The Crito Analysis

Socrates then goes on to explain that his friends would raise his children, as he would wish. Also, he would be a mockery to his followers if he were to go against his own preaching. Lastly, the guilty verdict may be wrong and unfair, but it was the wrongdoing of man and not the laws, so why should he disobey the laws? He feels a state cannot exist without laws that are followed. Because he dismantled all of Crito’s arguments, he proved that there is no reason not to follow the laws.

Crito tries to change Socrates mind about escaping by presenting him with several arguments. The first is that if Socrates choices to stay, his death will reflect poorly on Crito. The people will think that Crito did nothing to save his friend. If Socrates is worried about the risk or the financial cost to Crito; it’s an expense that he is willing to pay, and that he made arrangements for Socrates to live a life of exile in a pleasant manner. The next argument that Crito pleads to Socrates is that, if he stays, he would be helping his enemies in their injustices, and in turn would make Socrates act in an unjustly manner himself.

Crito By Plato Plato's Crito takes place after Socrates is condemned to death and sitting in his jail cell. Crito is Socrates' good friend and has come to visit Socrates in the hopes of convincing his old friend to escape. But Socrates logically refutes Crito's argument. Crito begins his argument by bringing bad news to Socrates, relating to him that the ship from Delos is approaching and, with it, the hour of his mandated death. Socrates seems resigned to his fated death, but Crito attempts to persuade him to allow his friends to help him escape prison and flee Athens.

According to Socrates, the only opinion that he is willing to consider would be that of the state. “...if you go forth, returning evil for evil, and injury for injury,...we shall be angry with you ... ... middle of paper ... ... state of Athens, constitutes disobedience against the state. He argues that obeying the state is a requirement right up until death. He says that by not obeying the state that he was raised in, it's like not obeying his parents that raised him. Socrates was a man who stuck to his commitment to truth, morality and philosophy over life.

The laws create order, and undermining them for a single citizen would be a crime against his country (51a). Country, Socrates says, is honored by the gods and more important that honoring one’s mother and father (51b). Socrates, then, should not break the law because he would be willingly committing injustice against the state. A state that has been good to him, that he was a citizen in, and raised sons in (52d). Also, by escaping, he would be proving his accusers right, because one that did not obey the law and escaped his punishment would be seen as a criminal, which is what his accusers want him to be seen as.

Socrates made valid points by declaring that he does not believe in vengeances, disbeliefs in public opinions, and the personification of the Athenian government being seen as a father figure; as well as, not wanting to exile from his homeland. Although, these moral values were instilled in his mind he still could have chosen banishment instead to save his life to continue educating people. Therefore, even though Socrates is not physically alive, his philosophy continues.

One reason Socrates refused to run away is because of what might happen to his friends that helped him, like loosing everything they own. His second argument is that public opinion is not always right and that he should follow the advice of a qualified person and not the advice of the general public “Than he should be afraid of the criticism and welcome the praise of the qualified person, but not those of the general public. Crito agrees to this argument. Next Socrates ask Crito if is right that never one should do willingly wrong, or it depends on the circumstance. Based on this question Socrates continues to his final and most important argument that he must respect the State and the Laws.

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 nor retaliation not warding off evil by evil is ever right.”(1). Retaliation and injuring other people is what Socrates did not lived by. For this reason, Socrates knew that if he were to escape, the state would prosecute his family and friends. Consequently, Socrates was afraid that the state would harm his family by depriving them of property or citizenship.

Crito is trying to persuade Socrates to escape not only because Crito feels he will lose a beloved friend, but also because he feels the majority will judge him for valuing himself over Socrates. In the passage, Socrates states many arguments to try and explain to Crito that the opinions of the majority do not and should not matter. The most compelling argument Socrates gives for this claim is when he states, “I am the kind of man who listens only to the argument that on reflection seems best to me” (Socrates, The Crito pg.4). I agree with Socrates’s claim not only because the words from the wise and the intelligent are far more likely to be sound, but also because listening to the knowledgeable is more likely to lead you to a more fulfilling

Crito does not understand the madness of Socrates, and would like nothing more than to help his dear friend escape to freedom. "…I do not think that what you are doing is right, to give up your life when you can save it, and to hasten your fate as your enemies would hasten it, and indeed have hastened it in their wish to destroy you. "(Crito p.48d) Plato introduces several pivotal ideas through the dialogue between Crito and Socrates. The first being that a person must decide whether the society in which he lives has a just reasoning behind its’ own standards of right and wrong. The second being that a person must have pride in the life that he leads.