Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Greek mythology contribution to our society
The importance of greek mythology
Importance of greek mythology today essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Morality and Laws in The Trial and Death of Socrates
Upon reading Plato, The Trial and Death of Socrates, Socrates strongly held views on the relationship between morality and laws become apparent to the reader. Equally, Socrates makes clear why laws should be followed and why disobedience to the law is rarely justified.
Finally, he makes clear his views regarding civil disobedience.
Socrates’ view on morality is that anyone can do wrong. It is said that injuring someone in return for injury to oneself is wrong. He follows this with the connection between morality and the city. You do badly without the cities authorization; you are doing wrong towards the city and the laws. He felt if you are behaving against peoples mind and in this way, behaving against the city. It is a way of destroying the cities laws and so you are hurting citizens by doing so. An example of this is the general understanding that you shouldn’t hurt your father. If you do so than you are disrespecting laws within your city. Of course you will get convicted for this, and it doesn’t change the idea that you acted against the city.
Socrates follows by explaining what is taught to each citizen. You are told that you were born with certain laws. Your father and mother brought you to the world in which they live and thus you should respect and obey by their rules. The laws were already there. That means, that your mother and father are as important as the city and you should respect the city as so.
Socrates describes the city and its laws more preciously. You don’t have the same rights as your parents. They educated you and thought you the rules in the city that you should follow. They taught you which behavior is right and which is wrong. It is immoral to treat your parents the way they treat you. You don’t have the rights to treat your parents the same way they treat you. That means that parents have a higher position in life than their children. It doesn’t really matter what they did to them. It is not moral to return the same behavior.
He follows with the relationship of a person to the city. He says, “One must obey the commands of one’s city and country, or persuade it as to the nature of justice. It is impious to bring violence to bear against your mother or father, it is much more so to use it against your country.” (Crito 51c)
One should not only obey their father and mother...
... middle of paper ...
...iritual things?”(Apology 24c). That shows that one should believe in gods, just because the city does so.
Socrates always searches for more knowledge about the city and its laws. We see that Euthyphro and him do not accept everything that is said by the city.
On Socrates’ point of view either the disobedience to the law or to the civil disobedience can be justified. To justify it correctly you have to be able to argue and find reasons for every given rule. Not just believe in what others say.
My personal opinion is that it is wrong to do be an object of the rules someone told you when you were born. Everyone has the right to argue about the city and laws or with his father or mother.
I totally agree that Socrates found it important to research about life’s morality and not just think the same way others do. That is a way of proving the knowledge of men. Ones sitting quiet in the corner usually have more knowledge than others that talk so much about what they know. Many men with a high position in life do not always have the most knowledge.
Do not believe in anyone theories without questioning it. It is important to prove that someone has the knowledge of what they speak.
"Do we say that one must never in any way do wrong willingly, or must one do wrong in one way and not in another?"3 Socrates tries to help people understand that mistakes are human nature, however to do wrongful things on purpose should not be tolerated. Crito agrees with Socrates statement, "So one must never do wrong."4 Crito believes in what Socrates is expressing, yet he wants Socrates to perform an unreasonable action and escape from prison. A big thing for Socrates is trust and being loyal to his family and city. "When one has come to an agreement that is just with someone, should one fulfill it or cheat on it?" Crito believes one should fulfill it. Which Socrates then states "If we leave here without the city's permission, are we harming people whom we should least do harm to? Are we sticking to a just agreement, or not?" Socrates thinks that if you commit to something you need to be a man of your word and follow through. If you make an agreement with someone, you should keep your word to the fullest extent. Socrates thinks he needs to adhere to the agreement of being in prison. He believes he shouldn’t leave unless someone tells him otherwise and to the just thing by upholding the decision. Again, Socrates doesn’t want to offend anyone or show disrespect, which shows his strong desire to always to the right
