It is an interesting question to what extent the voice of the law in the Crito differ from that of the law itself. — Fooloso4

Yes. I think the first difference is clear.
The verbal expression by Socrates/Plato v the written laws of the constitution.
Whoever wrote it and when:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Athenians
Another article:

The laws (θεσμοί – thesmoi) that [Draco] laid were the first written constitution of Athens. So that no one would be unaware of them, they were posted on wooden tablets (ἄξονες – axones), where they were preserved for almost two centuries on steles of the shape of four-sided pyramids (κύρβεις – kyrbeis).[8] The tablets were called axones, perhaps because they could be pivoted along the pyramid's axis to read any side.[9][10]
The constitution featured several major innovations:

Instead of oral laws known to a special class, arbitrarily applied and interpreted, all laws were written, thus being made known to all literate citizens (who could appeal to the Areopagus for injustices): "the constitution formed under Draco, when the first code of laws was drawn up". (Aristotle: Athenian Constitution, Part 5, Section 41)
The laws distinguish between murder and involuntary homicide, a novel concept at that time.[11] — Draco - wiki

The dialogic drama lies in 1. 'the act of singing a song'; the characters are 2. 'a group of singers'. Both synonyms for 'chorus' as per wordhippo thesaurus.
From the mind of Plato > Socrates, Crito, the laws speaking via Socrates' mind.
The importance of internal and external communication to clarify or confuse. Or both in a cacophony.

The chorus is a 'refrain' of the song - the much-repeated comments and themes.
Justice, harm and retribution. Morality of the contract. The main theme of obedience to law.

Interesting to read of the final overwhelming music mix in Socrates' mind, even as he is calm.

These are the words I seem to be hearing, just as the frenzied dancers seem to be hearing the pipes, and the very sound of these words is reverberating within me, and makes me incapable of hearing anything else. — Horan's translation

A striking mixture - even as he concludes:

"Well then, Crito, let it be, and let’s act accordingly, since this is the way god leads us."

He does not agree with all aspects of the laws. More can be said on this.
Socrates' raison d'être is in keeping philosophy alive. It lives on after his body dies.
The laws can and will be changed.

I thought the chorus did not speak directly to the actors.

There is another difference. The laws are not a separate character or entity, but Socrates speaking on behalf of the laws. — Fooloso4

That just goes to show the sheer creative brilliance and imagination of Plato.
How clever was he. Russian doll ventriloquism.

No. I plead ignorance. Perhaps you can persuade me. — Fooloso4

Oh, hell, you're not doing a Socrates on me, are you?!
What have I to persuade you of? I need to backtrack and underline the relevant:

Socrates' own music consists of arguments, but that will not do for the many who need to be charmed.
— Fooloso4

Without addressing the question of how much Socrates enjoyed the arts of the "many" (or the arguments in the Sorgner essay), I will observe Socrates is a character in Plato's plays. They are obviously more than plays, consisting of fixed characters being expressed through actors on a stage. Nonetheless, they are also artistic compositions. — Paine

I will observe Socrates is a character in Plato's plays.
— Paine
The first thing that comes to mind in making that comparison is that unlike the works of the playwrights the dialogues do not contain a chorus. — Fooloso4

Are you sure about that?
What about the repeated refrains of the laws... — Amity

I see that they are alike in so far as many voices sing as one, but my impression is that the chorus stands apart and is not a participant that speaks to the characters. — Fooloso4

The dialogues are not just like plays, they are plays with arguments, arguably Socrates' music.
Where might any 'chorus' be found? First, its usual setting:
Follow the links and all will be revealed:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_chorus
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wasps

We can see that the chorus can help both the spectator/audience and the other characters with insight. Crito is the one to be persuaded but Socrates too, in a sense.
The members sang, danced, narrated and acted in unison; organised and in harmony.
And yet, in reality - who makes up the laws? Are there not conflicts of interest and tension?
Open and vulnerable to interpretation and corruption. T

So, this Chorus is like the Voice of the Laws in Crito. Even if spoken by Socrates, it is another participating character or actor. With strong, rhythm, repetitions - part of the song displaying persistent themes.

Aristotle stated in his Poetics:
The chorus too must be regarded as one of the actors. It must be part of the whole and share in the action, not as in Euripides but as in Sophocles.
In Aeschylus' The Eumenides, however, the chorus takes the part of a host of avenging Furies.

The chorus had to work in unison to help explain the play as there were only one to three actors on stage who were already playing several parts each.

Aristophanes uses the chorus of the elderly for varying reasons within his comedies. For example, the chorus of the elderly within The Wasps plays both a comedic role and also serves as a political counterfoil to the young, cosmopolitans of Athens. — Greek chorus - wiki

As in his other early plays, Aristophanes satirizes the Athenian general and demagogue Cleon. He also ridicules the law courts, one of the institutions that provided Cleon his power — The Wasps - wiki

Given the the addiction of old jurors, the fun trial and the chorus, the Wasps sounds fascinating.
My next read...

In the Index to my old collection of the Dialogues, there are over a hundred references to Homer, thirteen to Aeschylus, fourteen to Pindar, forty-seven to Hesiod, four to Sophocles, and I am sure I have left out others. There are the countless rituals and festivals Socrates takes part in. And there is the beginning of the Republic where Socrates makes an aesthetic judgement upon the procession he came to witness. The guy was no shut in nor likely to plug his ears when nearing the Sirens. — Paine

A quick response.
Impressive.

The first thing that comes to mind in making that comparison is that unlike the works of the playwrights the dialogues do not contain a chorus. — Fooloso4

Are you sure about that?
What about the repeated refrains of the laws...

Thank you so much for this. Together we will take time to mull over the music!
The characters dance before us as they sing...
Or something like that!

