The Death of Socrates

Since his accusers sentenced him to death when he was telling the truth, they are wicked. When someone is wicked, they are bad and should be avoided. When they die, they would not have a good place to go after death while Socrates would have a good place to go. Socrates is not a person who live an immoral life, but rather, his accusers are the one’s who live immoral lives. The person who speaks the truth and lives a just life is someone we should strive to be rather than someone who tries to get off an accusation by going off from the investigation or lying.

In conclusion, I believe that it is blaspheme that Socrates is accused of corrupting Athenian’s children’s mind. He should not have received the death penalty, but I do understand it was by preference. I think that Socrates let his opinions get in the way of clear judgment when Crito tried to help him escape. However, I do realize why Socrates did not want to escape. 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.

Even though many people may argue that Socrates should not have escaped; Socrates was an old man and would have died anyway. He would rather become a martyr who highlights the problems with Athenian democracy than seem like a coward and escape. In another word, Socrates’ sacrifice was necessary in order to highlight the injustices of society at that point in time. But I still believe that Socrates should have at least fought for his life and not just submitted so readily to his punishment. The end result could still be the same, or even better.

Socrates did the right thing by not escaping from jail because if he had escaped he would be contradicting everything he ever believed and said, and that would be the worst possible thing for Socrates. Socrates was one of the few men who refused to escape jail while he knew that he was going to be punished by means of death. This was a very noble thing of him to do and it was the correct decision. During his last days, Crito tried to convince Socrates to escape. Then the two men had a discussion about what was right and wrong.

Therefore, if Socrates were to break the laws, it would be inappropriate and not a correct use of civil disobedience. The most important part to the definition of civil disobedience is that whatever is being done, is for the achievement of a better society. In King’s case, he was given a validated reason, being in an unfair societal contract, to break laws in order to show how unjust they are to the people who instil them. King never accepted his societal contract because he truly disagreed with it, and therefore he he broke those laws in which he believed were unjust. Socrates had an issue with the social code and not the societal contract.

Because he dismantled all of Crito’s arguments, he proved that there is no reason not to follow the laws. The laws raised him. He... ... middle of paper ... ... said by King is that, “Society must protect the robbed and punish the robber.” So, although he may have felt that it was wrong for Socrates to be in jail, and that society was punishing the wrong person, he believed that it was like a march and therefore a positive thing for Socrates to do. With this, I feel that he would agree with the Laws of Athens because they are just laws themselves. It was man that put Socrates in jail and made him drink hemlock, not the laws.

Escaping would essentially nullify his teaching of morals and honor and his reasons for living. Socrates had a few reasons for accepting his punishments and not escaping the death sentence that he was handed. In hopes to convince Socrates to escape prison, his friend Crito visited him in prison before he was put to death. Crito initially began pleading with Socrates to escape because he did not want to lose a friend and he was afraid that people would think that he... ... middle of paper ... ...dditionally, Socrates believed that escaping would show that the people who tried him and found him guilty that they had in fact done the right thing. This would further their assumptions that he was corrupting the minds of people by running away and disobeying the law.

Socrates does concede that as a majority, the general public has the power to put people to death, but he states that the most important thing is not living, but living a good life, so that it is not worth following the opinion of the majority if it means sacrificing something that is important for living a good life (48b). just to have life isn’t considered living to Socrates. He continues to explain the principle of life is to live well, escaping prison would label him an outlaw stripping Socrates the ability to fulfill Gods

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.

This is because all have been done for a good cause and to encourage the Athenians to pursue a good life. The Apology gives an account of Socrates defense, while the Crito is another account of how Crito, one of Socrates friends went to jail to persuade him to escape. Crito among other of his friends feared that if Socrates was executed, the public would say that they did nothing to help their friend. Yet, Socrates does not concur with this way of doing things. He believes that no one should worry about what others think but as he said in the defense, he is ready to lose his life as long as he is pursuing what is good.