Socrates refuses to disobey the law. He believes in the correctness of the cities laws. He believes it is never right to act unjustly. He thinks that if you do not agree with the laws of the area that you are living at, then to leave and go somewhere else. He argues that the government could be seen as “his parents, also those who brought him up,” (Crito, 51e), since he has lived there his entire life and when you live somewhere for so long you should “persuade us or to do what we say,” (Crito, 52a) or leave. Socrates tells Crito that
From all three arguments in the book, the most fundamental principle of Socrates is that the really important thing is not just to live, but to live well. Living a good life meant living a life without doing wrong, and not hurting his country and its citizens.. Socrates stated that the laws and the city could be destroyed if he escaped. The laws would lose their force, and a country without laws would be chaos. In addition to harming the city, Socrates thought he would harm the condition of his soul by escaping. His soul would be harmed if he harmed others by breaking the laws. Being responsible for harm to others would cause harm to his soul. Also, he did make a tacit agreement to follow the laws of Athens since he had lived under them for over seventy years, raised his children under them, and did not try to persuade the city to change them(Plato 54). According to Socrates, living justly also meant not breaking or disobeying the laws. To Socrates, nothing could be worse than breaking the laws and escape. Escaping from jail was a wrong action no matter what good reason he had, especially if this might bring harm to his country. Socrates declared, “One should never do wrong in return, nor mistreat any man, no matter how one has been mistreated” (Plato 49b). Socrates stated a truth, law breaking is unjust, while observance of laws is just, because laws are just. However, are all laws just? Should we obey all laws regarding the law itself is morally justice or
Socrates concern that breaking the law would make law ineffectual is a valid one, but Crito would argue a more global perspective on Socrates' escaping: what are the net effects of Socrates accepting his death sentence? It would be a misfortune for all his friends, any people that benefit from his teaching, and he would be leaving his sons prematurely (Crito, 44c). Though Crito doesn't develop this point further, it could be easily extended: no one “be...
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.
Socrates political, moral and social obligations are linked to a theory called the Social Contract Theory. The overall intent of the social contract is meant to enhance the society we live in and promotes a sound, balanced, law abiding society. Socrates illustrates to Crito, that he must accept his punishment administered to him by Athens law. Furthermore, he exemplifies that the laws he has obeyed his entire life, allowed him to thrive within Athens (Friend). He indicates that he made a conscious decision, when he reached the age of maturity, he would reside in Athens. He was fully aware of the laws and how the Athenian government handled justice. Although, the social contract is not signed legal binding contract, Socrates feels fully obligated
(36) My argument is that Socrates is of great service to the citizens of Athens, as he understands he knows nothing, he understands where he belongs, and through this
Socrates was one of the wisest people to walk the earth, and he didn’t even know it. His questioning, reasoning, and expertise in the Apology convey the amount of wisdom he endowed. Through his statements, Socrates sounds like he contradicted himself, but rather, both statements made about obeying law and breaking the law are correct. Socrates said that he would obey the commands of the city, only if the commands were just. He should not be on trial, because he did nothing to invoke injustice upon himself. He committed no crime; therefore, he will continue practicing philosophy no matter what the consequence.
Truth be told there is no real justice in Socrates? ?just city?. Servitude of those within his city is crucial to its function. His citizens are, in every aspect, slaves to the functionality of a city that is not truly their own. True justice can not be achieved through slavery and servitude, that which appears to be justice (and all for the sake of appearances) is all that is achieved. Within Socrates? city there is no room for identity, individuality, equality, or freedom, which are the foundations justice was built upon. These foundations are upheld within a proper democracy. In fact, the closest one can experience justice, on a political level, is through democracy.