Socrates says he has had this dream before and had always understood it to mean doing what he is always doing:
since philosophy is the greatest music.” (61a)

Now he thinks the dream meant:
make music in the popular sense of the word.

So he:
took whatever stories were to hand, the fables of Aesop which I know, and turned the first ones I came upon into verse.

Taking whatever stories that were at hand suggests that the content of music in the popular sense did not much matter. — Fooloso4

Interesting that at the start and end of Crito, Plato invokes a sense of mystery; soul and mysticism.
Socrates takes his dream world as clear evidence. This adds to his dramatic character, someone with special, perhaps divine, knowledge. More than a logical, rational thinker.
Also, he suggests that Crito's watching and not wakening him is a serendipitous stimulus for his noble, beautiful prophetic woman. Ah, Fortuna! as a Roman might say. Fate.

Soc: Well, Crito, may it be for the best. If this pleases the gods, so be it. However, I do not think it will be here today.
Crito: 44A What is your evidence for that?
Soc: I’ll tell you. Presumably I am to die the day after the ship arrives.
Crito: That is what the authorities say, in any case.

Soc: Well, I do not think it will be here today, but tomorrow. My evidence is a dream I had a little earlier, during the night, perhaps when you decided not to wake me.
Crito: What was the dream?

Soc: I thought that a noble and beautiful 44B woman wearing a white robe approached me, called out and said: Socrates, on the third day thou shalt reach fertile Phthia.[3]

Crito: What a strange dream, Socrates.
Soc: Well now, Crito, it seems clear enough to me anyway — Horan's Crito

***
It seems Socrates is visited by a creative spirit or muse when he turns fables into verse. Also, there is a hymn to Apollo. Other people, including a poet. are talking about and wondering as to its meaning.

Then Cebes took this up and said, “By Zeus, it is just as well you jogged my memory, Socrates. A number of people have been asking me about your compositions, 60D the setting of Aesop’s fables to verse and the hymn to Apollo. — Horan's translation - Phaedo

Might this be the brain's reaction to forthcoming death? Sing now, or forever hold your peace. He is superstitious and needs to heed the call of his dreams. Socrates/Plato gives us musicality in poetry, music and philosophy.

Remember I mused earlier about the quickening, breathless pace of the final argument as a kind of stream of consciousness? Now I'm thinking of a jazzy vocal improv! The bookends of Crito as a reprise.
The repetitions are a rhythmic beat; a popular song that Crito might understand.

I read Socrates taking up music during his confinement as one way to keep alive when deprived of his preferred 'medium.' — Paine

Interesting. I didn't know of this 'music-playing' Socrates.
According to a quick search:

Socrates, as portrayed by Nietzsche, is a figure who is very different to Dionysus. During most of his life Socrates was the personification of a theoretical man (Nietzsche, 1967-1977, Vol. 1 p 98). He practiced neither music, nor poetry, nor did he have a high opinion of either. Only when he was in his death cell did he start to discover his musical side. Nietzsche attributes great importance to this observation (Nietzsche, 1967-1977, Vol. 1 p 92-96). From this brief description alone we can see that Nietzsche’s Socrates is very much influenced by Plato’s, for it was in Plato’s Phaedo that this story of Socrates was told Plato (Phaedo 60c-61d). However, it will soon be clear that Nietzsche’s Socrates is far from identical with Plato’s. Still it is much closer to Plato’s than it is to Xenophon’s or Aristophane’s Socrates who are the other major literary versions of Socrates.
[...]
Since Socrates never appreciated tragedy, i.e. music and poetry, during most of his life, and as he only went to the theatre when the plays of the logical poet Euripides were performed, it was strange that in his death cell Socrates suddenly devoted himself to music and poetry.

According to Nietzsche, then an important part of Socrates character, which he normally oppressed, was set free (Nietzsche, 1967-1977, Vol. 1 p 92-96). — Socrates - Minerva

I don't understand why it's thought that Socrates 'oppressed' this kind of mystical communication.
It doesn't fit in with how I imagined him to be...appreciative of all the senses. A higher awareness.
Listening to his daemonion. And so on. Wasn't music played in the Symposium?
Ah - do I remember the lyre players being dismissed? All the better to think?

But i did, for fun, paint on the back of a jacket:
I Care
Don't
You
? — Vera Mont

Careful
You might set a trend
Seeing the back of somebody
Like Melania
Wearing on the mind
'No hidden message'
Fake news
Until it isn't
The timing
And the lies turning
Back to front and round again
To be continued...

Following up on the story of Socrates, the granting of Athenian citizenship, the laws:

In Socrates’s eighteenth year, Sophroniscus presented him to the deme in a ceremony called dokimasia. He was there examined and entered onto the citizens’ roll, making him eligible—subject to age or class restrictions—for the many tasks of government determined by lot or required of all citizens, beginning with two years of compulsory training in the Athenian militia. In an important sense, the dokimasia marked a young man’s allegiance to the laws of Athens. — Socrates - SEP

I am no expert, but... — Paine

Oh, but you are. There is no denying that...relatively speaking!
I enjoy and learn from all your posts. I've still to give them the time they deserve.
The most recent:

You were an early and consistent responder in my very first 'Discussion' about willpower.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/4796/willpower-is-it-an-energy-thing/p1

5yrs ago. Now, I wonder at my audacity and remember my struggles to understand and reply.
I return to it slightly red-faced and grateful to those, like you, who must have been shaking their heads but persevered. I never did have the willpower to finish reading The Republic and didn't follow through on all suggestions. Tsk, tsk!

But I am more interested in the listening part of my own idea than ruling out other readings... — Valentinus

I get this now. And thank you for your clear articulation and patience.

