Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
In Crito, Socrates argues
Criticisms of hobbes view on human nature
Criticisms of hobbes view on human nature
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: In Crito, Socrates argues
Plato’s Crito takes place in the jail cell of Socrates, who is wrongfully committed for a crime and is subjected to death. Socrates friends, including Crito, formulate a plan to bribe the guard overlooking Socrates and help him escape in order to give him a peaceful life in exile. Yet, Socrates objects to all of these actions and chooses to face death for many valid reasons. Socrates does not take a stance about whether escaping looks good or bad, instead he lets other people decide whether it is good or bad, for it reflects on them and not on Socrates. Socrates views escaping his unjust punishment as wrongful due to his gratitude, consistency, and loyalty to the laws and order of the government.
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.
Several philosophers have wrestled with ideas to decide under what conditions that humans are morally permitted to disobey the law. Civil disobedience is a concept that both Socrates and Martin Luther King Jr. strongly believed in, but they did not have the same viewpoints on it. Socrates dismissed any form of civil disobedience that got a person into conflict with the State, and Martin Luther King concluded that there were times when a man needed to partake in a protest that was non violent and take disobedient acts in in order to defend his freedom. Socrates believed that if a person lives in a government where he was given the chance to argue his case, he should not practice civil disobedience. Socrates thought that if a person was given
What this suggests is that Socrates would be supporting the wrong-doing of his adversaries in following through with their commands. But Socrates argues that laws are just and one should never do wrong. No matter how much one thinks the act was just. He explained that he could not break the law, just because he believed the reason he was being punished was unjust. He was a man that lived his whole life following the Law of the Athenians.
Crito is supposedly a friend to Socrates but his words and actions does not speak the same intentions. He tells Socrates that if he will not leave and escape prison, that everyone would think that he didn’t care about his friend well enough to help him. Socrates is not concerned about the opinion of the majority, for it is capable of neither the greatest evil nor the greatest good. Crito then questioned Socrates on many different things and also degraded his name and manhood. Some of the concerns listed by Crito regarded Socrates’ kids, the fact that his friends may be excluded from the Community, and playing into the hands of his enemies and giving aid to the ones who are disregarding the demands of justice.
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
In Crito Socrates position on the obligations of a citizen is disapproving of breaking laws or civil disobedience. In the dialogue between lifelong friend Crito and a jailed Socrates, Socrates attempts
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.
The general idea that Socrates and Crito seem to agree upon is that it is always right to follow all laws and always wrong to disobey all laws set for that state. If one makes this conclusion along with Socrates and Crito, it is easy to understand the their view on civil disobedience. Socrates has made a very strong argument as to why he must remain in jail and accepts his sentence of death, as a good citizen
He uses the example of ruling a city, where a government would change the rules and laws to best suit them, and as the rules are followed by those who act justly, the just would be acting in the favour of the stronger. Socrates objects to this and claims that humans will make mistake, as that is part of being human, and may
Moreover, Socrates’ claims that escaping from prison will “break the covenants and agreements” (37) between him and Athens, and argues that complying with injustice will cause moral harm to himself and to his state, Athens. In Crito, when Crito asks Socrates, that why comply with such crowning absurdity. Socrates answered, “do we ought to follow the opinion of the many and to fear them, or the opinion of the one man who has understanding?” (33). Socrates further explained that disobeying the state laws, by escaping from prison, is a compliance with injustice, rather than agreeing to an unjustified sentence.
To be just or to be served an injustice and obey, this is the very basis of the philosophical dialogue between Socrates and Crito. The Crito begins as one of Socrates’ wealthy friends, Crito, offers Socrates a path to freedom—to escape from Athens. Through the ensuing dialogue, Socrates examines, as a man who is bound by principles of justice, whether an unjust verdict should be responded to with injustice. In the dialogue between Socrates and Crito, Socrates outlines his main arguments and principles that prevent him from escaping under such circumstances. Socrates is under guard when Crito visits him, thus the plan to escape.
COMPARISON BETWEEN TO THOMAS HOPPES AND JOHN LOCKE VIEWS ON STATE OF NATURE Introduction Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) and John Locke (1632-1704) were both political philosophers. They are mainly known for their master pieces on political philosophy. I.e. Hobbes' Leviathan and Locke's Two Treatise of Government. Each of them has different views and perspective of the State of Nature and Social Contract.
This is a complicated issue because every person has a different view when it comes to answering this question. Socrates believed that the law should be upheld and respected by everyone, no matter what, while other people