Imagine the time just after the death of Socrates. The people of Athens were filled with questions about the final judgment of this well-known, long-time citizen of Athens. Socrates was accused at the end of his life of impiety and corruption of youth. Rumors, prejudices, and questions flew about the town. Plato experienced this situation when Socrates, his teacher and friend, accepted the ruling of death from an Athenian court. In The Last Days of Socrates, Plato uses Socrates’ own voice to explain the reasons that Socrates, though innocent in Plato’s view, was convicted and why Socrates did not escape his punishment as offered by the court. The writings, “Euthyphro,” “The Apology,” “Crito,” and “Pheado” not only helped the general population of Athens and the friends and followers of Socrates understand his death, but also showed Socrates in the best possible light. They are connected by their common theme of a memoriam to Socrates and the discussion of virtues. By studying these texts, researchers can see into the culture of Athens, but most important are the discussions about relationships in the book. The relationships between the religion and state and individual and society have impacted the past and are still concerns that are with us today.
In Plato’s dialogue Crito, you can find Crito offering escape from demise to Socrates. This would be enough to make most men succumb to their survival instinct and flea but Socrates takes a different path. Socrates reasons through the escape with Crito. He logically comes to the fact that one shouldn’t do wrong when wronged or do harm when harmed (49b-c). He then draws the conclusion that escaping prison would harm the citizens, laws, and whole city of Athens (50b). As Athens is his home, Socrates feels he owes everything to his city, he feels compelled to follow the laws and decisions of its courts. He likens a home city to a parent, saying that to bring violence against one’s city would be sacrilegious as it would be with a parent (51c). In Socrates’ mind he would not wrong Athens because it made him the man he stands to be. All the knowledge, wisdom, and high regard he holds is because of Athens, and so he refuses to
In 399 BC, Socrates, the great philosopher in ancient Greece, was put to death under the hands of his Athenian fellow-citizens to whom he had a strong attachment, after a final vote with over two-thirds of jurymen against him. We cannot experience the situation where Socrates gave his final argument in the court of law. From Plato’s Apology, we admire Socrates’ brilliant rhetoric and rigorous logic, while at the same time feel pity for him and indignant with those ruthless jurymen. However, the question of what exactly caused his death and why was Socrates, such a remarkable thinker sentenced to death in the very society that valued democracy the most is not easy and straightforward to answer. There are multiple elements involved that finally caused this tragedy in which “a person of high moral principle is confronted step by step with a situation from which there is no escape” (38). First of all, the moral principle and belief in divinity held by Socrates are inconsistent with those of the Athenian society, implying the very crimes charged upon Socrates were not completely groundless. Secondly, the imperfect juridical system of Athens played a role in causing this tragedy. What’s more, Socrates himself, could have offered better defense in the court, also had a hand in his own death by his stubbornness regarding to his own interpretation of wisdom and piety. His rebuttal, though brilliant and insightful, was not persuasive enough to move the fellow-citizens for his wrong approach and sophistry in his cross-examination on Meletus.
The focus of Socrates at this time in Plato’s Republic is of the ideal city and how it can be traced to the human soul. Socrates believes that the city he has proposed to the other men is perfect in itself. He says that this city possesses four virtues which are the base for the city being perfect. These are the virtues of wisdom, courage, moderation and lastly but most importantly is the virtue of justice. He breaks down the city into classes and he says how each man within the city is responsible for what his life work is. He says that the people of the city whom the mass will see as most educated will be most fit for rule. “You remember the original principle which we were always laying down at the foundation of the State, that one man should practise one thing only, the thing to which his nature was best adapted; now justice is this principle or a part of it.”(433a) It is here that each man concentrates on his own possessions and his own business where we find a just city. He explains that being able to compare social classes within the city is very important because it has produced the important virtue of justice. With Socrates being able to do this he now has to establish a proper dialogue for explaining justice and the soul of an individual.
Socrates reached his conclusion based on the following premises. First was we must not do any wrong (unjust) willingly. Second was we should not do unjust in return of unjust. Third was we must keep on our agreement that is just. Fourth was we must follow the law with which we are in agreement with. Fifth was Laws are just and the sixth was we must respect the judicial decision as not respecting the law produces unjust to law and the People.
When Socrates was brought to trial for the corruption of the city’s youth he knew he had done nothing wrong. He had lived his life as it should be lead, and did what he ne...