越戰期間在美國本土興起的反戰運動，所引發之公民不服從行動，促使1970年代的政治哲學研究者，在尋找此概念的古代源頭時，溯源至柏拉圖的《克里同》(The Crito)。然而這是否是對此部對話錄的妥適理解，是本文欲探究的問題。藉由爬梳《克里同》的論證結構及對話者之間的關係，指出對話錄確無當代某些學者所主張，蘇格拉底的思想已有公民不服從的暗示；相反地，蘇格拉底強調守法對維繫靈魂的好狀態極為重要。

It has been commonly held, since the American government decided to be positively engaged in the Vietnam War in 1964, that there is an implicit notion of the civil disobedience in Plato’s Crito. The purpose of this paper is to show the fact that this is not a proper interpretation of this dialogue. This paper will go through critically the Crito in order to illustrate the idea that neither Socrates’ own moral stand, nor the structure of the argument in the dialogue will support the claim that there is an implicit notion of the civil disobedience in the Crito. Rather Socrates in the dialogue thinks that law-abidingness is one of the important factors in the maintenance of the good condition of the soul.