Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Justice about plato the republic
Controversial issues regarding the death penalty
Justice about plato the republic
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Justice about plato the republic
Personal Philosophy There is a very common human feeling of existential angst, which stems from the fact that we are creatures of meaning, creatures of purpose. We want to feel like there is a destiny to our lives, like there is a reason for why we are here. Physics has tried for a long time to define our reality, but there is a point when physics enters the realm of tautology and nonsense because of the circular nature of the task which it attempts — to study electrons with instruments which are, after all, electrons themselves. Therefore, reality is in some way odd; and the very fact of not being able to know them makes them all that stranger. Electrons, energy, existence, consciousness, or “Reality” are in some way odd. It is the very fact …show more content…
In the “Crito,” Socrates chooses not to escape prison because he has chosen a standard for justice. He argues that the system itself which prosecuted him was not unjust. Although the verdict was wrong and he was charged with something he didn’t do, his belief was that the trial in itself was not corrupt and held justly and fairly, the legal process was procedurally just and fair, even if it was the wrong sentence. He chooses to stay in jail and accept his sentence, as he puts it “And, so one should not repay an injustice with an injustice, as the many think, since one should never act unjustly.”(Plato) Socrates is following an objective truth, not his philosophy, but a philosophy that follows truth and justice. Had Crito managed to argue reasonably against the form of “Justice” that Socrates followed, he would have been quick to bribe the guard and leave Athens before dawn. Socrates ultimately argues for the reality of Justice, and as long as the laws of the land cohered to that reality, he too would abide to these laws. Socrates admirably argues for the idea of Justice, and given no counter argument by Crito, he chooses to stay in jail and face death. He surrenders himself to the values that he chose to uphold and allows the “river of life” to finally take him over the edge to face death with courage and an undeniable authenticity to who he chose to
Crito on the other hand believes civil disobedience is sometimes morally legitimate in certain cases. He states “Your present situation itself shows clearly that the majority can do not just minor harms but very worst things to someone who’s been slandered in front of them” (pg.79) Crito tries to reason with Socrates by telling him how by abiding to these “just” laws is what got him in prison in the first place, and how he is going to be unjustly prosecuted because of it. He goes on by trying to persuade him that by escaping prison it wouldn’t classify as civil disobedience since he wouldn’t be harming anyone. If he stayed in prison it would seem as cowardness and seem irresponsible. Since Socrates has a responsibility towards his family
Socrates was a famous Athenian philosopher who was sentenced to death for the charges of corruption of the youth and impiety, or the act of not worshipping Athenian gods. In Plato’s dialogue, The Crito, Socrates argues to Crito his reasoning to stay in prison. Socrates gives three major explanations why he should not escape; the first being that if he escapes he it would be unjust to the state, the second being that people must always keep their promise, and lastly we must obey or respect our parents and teachers. The purpose of this essay is to show that Socrates’ arguments are flawed.
Socrates argues in the Crito that he shouldn't escape his death sentence because it isn't just. Crito is distressed by Socrates reasoning and wishes to convince him to escape since Crito and friends can provide the ransom the warden demands. If not for himself, Socrates should escape for the sake of his friends, sons, and those who benefit from his teaching. Socrates and Crito's argument proceeds from this point.
Socrates was not guilty as charged; he had done nothing wrong, as seen in the Apology. Not even a priest could tell Socrates what he had done wrong religiously, Euthyphro wasn’t even able to give Socrates a precise definition of piety. It is then questioned by Crito why Socrates would remain to face a penalty for a crime he did not commit. In the Crito, it is explained why, although innocent, Socrates must accept the penalties his peers have set upon him. It is his peers that will interpret and enforce the laws, not the law which will enforce it. Even if the enforcers don’t deserve attention and respect because they have no real knowledge to the situation, Socrates had put himself under their judgment by going to the trial. Therefore, Socrates must respect the decisions made by the masses because the decisions are made to represent the laws, which demand each citizen’s respect.
He states that if he were to escape he would not be living honorably which he describes in Plato 's “Apology” as living a unexamined life and to him he would much rather die. Socrates states, “one must not even do wrong when one is wronged, which most people regard as the natural course” (Plato, 268). Socrates even though his sentence maybe biased and not morally right still believes that he must follow what he is condemned to. Through this he implies that even if we are cheated of fairness we must still do what is honorable and not fight it. He explains that the majority of people in his case would justify it to escape because they were sentenced for something that is completely moral. I disagree with Socrates in that if I was in his place, I would gain freedom and face my enemies for they wronged
First he decides to address whether the jury was in fact unjust in their judgment. According to what they had concluded before the argument, Socrates and Crito both agree that one can willingly do no harm or commit unjust acts knowingly, and thus one can never do wrong in return, since then you would be knowingly committing harm, thus committing an unjust act. “One should never do wrong in return, nor do any man harm, no matter what he may have done to you.” (Plato, Crito 49c) Even if they determined the ruling to be unjust against his earlier claim, Socrates thinks that then the law would respond that he agreed to accept the verdict of the jury, and thus anything else would be contrary to his word, and thus unjust. Thus, since this holds to be true, they must conclude whether it harms other people if Socrates leaves, or will it do
...uments are completely different. Crito wants Socrates to escape because he doesn’t deserve to die because he did nothing wrong. Socrates argues back that if he escapes he will be breaking the law. Which is the thing that he is trying to uphold. Socrates believes that escaping will go against all the things he has been arguing and teaching the youth.