Well, this is why I brought up the topic of thumos in the previous discussion. The closest parallel I can find between how it was discussed back then and later on is related to the experience of getting really pissed off. — Valentinus

Unfortunately, I left it there. With you seemingly pissed off! Oh, dear...

***

the situation makes me think of Kafka:
You are the problem. No scholar to be found far and wide.
— Reflections, #19 — Paine

OK. No great knowledge of Kafka - so what does that mean?
I couldn't think, or was too lazy to - so looked it up:

Aphorism # 19

You are the problem. No scholar to be found far and wide.
Meaning: You must solve yourself, if no one else seems to have taken up the task. If there is no scholar of you 'far and wide', you must become that scholar. If you are Kafka, you have not stinted that 'must,' and should it come to proof, you will be able to stand before any judgment seat clear of conscience. All those close written pages were for what if not to solve the problem that you were to yourself?

But, did you solve the problem of yourself? No, of course you did not. Thinking cannot solve the problems of thought. Thought only creates more thought. Thought cannot carry thought past itself. If you are Kafka, your voluminous writings are a good indicator of that. (But also of the positive qualities that thought returning to thought, over and over, do give rise to, namely: condensation of idea, excellence of conception, and brilliance of realization. In other words: poetry). — Franz Kafka's Blue Period - Appreciating the Octavo Notebook Aphorisms By Alex Stein

To be a scholar of yourself. To know yourself. To the best of your ability.
Then, like Socrates, you can 'stand before any judgement seat clear of conscience'?

But, even though his intentions seem pure, he didn't write the poetry of the Dialogues, did he?
It was Plato. He returned to certain thoughts, over and over. The repetition interspersed with humour.

I had to laugh at this:

Crito: What you are saying is all very well, Socrates, but you still need to decide what we should do.

Soc: Let’s consider this together, good man, and if you are able to contradict 48E what I am saying in any way, do so, and I shall heed you. Otherwise, at this stage, blessed man, please stop presenting the same argument to me over and over, that I need to get out of here without the permission of the Athenians, for it is very important to me that I do all this with your approval and not against your will. Now look at the principle of the inquiry, and whether it is stated adequately,49A and try to answer the questions you are asked, as you think best.

Crito: Well, I’ll try. — Horan translation

There will be further repetitions of the arguments in one form or another. Plato is having fun!
Crito is perhaps not Plato's Academy material but he, and his like, were important to Socrates.

Is this when philosophy became full of experts? A more formal public and private arena.
With this Academy would Socrates have survived any trial and votes by those who didn't know?

... a place for intellectual discussion as well as for exercise and religious activities. This addition to the gymnasia’s purpose was due to the changing currents in Athenian education, politics, and culture, as philosophers and sophists came from other cities to partake in the ferment and energy of Athens. Gymnasia became public places where philosophers could congregate for discussion and where sophists could offer samples of their wisdom to entice students to sign up for private instruction. — Plato: The Academy - IEP

***

I think that the claim has something to do with the story Socrates recounts in the passage I quoted above saying "Love is the son of Resource and Poverty." It is a view that encompasses all those who make, whether they practice philosophy, poetry, or making material goods through skilled arts. — Paine

I haven't given the quote from the Symposium enough attention. Way back, I think I asked someone if they would start a discussion on that particular favourite! Or was I trying to re-create or imagine the place and people? Perhaps @Fooloso4 or yourself?

Rather, on the self-same day he thrives and is alive at one moment whenever he is well-resourced, but the next moment he is dying; yet he comes back to life again because of his father’s nature. Whatever resources he obtains are constantly slipping away, and so he is neither devoid of resources nor wealthy, and what is more he is midway between wisdom and ignorance.
— Symposium, 203b, translated by Horan

This view puts Socrates turning down the wealth of Crito as a resource into a certain light. It does not fix the kind of poverty that has befallen Socrates. — Paine

What would you say is the kind of poverty that felled Socrates?
The ignorance of the voting majority? Devoid of knowledge or desire/love for wisdom?
Socrates, then, sees the richness of the situation as being a way to learn and enlighten...

Is being imprisoned more conducive to thought/insight than an Academy?

Aphorism #13
A cage went in search of a bird. — Kafka - The Philosopher

A List of Intense Annoyances

Yes, these are sweeping generalizations. I don't care.
Also, this is a living document. — Mikie

Yay. Living and word-flowing. Good to get it all out and great to read!
I thought of the thread today when I read this:

In these troubled times we all get the ‘bothers’ but I have a surefire cure: write them down
Michael Rosen
The sentence was created to make sense of the world, but some things are beyond logic. Forget what you learned at school, let the words out.
Treat yourself. Instead of reading the rest of this article, first go and write down something that’s bothering you …
[...]
Here’s the experiment:
Whatever word or phrase comes into your head, write it down. Don’t worry about whether it fills the whole line (part of the tyranny of the sentence!). Don’t worry if it sounds unfinished.

Now wait.

Whatever next thought comes into your mind, write it down underneath that previous line. I call this “unfolding”. Now repeat this unfolding for as short or as long a time as you want. Remember that you can nick anything you want from songs, poems, plays or films that help you express this bother.
Mine, today, might look something like this:

Losing
Losing the way
Losing my grip
Losing the sense
Losing it
Losing him
Lost

But don’t worry about what mine look like, or about getting them right. They’re yours.
The point of this is whether it’s doing you good. The best response is if people wish to have a go themselves, because in sharing bothers we start to find that we are less alone than we’re inclined to think we are.
We find company and help in our similarities and commonalities...Writing might not be an instant cure for all your bothers, but it can be a way of feeling less in a hole alone with yourself. — Michael Rosen - The Guardian

I think all at TPF pretty much know about the benefits of writing.
Until now, I haven't made a practice of writing my 'bothers' down.
I prefer phone rants!
OK, Rosen, here goes nuthin':

'Winners'
Winners and losers
Winners at the expense of 'losers'
Whiners at diners
Dining sans wine
What? When people are starving and worse!?!
Fining the wording
Freeing the words
Free to be seen and heard; to touch and taste, if not smell
To win and lose, fair and square.
Why should I care?

