A PHILOSOPHICAL EXAMINATION OF SOCRATES’ ARGUMENT AGAINST CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE

Abstract

This study is an examination of Socrates’ argument against civil disobedience. Socrates opine that an individual is bound to obey the laws of the state at all time and in every condition he or she finds himself. An individual is obliged to always maintain a proper relationship with the state. Socrates, in his political theory, maintains a conservative position towards the laws of the state. The state is sacrosanct so as its laws. Any attempt to disobey the state would pose a destructive danger to the state. The substance of his argument is that when the laws are unjust, we should either try to persuade the legislators to change the laws, or we can register our dissent by lawfully leaving the country and revoking our citizenship. This study examines Socrates’ position on civil disobedience. In doing this, we employed analytic method to examine the morality as well as the legitimacy of Socrates argument against civil disobedience. The significance of this research is informed by the necessity to employ appropriate means in expressing disagreement with perceived injustice in the formation and the implementation of the laws of the state without necessarily destroying the state. In this regard, Socrates’ view of civil disobedience serves as a guide in examining the concept of civil disobedience. However, civil disobedience has been instrumental to advancing human rights and promoting just order.