Introduction Socrates argues in the Crito that he shouldn't escape his death sentence because it isn't just. Crito is distressed by Socrates reasoning and wishes to convince him to escape since Crito and friends can provide the ransom the warden demands. If not for himself, Socrates should escape for the sake of his friends, sons, and those who benefit from his teaching. Socrates and Crito's argument proceeds from this point. As an aside, I would like to note that, though I believe that a further objection could be made to Socrates conclusions in “The Philosopher's Defense”, due to space considerations, I didn't write the fourth section “Failure of the Philosopher's Defense”. I.Explanation of the Philospher's Argument Socrates' response to Crito's question “Why don't you escape if I'll provide you the means?” is that the primary criterion for moral action is justice, and escaping would be unjust, so he should not escape. Socrates reasons that if he were to escape, this would break the system of law enforcement since avoiding punishment when a city has deemed it necessary makes the law ineffectual if there is no consequence for breaking it. He would be a 'destroyer' of the law (Crito, 51a), an injustice he does not wish to commit. II.Objection to the Philosopher's Argument Socrates concern that breaking the law would make law ineffectual is a valid one, but Crito would argue a more global perspective on Socrates' escaping: what are the net effects of Socrates accepting his death sentence? It would be a misfortune for all his friends, any people that benefit from his teaching, and he would be leaving his sons prematurely (Crito, 44c). Though Crito doesn't develop this point further, it could be easily extended: no one “be... ... middle of paper ... ... Socrates reaches a conclusion that defies a common-sense understanding of justice. Nothing about his death sentence “seems” just, but after further consideration, we find that his escape would be as fruitless as his death, and that in some sense, Socrates owes his obedience to whatever orders Athens gives him since he has benefited from his citizenship. Despite these convincing arguments, he does make a few points that don't hold water, such as that he would destroy the law if he were to escape – this is an exaggerated claim that invites refutation. Also, though his escape would be in general fruitless to himself and his comrades, further argument might contend that citizens of other cities would benefit from his teaching, and act as a civilizing force. However, due to space considerations of this essay, I didn't write a fourth section. Works Cited Crito Apology
Socrates was a one of the first philosophers and teachers known to Western philosophy. He lived in Athens Greece from 470 – 399 B.C. and is studied to this day because of his insights and understanding of the way people should live. Towards the end of his life, Socrates was accused of a myriad of crimes including criminal meddling and the corruption of the minds of the young. Eventually, Socrates was found guilty of his crimes and shortly after he was condemned to death. During the time of his incarceration, he was visited by a friend known as Crito to discuss the matter of his death in addition to the proposal of escape from prison. Crito initially believed that it would be in Socrates best interest to escape prison and live in exile instead of facing death. Socrates, however, had a different view on escape and chose not to flee. Instead, he faced his sentence and explained his reasoning to be what he believed was right. Escaping could have been feasible for a few different reasons including instances such as his children and the people that he taught. For the type of teacher that he was, his reasons for not escaping are understandable and respectable, and he believed that escaping was wrong. Since he believed it wrong, it was good that Socrates chose not to escape. Escaping would essentially nullify his teaching of morals and honor and his reasons for living.
Socrates lived in a political system. In order for someone to survive in a political system, it is helpful to obey the laws of the system, or city. Did Socrates follow these laws? According to the facts, no. He was indeed put to death because he broke them. But when looking at Crito, I wonder if he even intended or noticed the laws he broke to deserve him death. In Crito, Socrates follows the laws and does not escape, as recommended. If he was such a criminal to deserve death, why didn't he escape? Socrates viewed the laws with his own reference. It is obvious that he does not see any law being broken such as corrupting the youth. If he did see this crime take place I think he would not of defended himself. Socrates was a proud man, even though he did not sho...
Socrates refuses to disobey the law. He believes in the correctness of the cities laws. He believes it is never right to act unjustly. He thinks that if you do not agree with the laws of the area that you are living at, then to leave and go somewhere else. He argues that the government could be seen as “his parents, also those who brought him up,” (Crito, 51e), since he has lived there his entire life and when you live somewhere for so long you should “persuade us or to do what we say,” (Crito, 52a) or leave. Socrates tells Crito that
...st of his life. Then when Socrates pass away, he will be harshly judged in the afterlife for behaving in an unjust manner towards his state’s laws. Thus, this is why he will not try to escape and based on his reasoning Crito has been convinced that it would be better for Socrates not attempt an escape.
Plato's "Crito" begins with Socrates in prison due to his sentence by his Athenian peers, he awakes to find Crito in his cell; Crito had bribed the guards to the prison. Crito then tries to convince Socrates to escape to Thessaly, where he can have a safe life. Socrates was not easily convinced as he believed that he should suffer his punishment even if it is unjust, wanting his death to be an example for the jurors and those of Athens. Crito pleas to Socrates with a number of arguments, standing against his enemies in Athens (politicians, craftsman, etc), for the
Though Socrates has been unjustly incarcerated, he refuses to escape due to his implied agreement with the Athenian legal system. This paper serves to argue that Socrates’ line of reasoning to Crito does not properly address actions committed under an unjust legal system.
