In “Crito”, we might’ve imagined that the dialogue would argue against obeying the laws. However, given Plato’s view on Athenian democracy he finds justification to support the laws regardless of the will of the people. In this paper I will assess Plato’s arguments for why Socrates should remain in prison and accept his death sentence. My main focus will be on Socrates primary argument, which is solely based on the premise that doing unjust actions harm’s one’s soul, and life is not living with a ruined soul. From that statement, I however, believe Socrates should escape Prison for he has not done anything to physically harm the people of Athens. The dialogue commence with Crito, Socrates old friend, whom goes to visit Socrates in his prison cell where he awaits for execution. Crito originally made arrangements to sneak Socrates out of prison and safely to exile. However, Socrates was quite at ease awaiting for his execution and so then Crito begins to present as many arguments as he can to convince Socrates to escape. He gives as his reason if Socrates refuses to escape and is put to death, he will lose a true friend who can never be replaced and many …show more content…
In Plato, Socrates crime was described as harming public by being accused of a natural philosopher and not believing in Athenian Gods, corrupting the youth. One must understand that there are two classifications of crime. Those crimes that we agree not to commit because doing so will harm others. Example: rape, murder, fraud, assault and etc. And then you have the crimes where it consists of acts that do not harm others by their performance but could harm through secondary effects. Take drugs for a prime example, the use of drugs doesn’t harm another person but once that person is heavy on a particular drug, then the user might hurt someone
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
In the Dialogue Crito, Socrates employs his Elenchus to examine the notion of justice and one’s obligation to justice. In the setting of the dialogue, Socrates has been condemned to die, and Crito comes with both the hopes and the means for Socrates to escape from prison. When Socrates insists that they should examine whether he should escape or not, the central question turns into whether if it is unjust to disobey laws. Socrates’ ultimate answer is that it is unjust; he makes his argument by first showing that it’s wrong to revenge injustice, then arguing that he has made an agreement with the city’s law for its benefits, and finally reasoning that he
The dialogue is set in the prison cell of Socrates, where he calmly waits for his execution. Before dawn, he is visited by Crito, an old and loyal friend of his. There, Crito lets him know that he has bribed the guards and made arrangements to smuggle Socrates out of prison and into safety. However, Socrates seems rather unmoved, and insists that he must stay in anticipation for his own execution. Crito presents an onslaught of arguments as to why Socrates must escape.1 Then Socrates rebuttals2, refusing Crito’s pleas from him to save himself and escape the prison. Next, Socrates brings in the voice of the Law of Athens, citing that it speaks to him, saying that it would be unjust for him to leave his cell. Since the laws exist as one collective
The Crito and the Republic were both works of Plato. Plato’s works were divided into early, middle and late dialogues. The Crito falls into the category of the formal while the Republic falls into the category of the latter. In his early dialogues, Plato was influenced by Socratic philosophy but as he ages, he starts to develop his distinct and independent philosophy. Justice is the fundamental concept that will be discussed in this paper. The scope of discussion will mainly revolve around the Crito, the Apology and the Republic. In Socrates’ submission and acceptance of his sentence lies the implication that Socrates agrees with democracy as a political system. Plato, on the other hand,
Socrates has presented a period of questions and answers through dialogue with Crito to examine if he going into exile will damage his reputation. Socrates questions and answers with Crito establishes that a person must decide whether the society he or she lives has a just reasoning behind it's own standards of right and wrong and that a person must have pride in the life that he or she leads. By confirming these two concepts through questions, Socrates attempted to prove to his companion Crito, that the choice that he has made is just: "I am the kind of man who listens only to the argument that on reflection seems best to me. I cannot, now that this fate has come upon me, discard the arguments I used;
In Plato’s The Republic and The Apology, the topic of justice is examined from multiple angles in an attempt to discover what justice is, as well as why living a just life is desirable. Plato, writing through Socrates, identifies in The Republic what he thought justice was through the creation of an ideal city and an ideal soul. Both the ideal city and the ideal soul have three components which, when all are acting harmoniously, create what Socrates considers to be justice. Before he outlines this city and soul, he listens to the arguments of three men who hold popular ideas of the period. These men act to legitimize Socrates’ arguments because he finds logical errors in all of their opinions. In The Apology, a different, more down-to-Earth, Socrates is presented who, through his self-defense in court, reveals a different, even contradictory, view of the justice presented in The Republic. In this paper, the full argument of justice from The Republic will be examined, as well as the possible inconsistencies between The Republic and The Apology.
