An argument analysis In this paper I will look into Plato’s dialogue Crito in which Crito, Socrates’ friend, is trying to convince Socrates to escape from the prison of Athens. Socrates manages to convince Crito with his argument that is constructed of four major premises that lead to the conclusion that Socrates should never escape. Three of those premises were clear and agreed upon by both Socrates and Crito. The fourth premise is constructed of two sub-arguments. In this paper I will explain the premises that they agreed upon as well as explicit Socrates’ two sub-arguments, which I shall call parental and contract arguments that he used to convince Crito with his major argument that reaches to a conclusion that he must not escape the prison of Athens. In addition to explaining Socrates’ premises, …show more content…
Meaning that the respect and the obedience that children give to their parents are similar to the respect and the obedience that citizens should give to the laws. This argument states that the laws brought Socrates to life by allowing his parents to get married. The laws nurtured and educated him. if the laws nurtured and educated him, then he must be the law’s offspring and servant. Socrates cares for virtue. If Socrates cares for virtue, then he is morally obligated to obey his parents and his master. Socrates is not in the same footing with his father nor his master. If Socrates is not in the same footing with his father nor his master, then of course he is not in the same footing of his country as it should be much more honored than his father or mother or even all of his ancestors (51b), therefore Socrates is morally obligated to obey the orders of his country no matter what. If Socrates disobeyed his country by escaping that would be considered as a wrongdoing, therefor escaping would be considered violation to the principle of