In Plato’s dialogue Crito, you can find Crito offering escape from demise to Socrates. This would be enough to make most men succumb to their survival instinct and flea but Socrates takes a different path. Socrates reasons through the escape with Crito. He logically comes to the fact that one shouldn’t do wrong when wronged or do harm when harmed (49b-c). He then draws the conclusion that escaping prison would harm the citizens, laws, and whole city of Athens (50b). As Athens is his home, Socrates feels he owes everything to his city, he feels compelled to follow the laws and decisions of its courts. He likens a home city to a parent, saying that to bring violence against one’s city would be sacrilegious as it would be with a parent (51c). In Socrates’ mind he would not wrong Athens because it made him the man he stands to be. All the knowledge, wisdom, and high regard he holds is because of Athens, and so he refuses to
When Socrates was sentenced to death, his friend Crito offers to help him escape, but he refuse to escape. He explains to Crito that if he were to escape he would be running away his whole life. He would stay at Athens and comply with the sentence as set by Athens law and die for his cause. Another reason that he gave Crito for not escaping was that he was already death alive and that he was too old to be running away .
This means that the opinion of the majority is not worth noting if it results in a ruined soul. Therefore, when the moral question is brought up about whether escaping is the right or wrong thing to do, Socrates thoroughly assess the outcome. He came to the conclusion that escaping will not only cause him harm, but will cause harm to his city of Athens as well, because as he sees it, by living there his entire life, in a way, meant that he signed a social contact. The idea of a social contract “, an implicit agreement among the members of a society to cooperate for social benefits,” (Oxford) further strengthens Socrates argument for anti-retaliation because he personifies Athens in a role of a caregiver. Athens is a place that nurtured Socrates and molded him into the person he is, just like a parent does with their own child. And just like any good child will do if their parent was to hit them, is not to retaliate against them in the same physical manner because of the respect and love that is there. Furthermore, Crito mentions that it was fellow Athenian wrongdoers that put him in there, therefore, if Socrates decides not to leave then he behaves unfairly to himself. However, for Socrates retaliating against unjust is an act of unjust and that is certainly the opposite of what he is trying to live by, so he stands his ground and does not leave the prison
The basis for arguing against escaping is explained by Socrates to Crito. While Crito believes that there should be no questions involved in breaking Socrates out of jail, Socrates believes otherwise. The foundation that Socrates argues on, is that breaking out would do so against The Laws of Athens. Socrates makes the point that breaking the laws would in turn lead to other civilized states banning him from living there. Socrates is also concerned that if he we to break the rules, that the underworld would judge him harshly for his actions against his city’s laws.
According to Crito, there are three major reasons as to why Socrates should escape from the prison. Notably, Crito offers lame self centered excuses for Socrates escape. Indeed, two of the reasons do not stand ground whereas the third concentrates on the victim’s responsibility to his offspring. Crito begins by proposing Socrates escape because failing to do so will doubly hurt him. Firstly, Crito enjoys a warm and cordial friendship with Socrates. Therefore, his execution would distraught and melancholy him. On the other hand, Crito says that the execution of Socrates will harm his reputation. People will tantalize, taunt and jeer him for valuing his monies more than the life of his friend. This is because Crito can bribe Socrates way out of prison. According to Crito, the population will be prejudicial to him un...
For these two articles that we read in Crito and Apology by Plato, we could know Socrates is an enduring person with imagination, because he presents us with a mass of contradictions: Most eloquent men, yet he never wrote a word; ugliest yet most profoundly attractive; ignorant yet wise; wrongfully convicted, yet unwilling to avoid his unjust execution. Behind these conundrums is a contradiction less often explored: Socrates is at once the most Athenian, most local, citizenly, and patriotic of philosophers; and yet the most self-regarding of Athenians. Exploring that contradiction, between Socrates the loyal Athenian citizen and Socrates the philosophical critic of Athenian society, will help to position Plato's Socrates in an Athenian legal and historical context; it allows us to reunite Socrates the literary character and Athens the democratic city that tried and executed him. Moreover, those help us to understand Plato¡¦s presentation of the strange legal and ethical drama.
He states that if he were to escape he would not be living honorably which he describes in Plato 's “Apology” as living a unexamined life and to him he would much rather die. Socrates states, “one must not even do wrong when one is wronged, which most people regard as the natural course” (Plato, 268). Socrates even though his sentence maybe biased and not morally right still believes that he must follow what he is condemned to. Through this he implies that even if we are cheated of fairness we must still do what is honorable and not fight it. He explains that the majority of people in his case would justify it to escape because they were sentenced for something that is completely moral. I disagree with Socrates in that if I was in his place, I would gain freedom and face my enemies for they wronged
...uments are completely different. Crito wants Socrates to escape because he doesn’t deserve to die because he did nothing wrong. Socrates argues back that if he escapes he will be breaking the law. Which is the thing that he is trying to uphold. Socrates believes that escaping will go against all the things he has been arguing and teaching the youth.
...ns. Why would he do this if he did not see the laws of Athens as just? In order to fulfill the agreement he has made with Athenian law, Socrates must accept the punishment he is given, though he feels that his being punished is Athens wronging him. It would be wrong, by his view, to escape from prison, though he would not be pursued, because he would be breaking his agreement to obey Athenian law. Since he and Crito previously agreed that one must never do wrong, he simply must stay in jail until his death. This is merely one example of the way in which Socrates uses a method of logical dialogue in order to make his point. He appears to be unmatched in his skills of deduction and consistently demonstrates his love of knowledge and truth. Socrates exemplifies all that is philosophy, both as a student and a teacher, because of his constant, active pursuit of wisdom.