Ah, so many 'elephants and blind men'.

So many aspects of a concept, behaviour and perspectives:

The Wisdom Researchers and the Elephant: An Integrative Model of Wise Behavior

The article first specifies which real-life situations require wisdom and discusses characteristics of wise behavior. The core proposition of the model is that in challenging real-life situations, noncognitive wisdom components (an exploratory orientation, concern for others, and emotion regulation) moderate the effect of cognitive components (knowledge, metacognitive capacities, and self-reflection) on wise behavior. The model can explain the situation specificity of wisdom and the commonalities and differences between personal and general wisdom. Empirically, it accounts for the considerable variation in correlations among wisdom measures and between wisdom measures and other variables. The model has implications for the design of wisdom-fostering interventions and new wisdom measures. — An Integrative Model of Wise Behaviour - Sage Journals

We should be open to the possibility that no such expert exists. — Fooloso4

You are right. Even if we think we know our own 'story' better than anyone else, there is room for error.
Opinions, even of self, should be gleaned from what 'knowledge' is available.
Self-knowledge: we can have false beliefs about who or how we are.
We put on a face to self and others. Often surprised by their reflections right back at us.

When we point out that what someone says is sarcastic, they can respond by saying:
"That's not who I am!". Then, our opinion as stated is not valued. It doesn't fit the self-image.
Even if we try to explain that we didn't mean they are sarcastic, only what they said.
The damage has been done!

We can be rational, irrational or non-rational in choosing what we present or accept as evidence.
But as a juror, in a court of law, with life or death decisions - the best available evidence matters.
We rely on experts and witnesses - to do the best they can, in the circumstances.

When it comes to opinions, remember to cut them with care. No tears!
I returned to my 'Opinions' thread ( a year ago!) to re-read the exchanges:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/13340/how-to-cut-opinions-without-tears/p1
'Knowing' people from previous posts, I put out a request to you and @Ciceronianus as 'experts':

Plato on Eros and Friendship

Plato’s views on love are a meditation on Socrates and the power his philosophical conversations have to mesmerize, obsess, and educate.

1. Socrates and the Art of Love
“The only thing I say I know,” Socrates tells us in the Symposium, “is the art of love (ta erôtika) (177d8–9). Taken literally, it is an incredible claim.

Are we really to believe that the man who affirms when on trial for his life that he knows himself to be wise “in neither a great nor a small way” (Apology 21b4–5) knows the art of love? In fact, the claim is a nontrivial play on words facilitated by the fact that the noun erôs (“love”) and the verb erôtan (“to ask questions”) sound as if they are etymologically connected—a connection explicitly exploited in the Cratylus (398c5-e5).

Socrates knows about the art of love in that—but just insofar as—he knows how to ask questions, how to converse elenctically.
— SEP: Plato on Friendship and Eros

What does that even mean?
To converse elenctically...especially on a philosophy forum?

I know who to ask, but will my friend @Fooloso4 respond?
And others, like @Ciceronianus.... — Amity

Expertise is relative, as is wisdom.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/wisdom/#WisRat

The first mention of justice:

That’s right. And without going through them all, Crito, doesn’t the same issue arise in other cases too, and especially when it comes to justice and injustice, disgrace and nobility, good and bad, with which our deliberations are now concerned? Should we follow the opinion of the majority and fear it, or the opinion of one person, someone who is knowledgeable, and feel more shame and fear before him than before all the others put together? And if we do not follow him, shan’t we corrupt and maim that which we agreed is made better by justice, and ruined by injustice? Or is this nothing?
(47c-d) — Fooloso4

This simple and stark contrast between the 'majority' (the unknowing) and the 'one' (knowing) runs through the entire dialogue. And is open to question.
The different contexts and circumstances:

1. The expert should be valued more than the many.
The Opinions of the Many v Experts Argument, from 46d-47c.
Horan's translation: https://www.platonicfoundation.org/critias/

Who is the expert in Socrates' story? He is. And how do/could the majority of citizen voters know him? How did the court system work?

2. It leaves out groups who might not be deemed 'citizens'. The multitude of missing voices of the community. To understand better, some research is required into the complex social picture and structures of Ancient Athens.

Three major distinctions:

The first was that between free and slave. The second focused on a clear dividing line between adult male citizens, who were full members of the Athenian political community and its institutions, and various excluded “others” (slaves, metics, women).
Finally, within the citizen community itself there was a marked division between plousioi, the wealthy who did not need to work, and penētes, who had to work for their living, irrespective of whether they were well-off or destitute. — What do we really know about Athenian society - Cambridge Core

Emphasis added: did the same civic rules apply to other Greek cities?
This is relevant to Socrates' decision to live and remain in Athens. If he moved elsewhere would he be considered a 'metic'? We previously considered the use of the word 'slave' compared to 'servant' as applied to Socrates and his behaviour.

From wiki:

Metics: In Ancient Greece, a metic (Greek: metoikos) was a foreigner living in a Greek city-state (polis). The metic did not have the same citizen rights as a citizen who was born in the state he was living in.

The term 'metic' was especially used in ancient Athens in the 4th and 5th centuries BC.

A notable metic was Aristotle, who was born in Stageira but lived in Athens for a long time.

Regardless of how many generations of the family had lived in the city, metics did not become citizens unless the city chose to bestow citizenship on them as a gift. This was rarely done. Citizenship at Athens brought eligibility for numerous state payments such as jury and assembly pay, which could be significant to working people. During emergencies the city could distribute rations to citizens. None of these rights were available to metics. They were not permitted to own real estate in Attica, whether farm or house, unless granted a special exemption.

