Himwich: Socrates, when Meletus initially responded to your question about who improves the citizens of Athens, his answer was the Laws. You countered that that was not what you meant: you wanted to know who was the person who knows the laws. Yet later, in your conversation with Crito, you yourself made the Laws speak as if they were a person. I can’t help but wonder what you would have said if Meletus had insisted on his first answer and responded in the following way: No, Socrates, it IS the Laws. They live inside each citizen and warn us when our actions are detrimental to the State, much like you say your daimon warns you not to do perform certain actions. Whatever voice you are listening to is not the same voice that the rest of the citizens hear. The voice you hear speaks only to you about your own personal well-being but neglects that of your fellow citizens.
Socrates: If Meletus could have answered in this way, he would never have charged me with corrupting the young because he would have known that putting me to death would surely be detrimental to the State, as in fact it proved to be. But be that as it may, if he had answered in the way you propose, I would have responded that the moral health of the state depends on that of each individual and that it is precisely the moral health of each individual that is my paramount concern. I would ask him how it could be subversive to urge young people to prefer virtue to the obtainment of worldly goods and honor. Does not that voice speak to him and every other citizen as well?
Himwich: As unlikely as it is that Meletus has ever thought about such questions, let us give him his best arguments. Let us imagine Meletus responding: Of course, every citizen hears that voice, but each citizen also knows that when private morality takes precedence over public morality, the result is inherently subversive. You apparently believe that the State is the reflection of the souls of individual citizens writ large. That’s nonsense. Of course, virtue is to be preferred to worldly goods, but each citizen also knows that public morality requires citizens to accommodate their private morality to the public good. If the health of the State is not given priority to that of individuals, then individuals will fall prey to whatever private morality proves to be the strongest and risk the loss of any opportunity to seek their individual good at all. This is how tyranny comes about. That is why you are such a dangerous person: you promote private morality in opposition to the good of the State.
Socrates: There is much that could be said in response to Meletus’ arguments. For instance, I would argue that there is basic agreement about what he calls private morality and, indeed, that it is my mission to help individuals recognize that there is really no such thing as “private” morality and that your good and mine are, if we but had the courage to acknowledge it, one and the same. But since we cannot question everyone about this now, I ask you, Himwich: Do you prefer worldly goods to the exercise of virtue?
Himwich: I could complicate our discussion by asking you what you mean by virtue, but I acknowledge that I often do not live in accordance with my own notion of virtue and that the pursuit of worldly goods often causes me to violate my own principles.
Socrates: Do you believe that necessities of state or family in any way relieve you of your personal responsibility to live up to your idea of virtue?
Himwich: No.
Socrates: How old are you?
Himwich: 68
Socrates: Not much time left.