preview

The Guilty Of Socrates Argument In Crito

Good Essays

In Plato’s dialogue, Crito, Socrates is in prison awaiting his execution. This punishment is due to the fact that he was perceived as corrupting the youth of Athens, as well as being impious. In this dialogue, Crito visits Socrates while he is in prison. Crito is a friend of Socrates who has planned to break Socrates out of prison and save him from his punishment. Socrates refuses to leave, as it is not the just thing to do. Socrates, using the Elenchus method, and influencing Crito to believe that it is never right to harm an individual, or break a just contract, dissuades him from following through with his plan to free his imprisoned friend. In this paper, I will take the stance that Socrates’ argument is faulty due to a logical inconsistency, in turn, making his argument not sound. Socrates’ argument also leads to undesirable consequences that, while remaining non-contradictory with Plato’s other writings, can lead to a breakdown of the justice system since Socrates seems to believe that one must accept the verdict of the Athenian legal …show more content…

The first premise of his argument states that one must never to harm to another (49b9). Following this premise, he claims that even if one is harmed, it is never just to retaliate against that harm with another harm (49c9 – 49d1). Both of these premises are agreed upon by Socrates and Crito. Socrates’ third premise states that if one has a just agreement with someone else, one ought to fulfill it (49e6 – 49e8). From these three premises, he comes to his first conclusion, which states that if Socrates and Crito were to leave the city without its permission, they would be doing harm to people whom they should not be harming. He also concludes that they are failing to fulfill a just agreement that has been agreed upon between the city and Socrates (49e9- 50a2). Crito is unsure if this is truly the case, and cannot agree or disagree with

Get Access