Metics shared the burdens of citizenship without any of its privileges. Like citizens, they had to perform military service and, if rich enough, were subject to special tax contributions. — Metic - wiki

We can consider how fair or just this system is...to exclude so many from citizenship.

The idea of the 'social contract' appears central to the argument whereby citizens and state/city have a mutual understanding of what benefits entail.
But even then questions can be asked: Loyalty to who, at what cost?

His entire way of life is exactly what the law now demands he no longer practice.
The law claims:
... you have agreed, by your actions if not by your words, to live as a citizen in accordance with us
(52d)
— Fooloso4

For much of his life, doing what he does and saying what he says was not prevented by the law. By its actions or lack of action the law agreed to allow him to engage in philosophy.
— Fooloso4

The law has violated the terms of the agreement. But even so Socrates is unwilling to break the law.

It is true that Socrates was free to leave, but Athens was for him not simply where he lived. Although by leaving when that option was open he would not have broken the law, it would have broken his bond to the city which was not simply a legal one. — Fooloso4

Exactly this.

***

The Greek term νόμος, from which we get the term 'norm', means custom, law, and also song (νόμος).
— Fooloso4

There is a spirit of custom and law that encompasses more than objective, generalised legal rules.
We find it in the subjective personal story of Socrates. The philosopher of Athens with soul.

There is more to be said. Later...

I hope to read and respond to these substantive and thought-provoking posts later, thanks.
But for now, I think you have this spot on:

I think that it is clear that Socrates wants Crito to accept it. It is also clear that Socrates abides by the decision of the court. Before imagining what the law will say he was already convinced that to flee would be unjust and to return an injustice with an injustice is unjust. This is not the same as accepting the words he puts in the mouth of the law. — Fooloso4

[emphasis added]

↪Fooloso4
Food for thought. Your take is a little unorthodox, but that's fine. — frank

Can you explain what you mean by a 'little unorthodox' in the way @Fooloso4 has tackled or read 'Crito'? It is only one of many ways to consider this piece.
You will know of them no doubt. Various analytic approaches sometimes run the risk of ignoring the literary and dramatic features. There is a complex and memorable interplay of voices - those of Plato, Socrates, Crito, the Laws, moral principles, family, friends, the city, and other states. Norms.

Developments of arguments and sub-arguments to disentangle and tease out.
Conflicting attitudes of translators/readers regarding textual ambiguities, like the word 'slave', 'the many'.
Just as Plato intended, even with a hint of irony and subtle humour.

***
[ An aside: talking about 'unorthodox', your OP is not exactly 'orthodox', is it?

As part of a dive into normativity, I'm going to read Crito. Would you have time to moderate it? — frank

Different from what is expected. It is more like a PM invitation.
It doesn't meet the usual guidelines, but that's fine.
The mods usually let such stand if it results in a productive discussion. And it has, thanks! ]

***

Since my purpose was to focus on normativity, I'd say the take away is this:
Crito says that the foundation of normativity is the well-being of human social groups. So there's an element of selfishness to it, but it's not what I want. It's what we need to survive. — "frank

Where in the dialogue does it say this?
Is that all that it says?
What does Plato want us to 'take away' from a reading?
What is his goal?

Questions for a general and a specific 'you':
What happens to your mind when you are reading this carefully?
Do you accept all that is said - or do you continually ask questions of it?
Or is it simply a case of cherry-picking certain aspects for another project?

I hope the discussion continues to produce more questions/ideas than set answers.
I have plenty, still to sift through.
Isn't that what reading 'Crito' is all about? Developing capacities of mental discernment?

Perhaps you know that the name Crito comes from the Greek meaning "discern" or "judge". (This is noted in West's translation.) — Fooloso4

This view puts Socrates turning down the wealth of Crito as a resource into a certain light. It does not fix the kind of poverty that has befallen Socrates. — Paine

I will need more time to read and reflect on that and this (or this and that):

However, this latest made me wonder as to the importance of the use of the word 'slave'.
— Amity

What is at issue can be seen if we put it in the form of a question: are the laws for the benefit of man or is man for the benefit of the laws? — Fooloso4

I need to read Crito to fill in more than a few of my gaps in understanding.
In other words, I'm perplexed, puzzled and pleased to participate in Plato's piece.

His daemon, however, does not provide any reasons when warning him against doing something. — Fooloso4

I don't think he refers to this divine force as a 'daemon'.
It is his daemonion, a 'voice' he hears.
A special, spiritual consciousness or 'being' to save him from anything that might harm his moral or intellectual values/beliefs.

For most of the argumentation, Socrates takes his time, seeking agreement from Crito.
Then, from 52e until the end, there is no breathing space.
The personalised voice of the accusatory laws takes over. It is unrelenting, even referring to the laws of Hades. The next world will not receive Socrates graciously...

This voice stems from Socrates. [Perhaps directed by his daemonion?]
It seems to come from a higher self or self-consciousness.

When I read it, it felt like a 'stream-of-consciousness'. Is it?
If we read the dialogue aloud, might we better hear the increased pace of Socrates' thought processes.
His inner voice and external voice letting rip? The sounds of frenzy:

So take note, dear friend Crito. These are the words I seem to be hearing, just as the frenzied dancers seem to be hearing the pipes, and the very sound of these words is reverberating within me, and makes me incapable of hearing anything else. Mark my words then. — Horan

It seems his mind is overwhelmed by a mix of reason and a spiritual element; his daemonion warning him against escape.
It left Crito with nothing to say.
Socrates has the final word in the Dialogue but leaves us with more questions.

