While his friend Crito advocates for his escape, Socrates believes that disobeying the law would be morally wrong and undermine the state's authority and laws. As Socrates asserts, "Do you think it possible for a city to continue in existence and not be turned upside down if the legal judgments pronounced in it have no force but are nullified and destroyed by private individuals?" Socrates believes that by living in Athens and enjoying its benefits, he has entered into a social contract that obligates him to follow the city's laws, even if they are unjust. Socrates believed that fleeing prison or disobeying the law violated his principles and society's social contract. He believed breaching the law would harm society and weaken the state because the state's goal was to promote the common good, and laws protected everyone's interests.
Socrates states that if one does not agree with the contract that you tacitly agreed to that one must either try and persuade the state to change or follow the rules that they have. Socrates tried to sway the court on his ruling and failed, he now feels obligated to follow through with the ruling and accept the punishment that he was given. He also realizes that if he did not like the rules and regulations of Athens that he had the choice to leave and reside in another city. Socrates knows that since he has lived in Athens for many years and benefited from the goods and services of Athens he feels obligated to give Athens his
Political activists and philosophers alike have a challenging task of determining the conditions under which citizens are morally entitled to go against the law. Socrates and Martin Luther King, Jr. had different opinions on the obligation of the citizens in a society to obey the law. Although they were willing to accept the legal punishment, King believed that there are clear and definable circumstances where it would be appropriate, and sometimes mandatory, to purposely disobey unjust laws. Socrates did not. Socrates obeyed what he considered to be an unjust verdict because he believed that it was his obligation, as a citizen of Athens, to persuade or obey its Laws, no matter how dire the consequences.
In this paper I will argue that Socrates’s argument at 50a-b of the Crito would be not harming his fellow citizens by breaking the laws. Based on the readings from Plato’s The Five Dialogues, I will go over the reasoning of Socrates’ view on the good life. I will then discuss the three arguments Crito has for Socrates regarding his evasion of the death sentence including the selfish, the practicality, and the moral arguments. I will deliberate an objection to the argument and reply to the objections made in the paper and conclude with final thoughts. Socrates argues in the Crito that he should not escape or disobey the law because it is unethical.
By breaking the law his soul would be ruined and a ruined soul is not worth living with. This goes back to when he said that the really important thing is not to live but to live well. Also, when he dies he would enter Hades as an outlaw and will not be well welcomed. Therefore, he believes that he should stay and face his execution because it is better to die than to live with a ruined soul. Socrates uses all of these points to support his main argument which is that escaping jail would be morally incorrect.
Not believing in Gods Socrates did not recognize the gods, which were generally accepted in Athens. As it is known, in the community of that time some traditions and regulations were formed, and if person did not compliance them, this person acts against society. The charge was formulated as follows: "Socrates breaks the law not recognizing the gods, which recognizes the city, but recognizing the believing in some new genius" (literally "new demon"). So if in Athens laws was also traditions, and tradition was to believe in generally accepted gods, not believing in gods Socrates was breaking the law.
He reminds Crito “no human being should do injustice in return, whatever he suffers from others”(Crito, 49c). Socrates argues even if the jury's decision was unjust, it is never permissible for him to do injustice in return and therefore he will not try to escape. In essence, even though Socrates is offered the opportunity to
In Apology, Socrates faces possible execution as he stands trial in front of his fellow Athenian men. This jury of men must decide whether Socrates has acted impiously against the gods and if he has corrupted the youth of Athens. Socrates claims in his defense that he wants to live a private life, away from public affairs and teachings in Athens. He instead wants to focus on self-examination and learning truths from those in Athens through inquiry. Socrates argues that "a [man] who really fights for justice must lead a private, not a public, life if [he] is to survive for even a short time" (32a).
Socrates was a greek philosopher who found himself in trouble with his fellow citizens and court for standing his grounds on his new found beliefs from his studies about philosophical virtue, justice, and truth. In “Apology” written by Plato, Socrates defended himself in trial, not with the goal of escaping the death sentence, but with the goal of doing the right thing and standing for his beliefs. With this mindset, Socrates had no intention of kissing up to the Athenians to save his life. Many will argue that Socrates’ speech was not very effective because he did not fight for his life, he just accepted the death sentence that he was punished with. In his speech he said, “But now it’s time to leave, time for me to die and for you to live.”
I have always been a rule follower. I have absolutely no desire to get into any form of trouble. When I do get in trouble, however, I take responsibility for my actions and accept the punishment with no argument. If I were in the same situation as Socrates, I believe that it would be in my nature to remain, and I would do so in order to avoid a lifetime of anxiety and to protect my reputation. I think that the primary reason for my will to remain stems from my fear of what the rest of my life would entail.
Socrates bases this view of justice on the worth of living a good life. “And is life worth living for us with that part of us corrupted by unjust actions” (47e) If we corrupt our soul with injustice, our life would not be worth living, therefore one must never commit an injustice. “When one has come to an agreement that is just with someone, one should fulfill it.”(49e) It is this agreement with the Laws that Socrates would be violating, if he were to
Socrates, an Athenian philosopher of Ancient Greece, a man of great wisdom and knowledge, was put to death at trial, by the accusation of impiety, and corrupting the youths of society. “The Apology” written by Plato, the Defence of Socrates as it would sound, gives us an overview of what happened at the trial. Socrates had a few accusations up against him and they weren 't that simple to defend against, but that did not stop him, he came prepared and knew what he was in for, that gave him the upper hand and he was able to successfully and flawlessly defend against any accusation and statement that the accusers sent out against him. The main Accuser was Melytus, he was supported by most of the assembly and his two compatriots Anytus and Lycon.
He says, “I do not corrupt, or if I do corrupt, I do it involuntarily, so in both cases what you say is false” (26a, p. 75). He continues by saying that if he corrupts involuntarily, “the law is to bring in those in need of punishment, not learning” (26a, p. 75). This further points out Socrates’s innocence. He believes that he would need to learn of his wrongdoings rather than be punished because he doesn’t see anything wrong with his actions.
This essay is about Socrates in the Apology. Socrates was a philosopher, a religious fanatic and a man of reason who lived to questioned why things are the way they are, due to his occupation of questioning and reasoning he was later brought to court on charges of corrupting the young and encouraging people not to believe in godly things that are recognized by the state as said by his accusers. During his trial he said quite a numerous things in the Apology and he was found guilty by the juries and was sentenced to death. So, in this essay I will be explaining why he thinks that death should not be always avoided during his trial on apology. And I will be explaining my position regarding what Socrates has said that we shouldn’t always avoid death.
The Apology centered on Socrates’ justification of his actions in response to the accusations made against him by his peers, considering his dedication to the life of philosophy had earned him a fair share of critics and unpopularity. Pythian’s declaration regarding Socrates being the wisest of all was a starting point of Socrates’ defense. In disbelief because to the fact that he believed he knew nothing, Socrates was set to determine how an ignorant being such as he could possibly be named the wisest. He pursued this investigation of wisdom by striking a conversation with anyone he believed was wise. He approached politicians, poets, and craftsmen, however Socrates soon realized these people were not as wise as they portrayed themselves to be.
