Socrates gives Crito three arguments to staying in jail, Principle of Filial Piety, Principle of Fidelity and Non-Malificence contention.
Socrates' strongest contention is the Principle of Fidelity as he contends that we must keep our guarantees.
The wrong detainment naturally voids the assention that Socrates has with the state.
Since the state broke confidence with Socrates by shamefully blaming and sentencing him, why then would it say it is alright for Socrates to break confidence with them? Dworkin contends, "In practice, the legislature will have the keep going word on what a singular's rights are yet that does not imply that the administration's perspective is fundamentally the right view".
By Socrates keeping his end of the guarantee to the legislature, he accept that the administration
…show more content…
Socrates' second contention is the Principle of Filial Piety.
Socrates' first preface for the contention is that the relationship between a state and a resident is like the relationship between a guardian and a tyke.
The thought of "Perfectibility" gets to be more risky when Socrates analyzes the relationship of a subject and its state to a youngster and its parent: "In ignoring us he is defying his guardians we are the creators of his instruction".
Socrates practiced his rights as a subject and was rebuffed, be that as it may, as per Dworkin's thought the state committed an error when detaining him for talking his brain.
On the off chance that this were the situation, then why did Socrates talk against the state? The Filial Piety contention gets to be risky as Socrates repudiates his own particular activities of talking against government officials.
To finish up, I accept that Socrates ought to escape from jail on the grounds that the Principle of Fidelity expect that a law is constantly
Crito is about Socrates and his wealthy friend who tries to pursued him to break out of jail because its injustice that he is in there from the beginning. Crito presents a couple of arguments to convince Socrates to leave. His first argument Crito says, if you die you will be sending the people who are killing you a message that they can do whatever they want. Also they would o after your followers. Secondly you will leave two of your sons without a father. Socrates answers, “we should not give so much thought to what the majority of people will say about us, but think instead of what the person who understands just and unjust things will say-the one man and the truth itself” (Crito, 48a). The means, people should not worry about opinion of the public and only listen to the wise men. "And that while it is impious to violate the will of your mother or father , it is yet less so than to violate that of your fatherland."(51c.Crito) And then Socrates introduces the Voice of the Laws of Athens saying if I break one law it seems I break all laws so in doing so he did not break the law on the principle of others should follow the law and off saying “we should not give so much thought to what the majority of people will say about us, but think instead of what the person who understands just and unjust things will say-the one man and the truth itself” (Crito, 48a.5). Furthermore he says people will listen to the law and will not break
As a defender of civic virtue, the significance of obligation and authority of one’s representative government epitomizes the magnitude of respect that Socrates had for Athenian Jurisprudence, irrespective of the fact that he was prosecuted against. In the accounts of the Apology and Crito, there exists a plethora of evidence that demonstrate Socrates’s adherence of institutionalized authority. His loyalty of the Athenian State derives from his notion that the obligation to surrender to the law manifests a just society. One may ask, “how is it possible for a persecuted man to continue to profess allegiance to a polity that sought his trial and execution”? Though many would not have the capacity to sustain such integrity, Socrates had his reasons in
More importantly, Socrates’s relationship to the state is made clear during the dialogue with his friend Crito, when speaking as if Socrates is the state himself. When asking how important the state is, the law asks; “Is your…country to be honored more than…all your ancestors…that it counts for more among the gods and sensible men, that you must worship it…?” Rather than a statement, Socrates makes his point that the law must be upheld, even in his case of a death sentence. It is important to note that Socrates accepted his fate, even though he felt the accusations against him were false. Yet, as if speaking on behalf of the law, recognized that escaping would only turn those untruthful indictments into the truth, and as a destroyer of laws; “You will strengthen the conviction of the jury that they passed the right sentence on you.” By the definition of the word martyr, as one who dies for a cause, in this instance the laws of the state,
To this question, first Socrates says that he should not revenge injustice. Because doing injustice is bad in any circumstances (Crito 49b), to return injustice just because of having injustice done onto himself would bad also (Crito 49c). Therefore Socrates should not commit injustice just to get even with Athens. Injustice is bad because it harms, and disobedience to the law would harm the city (Crito 50b); so it seems that to disobey the law would be an injustice. But why should Socrates obey the law of the city? Socrates reasons that since the city has done him great benefactions, such as giving birth to his life, taking care of his physical upbringing and his education, and granting him long years of benefits from the legal system (Crito 50e - 51c), Socrates owns the state a strong duty of gratitude just as a child would own to his father. One of those duties is to obey the state (like how a child obeys his parents), which always has included the possibility of death such as in times of war (Crito 51b). Socrates should obey the city because he has made an agreement to do so. This agreement is the social contract that he has implicitly accepted and lived under for 70 years. This contract is legitimate because Socrates had a thorough understanding of the legal system (Crito 51e - 52a), he did not leave the city when he was given the fair chance all his life (Crito 51 c-e), and that he
While stating these reasons, Socrates was looking at it from the perspective of the state. He explained these reasons as if he was talking to the state, discussing why it is important to obey the law. Neglecting and disobeying that law is unfavorable because you agreed not to. Breaking a just law is problematic.