Soc: 54E Well then, Crito, let it be, and let’s act accordingly, since this is the way god leads us. — Horan

The way god, or 'the god' leads us.
Apollo? Or philosophy?

I am convinced of the importance of just law, but not that he is the slave (West translation) of the law. — Fooloso4

I've still to read through all the posts and re-read Crito.
However, this latest made me wonder as to the importance of the use of the word 'slave'.

I don't know why Horan translates it as servant, but possibly because a servant is able to leave (51d). — Fooloso4

That's a very good question - and what difference does it make to our reading or understanding?
As to the choices available to Socrates or anyone in life, how much freedom do we really have?
When we can imagine, or research, any alternative life does it fit with who we are, or think we are? What would convince us that it would be better to leave - 'the grass is always greener' - (slave to emotion?). Or to stay - 'no matter where you go, there you are' - (mastery of self?).
Master/Slave is a mental system, no?

[Another thing, could this be related to the old dichotomy of female(emotion)/male(reason). With all the male characters, dancing and fighting, in Plato's dialogues, how much 'eros' is present?
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-friendship/#toc ]

Laws of the state change from just to unjust and back again.
When it comes to civil rights, the speed at which change occurs can be excruciatingly slow (to build and progress) or appallingly quick (to destroy and regress). How much control does the individual have? What is at stake for present and future generations? What is Plato's overall agenda re Philosophy?[*]

***

I looked for the West translation you mentioned earlier (did you leave a link?)
This morning, I found this free downloadable pdf:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1023142

Socrates of Athens: Euthyphro, Socrates' Defense, Crito and the Death Scene from Phaedo
58 Pages
Cathal Woods
Virginia Wesleyan College; Virginia Wesleyan University
Ryan Pack
Virginia Wesleyan College

A quick search through 'Crito' (starts p44/58), the word 'slave' is mentioned 3 times:
At 50e, 52d and 53e.

***

[*] Crito, then can be seen as the Emotional beaten by the Rational (Socrates). Nevertheless, here we have the art/creativity of the dialogue along with logical steps/argument process and... a barely mentioned spiritual element. The presence of Socrates' daimonion?

Plato incorporates all. The struggles between the master and slave; state and the individual; art and logic. Drama and humour. Mind, body and soul. The whole and the interrelated parts. Tragedy and comedy.
Doesn't the start of philosophy lie in the wondering...and communicating...I suppose 'eros'...?

Plato’s views on love are a meditation on Socrates and the power his philosophical conversations have to mesmerize, obsess, and educate. — SEP - Plato on Friendship and Eros

I've read this dialog a couple of times. I'm rereading it thinking about what it says about normativity: Crito is giving all sorts of das Man type reasons to ignore the court's judgement and sentence — frank

OK. Then you already have a firm grasp of Crito and at a deeper level.
[I need to know more about 'Normativity', a quick google:
https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/normativity/v-1]

So if you haven't read Crito before, feel free to read further along. We'll catch up. — frank

Unfortunately, I need to leave the discussion for about 5dys.
You guys are providing food for thought. It's all good! Will see if I can add anything later...

Mine look a bit like that, except they're chapter no--- er, scribbles.
[...]
Like that, but not so neat; largely ignoring lines and writing diagonally, because the notebook is on the phone stand beside the desk. — Vera Mont

Thank you for a fascinating peek into your writing world.
I turned to Goodreads to work out which novel...so many! After a quick glance, the sequel to the Ozimord Project looks promising...

Your outline surprised me. I had imagined it fuller and more organised using computer software.

my main problem is I don't think I have a consistent writing style yet — Benkei

Isn't that not so much a problem as an exciting challenge as to how flexible styles can be?
Look at @hypericin - his style varies according to the weather but I think his method stays the same?
Others take time to find a style that suits and they settle into it.
Me? I've got no idea. Not sure I'd want to even have a label applied, 'comic fantasist'?!
What you've written sounds great to me! But is there not a place you can go for 'proper' feedback?

Anyway - outta here for a wee while. Enjoy!

I think there is an expression of fear in Crito's argument here. There is also an element of corruption being suggested. The dialogue begins with Crito noting he bribed the jail keeper to get in early. Is the disgrace Crito fears a loss of power at the same time? — Paine

Yes, perhaps all of the above and more. A fascinating story. One that I will have to leave for a few days - for a sunny September break.
If/when Socrates dies, what will Crito do? He will grieve his sad loss.
Without his good friend and mentor, who will keep his thinking straight? What or who will follow?

Socrates will not leave him without talking things through, perhaps with wise words to hold on to.
Will that console Crito? Will he be convinced or let things lie in peace as Socrates desires?
Can you imagine the emotional charge in this prison setting? Intense. This long goodbye.

Thanks for the pointers and questions.

There's quite a lot to be getting on with, isn't there? Crito is a piece of work!

OK. Keep at it!

Read and tremble:

A mini-collection of notes penned by writers including James Salter and J.K. Rowling have surfaced. From tables to scrawls to diagrams they are a fascinating look at how authors were inspired to write their classic prose.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2326630/Notes-diagrams-famous-authors-including-J-K-Rowling-Sylvia-Plath-planned-novels.html

.

Sounds great but a total cop out! That's a synopsis or summary - it whets the appetite.
All it gives me is the tone, genre, and theme of the work. Fascinating as that is. It's a tease.

I get it if you don't have an outline, or one you don't want to share. Somebody might nick your idea!
But for anything else you've written, like...hmmm...a zombie story...

Did you have a structure where the plot was broken down into its various parts?
Some kind of a map from start to end...even if there were changes en route.

"She pats my cheek the way a grandmother would pat her favourite, but decidedly stupidest, grandchild." — Benkei

Brilliant! So grandmatronisingly, then.

