for the death of Socrates, as will many of his friends. Now it is understandable that many men in the past did great things by standing up to the majority; such as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and many other civil rights activists in the 60s. I also understand that Socrates was criticized by the majority unjustly. He was standing up for a noble cause and paid the price. I believe he also knows that allowing himself to die will help prove his point, and

Ryan Bodine Final Paper

10

make him go down in history. In the end his death helps bring attention to his cause. I am not say that Socrates shouldnt have gone through with his execution, I am saying that his use of majority opinion to defend his execution was not right. In the end, Socrates is wrong about majority opinion not being important. Majority view is in fact more important than individual view. Majority opinion makes up our culture, our laws, our government, and who we are. It doesnt matter if we agree or disagree with the majoritys opinion, we are affected by it and can not simply ignore it without feeling the consequences. Majority opinion is the only thing that holds up our democratic society, and it is the only thing that keeps rulers from being corrupt and selfish. Majority opinion can decide how successful someone is in life. If someone decides to ignore the majority, they will likely not reach their goals. Goals, by the way, which were likely defined and created in reaction to majority opinion itself. Even when individual opinions are consulted on a daily bases, they are likely done so only to complete goals that the majority has helped decide for you. Regardless of the situation Socrates was in, he should not have come to so many rash conclusions about majority opinion. The majority certainly has the capability to make someone wise or unwise. They have the capability to do great harm and great good. One should not use their views on certain opinions to ignore them completely, for there are consequences for ignoring opinions. While Socrates is definitely wise, and a truly amazing individual, he should have stated the real reasons for his views on his execution instead of dragging majority opinion into it. These are the reasons why Socrates was wrong, and why majority opinion not only matters, but it is more important than individual opinion.