In The Crito by Socrates, both Crito and Socrates present arguments, one that Socrates should escape prison, and one that he should not. Crito’s argument contains logic fallacies that undermine his argument and make it weak. Therefore, Socrates argument that he should remain in prison and face his death is valid and strong, and is better than Crito’s.
In life, people are guided by moral beliefs and principles. Whether their beliefs are good or bad, their decisions are based on them. In Plato “The Crito”, Socrates emphasizes his moral beliefs and principles when he decides not to escape from prison. Although Socrates had the opportunity to escape his death sentence, he chose not to do so because he had a moral obligation to commit a sacrifice.
The next argument that Crito address to Socrates; is does he fear of putting his friends endangering or at an inconvenience for escaping. Crito and others friends are willing to face the danger of this and understand the risk. Crito doesn’t want Socrates to fear living in exile because he can ensure that Socrates will leave in comfort. Several wealthy men have been willing to put their money to aid Socrates and to also ensure his protection. Crito believes that Socrates’ behavior is a poor refection on Socrates himself as a friend
In Plato’s works Apology and Crito there is an attempt by Socrates to defend himself in court and defend his choice to receive the death penalty when found guilty. Although he makes very valid and strong arguments throughout one can only wonder why such a wise person would choose death over life. The following essay will analyze three quotes from Apology and Crito, find the correlation between them, and reveal any flaws that may exsist inside these arguments made by Socrates.
Before dawn, Socrates is visited by his old friend Crito, who made arrangements to sneak Socrates out of prison to the safety. Crito presents as many arguments as he can in order to persuade Socrates to escape, Socrates seems quite willing to await his execution . The Death of Socrates will look bad on his friends because people will think no one did anything to try to save him. His friends are willing to pay, and they also will try to find Socrates a comfortable life in exile so Socrates should not worry about the financial cost to his friends On a ethical level, Crito says two more arguments: first, if he stayed, he would be aiding his enemies in wronging him unjustly, and would be acting unjustly to himself; and second, that he would be leaving his kids with no father by just abandoning
Plato’s account of Socrates’ defense against charges of corrupting the youth and heresy, reveal the ancient teacher’s view of justice as fairness and support of rule of law. In the Apology, Socrates faces a moral dilemma: to either accept his punishment for crimes he did not commit or to accept the assistance of his friends and escape death by the hand of the state. His choice to accept death in order to maintain rule of law reveals his belief of justice. He beliefs his punishment to be just not because he committed the crimes but because his sentence came through a legal process to which he consented. By sparing his life, he would weaken the justice system of Athens which he values above his own existence. This difference between the two men’s beliefs regarding justice draws the sharpest contrast in their views of effective leadership and government.
In Plato’s Crito Socrates argues that it would be wrong for him to escape from prison. Speaking to his friend Cirto, Socrates explains that escaping from prison would go against many of his beliefs. Socrates believes in seeking the truth, not repaying a wrong with another wrong, and obeying the laws of the state. He also states that escaping from prison would ruin his reputation and is in best interest for everyone. Crito brings up many arguments to Socrates trying to convince him to escape. Crito tries to appeal to Socrates in many different ways and bombards him with many arguments. Every argument that Crito brings up to Socrates, he answers with carful thinking and analysis. Crito appeals to Socrates emotions by stating that his friends and family will be lost without him. He
In Plato’s Five Dialogues Crito had planned Socrates escape from jail and all he had left to do was convince Socrates to go with
In this paper, I will show why Socrates’ arguments on choosing to stay in prison is better than Crito’s argument. As an inexperienced reader in philosophy, I believe it would be difficult for a reader to choose a side. This is because both sides of their arguments can be easily refuted. Thus, the question to be answered is: Whose argument is more effective? Socrates’ arguments yield to specific scenarios that shows how his action could harm the state of Athens and his future life whereas Crito’s arguments are narrower and geared more to himself. Hence, after meticulous analysis, Socrates made the right decision by staying in prison and not letting Crito convincing him to commit an unjust action.