While we're at it.
Do you have an outline of your novel, or any short story you can share?
Same question to those who have written formal Outlines.
I'd love to see an example, if willing to share, thanks.

1. Personal Argument: 44c-44d
https://www.platonicfoundation.org/crito/ — Amity

Crito persists with his Personal Arguments: 44e-45c

But just tell me, if you escape from here are you concerned for me and for your other associates, in case the informers make trouble for us and we have to forfeit all our property, or incur a large fine, or suffer some worse fate at their hands? For if you are afraid of any such outcome, bid it farewell, for it is only right that we run these risks to save you, and even greater risks if necessary. So, heed me and just do as I say. — Horan

Then more forcefully, arguments related to:
Allowing his enemies to win by destroying him; and then his obligations to sons and friends.
Basically, he accuses Socrates of betrayal and cowardice. 45d-46a.

And I think you are choosing the easy way out, when you should choose whatever a good and courageous man would choose, especially when you spend your entire life speaking of concern for excellence.

So, I am ashamed both on your behalf and on behalf of ourselves, your associates, lest this entire situation in which you are involved may seem to have developed because of some cowardice on our part: the fact that the action went to court when it was possible that it not go to court, how the trial of the action itself unfolded, and to cap it all, as the most absurd aspect of the matter, people will think that an opportunity escaped us, due to our own baseness and cowardice, since we did not save you, nor did you save yourself, when we were well able to do so if we were of any use at all.
So beware, Socrates, in case these matters bring not just evil upon yourself and others, but disgrace too. So make your decision. — Horan

[emphasis added]
To take it to these extremes, we can see Crito's passion to save Socrates from death.
He sees a contradiction, a lack of consistency in Socrates - isn't Socrates being a hypocrite, given his 'concern for excellence'?
He begs Socrates not only to think of himself but family and friends.
[As if Socrates hasn't already considered his duties to family]
Did it not matter if his enemies would win by this capitulation and cowardice?

How will Socrates respond?
How different are his values and life/death philosophy from those of Crito?
Haven't they previously discussed such issues of harm, judgement and justice...and more?
How does Crito not know Socrates? Has he learned nothing?!
Or is his own fear (of death?) clouding his judgement?

The best people, whose opinions are more worthy of consideration

Who are those 'best people'? The wise? Those concerned with morality and carrying out justice?

Are they more likely than the popular majority to carry out the greatest good? How much influence do they have? (philosophers?)

I really wish the multitude were able to do the greatest harm, Crito, so that they might also be able to do the greatest good, and all would be well. As it is, they are not able to do either, for they cannot make someone either wise or foolish, and they do whatever occurs to them. — Crito - trans. Horan

Don't the majority also have a sense of morality and justice?

I think I see what you mean. If it's not the right or wisest kind, it can be shaped by teaching.
'Crito' is Plato's Dialogue and long-term project:

Since Socrates did not write his influence was more limited than Plato's. Plato did not simply write, he wrote in a way that heeded Crito's warning to care about the opinion of the many. He did this in two connected ways. He presents a salutary teaching that even though it did not make one wise it helped shape the opinions of the many. He also left some things unsaid that

The best people, whose opinions are more worthy of consideration
(44c)

might discern through careful reading and interpretation. — Fooloso4

Ah, but wait...is this teaching is only for those already deemed 'the best'...?

Crito shouldn't be concerned with the opinions of others.
— Amity

But given what has happened to Socrates, he should be. — Fooloso4

Yes. As noted in my full quote (now underlined):

This [argument] Socrates finds irrelevant. Crito shouldn't be concerned with the opinions of others.
Crito points out that it is very powerful; it can kill. As seen in Socrates current position.
Crito is willing to spend a substantial amount of money to arrange the escape. And beyond that.
Via corruption? I can't see Socrates agreeing to that. Why would his friend? — Amity

1. Personal Argument: 44c-44d
https://www.platonicfoundation.org/crito/

Note Crito's response. He does have some capacity for discernment: — Fooloso4

Indeed. Perhaps, as a long-term and good friend, he was 'ready' for Socrates' reply. Has Socrates talked of his age before; how it factored into his decision not to defend himself?

He accepts Socrates' speech on behalf of the city without question. — Fooloso4

I'm not there yet but thanks for the heads-up.

I think it would be helpful to follow the discussion if the various arguments were numbered or named?
As in a kind of Contents page, showing where they arise in the Dialogue.

There's a tug-of-war going on about popular opinion. Crito says we have to "care" what others think, and I'd fill out his thought with: conform to what others want you to be, because the crowd is dangerous, and at worst, they'll kill you for failing to satisfy their expectations. — frank

Crito's offer is to help Socrates escape from jail.
This in itself would break the law. A questionable act. How would it help?
We can examine the words in the dialogue.
Crito's arguments as to why Socrates should escape from prison.
Then Socrates' analysis or response.

How many arguments are there, how convincing are they, and the responses given by Socrates.

The first seems more about Crito, his loss of a friend and reputation; it sounds selfish:

No, quite apart from being deprived of a friend, the like of whom I shall never find again, many people who do not know you and me at all well will think that I did not care enough to spend some money to save you. And what reputation could be more disgraceful than this, a reputation for setting higher value on money than on friends?

This Socrates finds irrelevant. Crito shouldn't be concerned with the opinions of others.
Crito points out that it is very powerful; it can kill. As seen in Socrates current position.
Crito is willing to spend a substantial amount of money to arrange the escape. And beyond that.
Via corruption? I can't see Socrates agreeing to that. Why would his friend?

Socrates was convicted by a majority decision. His low opinion of public opinion, raises questions about how wise he thought the city and its laws actually were. And yet Socrates defends the city and its laws and abides by them. — Fooloso4

Good point.