Therefore, socrates does not believe his life to be worth living if he does not live in accordance with the good life, which he asserts is the just life (48b), which Crito also agrees to. Furthermore, Socrates argued that no one should ever willingly do wrong, even when one is done wrong to, which Crito agrees to as well (49d). Socrates argues since the law is just, as he had lived under them, been protected by them, and he did not try to change it, while he had the chance. Therefore, Socrates believed that he could not break the law, after he had benefited from them. The laws create order, and undermining them for a single citizen would be a crime against his country (51a). Country, Socrates says, is honored by the gods and more important that honoring one’s mother and father (51b). Socrates, then, should not break the law because he would be willingly committing injustice against the state. A state that has been good to him, that he was a citizen in, and raised sons in (52d). Also, by escaping, he would be proving his accusers right, because one that did not obey the law and escaped his punishment would be seen as a criminal, which is what his accusers want him to be seen as.
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. Socrates gave very strong convincing statements to back up his side. The initial argument they both agreed on was doing unjust actions are not good and people should not act unjustly. Acting unjustly does harm to people’s soul and that is unacceptable for Socrates. It does not make sense for him to live with a soul that is corrupted.
This is why after firmly establishing this first truth on justice, Socrates moves on to his next point. This point is that if Socrates escaped he would be acting unjustly, because he would be breaking his agreement and mistreating his state. First Socrates addresses how leaving would hurt the state. Socrates brings up this dilemma by asking Crito, “Do you think that a city can still exist without being overturn, if the legal judgements rendered within it possess no force, but are nullified or invalidated by individuals?” By leaving Socrates would be breaking the law, which is the foundation of order in any state. If all broke the law such as Crito encourages Socrates to do than the rules would be void and the state would fall into chaos. Next Socrates reminds Crito that as a citizen under the law he had agreed to follow the entirety of the law. It was through the work of the law that Socrates was born and well educated. Than later Socrates was even given the chance to make his own choice about being a citizen or not. By becoming a citizen Socrates freely accepted the laws of his country and all the privileges they included. Thus Socrates would be unjustly treating the state by breaking the law only because now it no longer benefited him. To further emphasis his point to Crito, Socrates compares his
The State of Athens found Socrates guilty of “impiety and corrupting the youth.”1 He was sentenced to death, but in the meanwhile, he was being held in a jail cell. Crito, Socrates' old friend, came to visit him one morning. Crito explained that they have the money and supplies to get Socrates out of his jail cell, and away from Athens to be a fugitive, thus saving Socrates his life. Socrates answered all Crito's options with an argument stating how he cannot escape from his cell, and death, because he would be defying all the laws of the State. If he denies all laws of the State, Socrates believes that if he leaves, then he would be proven guilty, and the charge of death against him would be correct. Socrates believes that if he stays, and
He tries to persuade Socrates to escape jail and flee the wrongful sentencing that he has been charged with. Crito brings up several points as to why he should escape. If Socrates does not try to escape Crito feels he will lose a good friend when he dies and people will view him as a bad friend and he will get a bad reputation. If Socrates does not try to escape he will not be able to see his son’s achievements and he and he will be betraying them. Crito believes that it is not fair (unjust) to not fight for your life, he wants Socrates to try and save himself from the injustice the people have come to. This is where it gets tricky and where the debate begins. If Socrates does nothing to free/ save himself then he is agreeing with the unjust people. But if he escapes jail then he is going against the Laws of the city of Athens and that in Socrates eyes is unjust. Socrates would rather have one person get hurt (himself) than to turn around and do something that would hurt many people. Socrates responds to his points with the way he thinks/feels. Socrates is about being just and living a moral life. If he escapes jail he feels the laws and city of Athens would be destroyed, therefore, by destroying the city and its laws it would cause the citizens of Athens harm, harming the citizens of Athens would be unjust, by being unjust it would harm his soul. Socrates
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. I agree with Socrates since how else could the jury find him innocent if he showed fear. Besides, he did what he did for the good of the society (44b). Therefore, he has nothing to fear and his conscience was clean even as he waited for execution. He stood his ground with his beliefs and that served as an example of other who shared same sediments but had fear in expressing
Who, was also in pursuit of truth. A few, one of them being Meletus, disagreed he was a good citizen. Socrates was persecuted and accused of corrupting the youth, and of impiety. He was then sent to prison to await his execution. Crito, his friend, went the day after to visit and admired how unflustered Socrates seemed to be under the unfortunate circumstances. Crito then explains his plans on how he could escape prison, and presents many arguments to try to persuade Socrates on why he should flee. One of Crito’s thoughts regarding this matter was that Socrates' death would reflect negatively on him and his friends, because people could think they did nothing to try to save him. Socrates then conveys to Crito that other’s opinion should not matter. However, Socrates expressed he would go with Crito, if it is just, but if it is unjust he must stay in prison and face
...ns. Why would he do this if he did not see the laws of Athens as just? In order to fulfill the agreement he has made with Athenian law, Socrates must accept the punishment he is given, though he feels that his being punished is Athens wronging him. It would be wrong, by his view, to escape from prison, though he would not be pursued, because he would be breaking his agreement to obey Athenian law. Since he and Crito previously agreed that one must never do wrong, he simply must stay in jail until his death. This is merely one example of the way in which Socrates uses a method of logical dialogue in order to make his point. He appears to be unmatched in his skills of deduction and consistently demonstrates his love of knowledge and truth. Socrates exemplifies all that is philosophy, both as a student and a teacher, because of his constant, active pursuit of wisdom.