In Crito, a play by Plato, Socrates and Crito deliberate about the justifications of breaking out of prison. Crito provides numerous evidences that should appeal to Socrates emotional side by bringing up his friends and family, however, Socrates maintains his composure. Instead he contributes a logical and concise argument to act justly by staying in prison and accepts his punishment for ‘corrupting the youth’, among other things. I believe that Socrates argument is most effective due to his content, which is filled with logic and reasoning to prove his premises, as well as his style; not filled with flare and insignificant common phrases. Socrates most effective strategy is his use of logos, he always uses rationale and logic to decide his next point or explain his most recent assertion. I believe the most …show more content…
His point of not listening to the majority, but rather those who understand justice and truth, gives way to his final argument that makes all of Crito’s reasoning invalid: the majority opinions of reputations give no weight in their actions, therefore they only act on what would be just, honoring Socrates agreement to Athens laws and the punishment he chose is just, thus breaking out of jail is unjust, and living an unjust life is not important. The only thing that matter is living well and that is to never stop striving for virtuous things such as goodness, truth, and justice. I believe this is still very true for people of today. Being a part of the ‘millennial’ generation is a very interesting thing because, while some of us are perpetuating the stereotype of YOLO and not caring about the future, many of us are become more and more aware of the problems and injustices of the modern world. The young adults are sparking protests and change, demanding equality, and speaking up for those kept silenced. The corrupt and unjust have held power for so long, and while they may