To Socrates laws only have meaning because the people give them meaning and only by following the laws do we see the actual value of them. According to Socrates the relationship of the people and the states are like that of a child and their parents. He claims that state raises the people by guiding them with laws giving them order and educates the people of what’s right and what’s wrong. Socrates does not believe in disobeying the law to set examples as you would not disobey your parents just to prove a point. Socrates is appreciative for what state has done for him and feels as if it is his duty and obligation to repay them or show gratitude to the state by following its laws.
The first argument the laws make is that if Socrates were to escape, he would destroy the laws the city had set. They argue that if private individuals nullified the laws, there would be no point in having them, and the state would be in turmoil (50b). The argument continues with the laws stating that they had cared for Socrates, giving him education, nourishment, and even birth (50e). The laws relate their relationship with Socrates to that of a father and son and state that it would be wrong to retaliate against one’s own family. In addition, Socrates had chosen to live in the state and because of that, he chose to abide by its laws (51d).
Socrates, at the other end of the spectrum, saw politics as a wasted venture for him because his life was devoted to a quest for knowledge. He stated his way of life, which conflicts with that of Pericles' model, to differ from that of the democratic system of Athens because he saw the government to be corrupt and the majority to not be just. Socrates did not bother to lead a life of servitude to the ideals of the state because he showed through his actions that an unexamined life without critical thinking was not a life at all. As is made clear by the admittance of Socrates himself, his defense plea is the first time he has appeared in a court of law, even by the age of seventy. Socrates' life was dedicated to the pursuit of further comprehension and debate with the Athenian people on the deeper issues of life, not to a court
Socrates was being guided by his moral beliefs when he decided not to escape from prison. Socrates informs us of his principle when he says, “[…] my first principle, that neither injury
This paper argues that Socrates makes a plausible case for justice. Socrates raised two main questions in the first two books of Plato’s Republic, what is justice? And why should we act justly? Thrasymachus and Glaucon both have different and more negative views of justice than Socrates. Throughout books one and two, Socrates, Glaucon and Thrasymachus go back and forth discussing the definition and application of justice in society. He starts his discussions with Glaucon and Thrasymachus by stating simply, “What is justice?”
He proclaims that “examining both myself and others is really the very best thing that a man can do, and that life without this sort of examination is not worth living” (Plato 66). Socrates believes that the government will be able to change so that people who value goodness and truth would be in power. However, later in the Apology, Socrates contradicts himself when he explains why he has led a mostly private life, saying that “if I had long ago attempted to take part in politics, I should have died long ago” (Plato 58). Socrates believes “a man who really fights for justice must lead a private, not a public, life” (Plato 59). This goes against what he has been saying for the rest of the trial and demonstrates the unrealistic quality of the high standards to which he holds the government and leaders. If Socrates says it is dangerous for proponents of justice to live a public life, it becomes extremely difficult for politicians to be virtuous and morally good, since politicians live essentially their whole lives in the public sphere. It is not realistic for Socrates to believe that the government of Athens could progress so that good people hold the power, when he has shown that in his own experience and observations it is not safe for good people to hold public positions.
Socrates would rather be punished or die before he breaks the laws that were set forth by his state, and this he says later in the same passage, “I should run any risk on the side of law and justice rather than join you. (Cahn pg. 38 Apology b10-c2).”
Socrates demonstrates throughout his defense speech that he simply wants to plant the seed of philosophical questioning within Athenian society to better enhance their establishment. He still possesses the utmost respect for law and order; he never technically violates any bureaucratic power, nevertheless, he is slightly guilty of the charges brought against him. However, he had pure intentions in the aim of shedding a light towards some flawed mechanics within the Athenian system in hopes to enhance it. Socrates mentions in his speech, “In addition to these things, the young who follow me of their own accord- those who have the most leisure, the sons of the wealthiest- enjoy hearing human things examined. And they themselves often imitate me, and in turn they attempt to examine others” (Apology, 72).
In his hypothetical argument with the law, the law states that his idea that because the courts wronged him, he should not now wrong them because the two parties are not equal. The Athenian government believes that is is bad to wrong your country because they have given him everything: his life, education and nurturing as they did with his ancestors. This argument tells Socrates, how the gods want him to care about his country more than his own family and though he does not fear death he does think of judgement from the gods.
A philosophical attitude toward life should play a major part in our lives. It is crucial for us as humans to learn and accept lessons learned through the experience of life. If you do not “examine your life” then what do you learn and what do you gain? Socrates’ in “The Trial and Death of Socrates” he details this in many ways. We can pull all the evidence and ideas we need from this text written by Plato. In the 3 parts Euthyphro, Apology and Crito many conclusions are made and there is much to learn from this text. Some of the most important parts allude to this idea of living life with a philosophical attitude. The book begins with the search for the definition of piety. In the apology Socrates’ details his side of the argument showing everyone the power of his own ideas and that is proved by his execution and finally in the Crito his commitment to his way of life is the last point that Socrates’ made. This text is chalked full of life lessons but the most important is the one that urges people to live their lives while never stopping to learn and think.