Grateful for this discussion. I like to read slowly, all the better to understand and appreciate.
Therefore, my comments will lag behind. Hope you don't mind.

Crito has arrived to visit Socrates and they discuss his coming execution. — frank

It is interesting to read the dialogue in the Introduction. It sets the scene and is quite telling as to the role and character of Crito. The very title of the dialogue.

Socrates: 43A Why have you arrived at this hour, Crito? Isn’t it still early?
Crito: It certainly is.
Soc: What time is it, then?
Crito: Just before dawn.
Soc: I am surprised the prison guard was willing to answer the door for you.
Crito: He knows me well at this stage, Socrates, because I visit the place so often and, what’s more, I have done him a favour. — Crito - trans byHoran

Crito is an old, loyal friend of Socrates, a regular visitor and anxious to help. He bribes the prison guard to let him in early. The reader sees him as a good guy but perhaps with questionable or flexible morals.

the name Crito comes from the Greek meaning "discern" or "judge". (This is noted in West's translation.) — Fooloso4

Interesting, then, we can ask about whether he lives up to his name.
Discernment: the quality of being able to grasp and comprehend what is obscure : skill in discerning/

I love the humour of Socrates when Crito explains why he didn't wake him earlier:

C: ...I am also amazed at you, when I notice how sweetly you sleep, and I deliberately refrained from waking you so that you might pass the time as pleasantly as possible.
And on many previous occasions, all through your life, I have noted your happy disposition, especially now that I see how easily and calmly you are bearing this present misfortune.

Soc: Actually, Crito, it would be most odd, at my age, to be troubled because I now had to die.

He had a premonition in his dream - 'perhaps when you decided not to wake me' that the day of execution is to take place within 2 or 3 days.

My grand sci-fi opus — Benkei

Ah. So, they still see things in terms of mummy and daddy? Some things never change...

I ended up hating the sound of it so opted for a more descriptive approach. — Benkei

Yes, it sounds ridiculous but it does provoke thought. How did the patron or matron aspect turn to a more negative connotation?
How long a description? The arrogant and condescending female of the species pets the little, big man.

Sounds like you're having fun!

No, but the aim (provide no answers but assist others in discovering their own) seemed similar. — Mikie

But that wasn't my aim. An answer might have been provided by the parent once the context and circumstances were known. If the answer was not known, then they could both find out together. Google.

But more like getting to know them better. — Mikie

Yes, it kinda works like that but not always.

And I don’t consider this a “test,” really — although I can see how it would be viewed that way. I’m in no position to grade anyone’s work. — Mikie

I know. But it does test the mind and memory box!!
It's a great thread and the replies are fascinating. I'll grade you as Excellent!
And I am in a position to know. Being an authentic Goddess. True that.

Stupid, keeping it simple! — unenlightened

Simple and stupid? Now I know...thanks. I always wondered.

In Plato's Dialogues, is Socrates searching for a definitive definition of a concept?
Or the reality behind the word?
— Amity

Neither. — Mikie

So, what is it that Plato is attempting to do?

I don’t think using a kind of Rogerian technique in these circumstances is appropriate, however well-meaning the intention.
[...]
Carl Rogers was a therapist, and the technique I was referring to was one in which the therapist provides no answers, but creates a conducive atmosphere where the patient discovers the answers for himself/herself. — Mikie

So, you thought that I was attempting to situate the questioning as a kind of psychological therapy?
Does having a psychology background hinder or help you in forum interactions? Both/Neither/Other.
Are you always trying to figure people out, and affix labels, according to some little test or word exercise?

the unintended consequence of separating those brave enough to take a stab at it and those finding excuses not to. — Mikie

What is interesting me about this exercise is to arrive at definitions that are both faithful to (at least some of) the ways in which they are used in philosophy, and also relate to each other in ways that are somewhat significant of the individual's philosophy. — unenlightened

Yes, I think that is the idea behind the OP:

My guess is that this brief exercise will give a better overview of a person’s perspective than merely adhering to, or assigning, a label or school (realist, materialist, dualist, utilitarian, etc). — Mikie

I don't assign myself a label but others might. 'Rogerian'?

I hope the above tells the careful reader something about myself, or at least about the way I think that I think. — unenlightened

Really? One-line responses? Hmmm....

Sure— but I was responding to your question of “why do you want to know”. If the kid said “curiosity,” then we’d either say we have no idea what an aorta is, or what it means as a word, or try our best to describe or define it in some way. — Mikie

The child/teenager might have turned it around and asked, "Why do you want to know?"
The parent could answer with: It would help me better answer your question if I knew what prompted it.

I don’t think using a kind of Rogerian technique — Mikie

What's a 'Rogerian technique'?

Ideas have meaning. — Mikie

Yes. And any meaning can be hidden from view or understanding.

The dialogues pretty quickly transition into what is meant. — Mikie

Sure - but some dialogues stem from an experience, belief or understanding of moral issues.
As in the child/teenager scenario. What experience has made them curious about an aorta?

In Plato's Dialogues, is Socrates searching for a definitive definition of a concept?
Or the reality behind the word?

“Curiosity.” — Mikie

Desire to know or discover.

If this life student is asking questions about such things, then they already have a degree of knowledge.
— Amity

Sure. So what? — Mikie

It's the basis or grounding of more questions in a dialogue. Why do you ask? What do you think it is?

He asked questions of students. He made them think things through for themselves.
— Amity

Yes, and usually triggered by the meaning of x. Whether justice or piety or virtue or whatever. — Mikie

It's an idea of 'justice' related to action or behaviour and consequences.
Depending on context or circumstance.
In the case of a questioning child, then it would probably be framed as 'fairness'.

“What’s the aorta Dad?” — Mikie

The first response:
Why do you want to know?