Socrates’ argument that citizens enter an agreement or promise to obey the laws are to persuade the laws and making it an agreement. Socrates has three arguments for Athens and facing death. First, he believes that he will be received in Hades warmly if he abides by Athens' law. Second, Socrates argues that he has made a tacit agreement with the laws of Athens that he cannot justly break. Finally, he states that it is wrong to retaliate against those who have done you wrong, and thus it would be wrong to retaliate against Athens by escaping.
Concerned with making the best and most rational choice, people’s opinion of his actions does not affect Socrates, for "why should we care so much for what the majority think?" (Crito,44c) Using Socrates’ own standards we can use this to see if Socrates makes a good and rational decision, we can argue that, contrary to what he says, it would not harm the state if Socrates escaped. I begin by arguing Plato’s conception of the state that would lead to the conclusion
…show more content…
that Socrates didn’t enter a just agreement with Athens. Therefore, Socrates is having no obligation to keep his agreement with the Athens. Finally, I argue that the notion of retaliation is not applicable to Socrates’ situation which he is being prosecuted. Because Socrates will not be committing an injustice by leaving Athens, he will not be shunned in the afterworld for this decision, but Socrates himself will see it as committing a crime. Crito tried to plead with Socrates not to accept suicide because death is an evil thing. How could Socrates choose to do something evil? Socrates answers Crito with a question: how do you know that death is evil? Although Crito has not experienced death himself, he cannot say whether it is evil or not. Thus, Crito said “death, at best, is not known to be good or evil.” However, Socrates describes a scene in Hades where he departed other souls judge him. If he makes rational decisions and acts justly, then he will be welcomed warmly in the eyes of others. “If he chooses poorly or irrationally, then when he does finally journey to Hades, he will be shunned” (Crito,54c). Therefore, because Socrates believes that choosing to face his sentence is rational and good, his death is more likely to be good than evil. Socrates is concerned with doing what is just as a citizen of a state. He believed that he had entered a binding, even if tacit, agreement with Athens. He had lived his entire life in Athens and enjoyed the benefits of living under its laws. Because he had enjoyed living under these laws, he had implicitly agreed that they were good laws and that he would uphold them. He believes that keeping a just agreement is one of the fundamental characteristics of a rational agent. "When one has come to an agreement that is just with someone one should fulfill it" (Crito,49e). Additionally, he tells anyone who has made an agreement that "your country is to be honored more than your mother, your father, and all your ancestors, that it is more to be revered and more sacred, and that it counts for more among the gods and sensible men, that you must worship it" (Crito,51a).
Given the paternalistic and even godlike nature that Socrates sees in the state, he is in no position to decide whether its demands on him are just. However, even if he could evaluate the state’s demands, it would be unjust for him now to decide to break his agreement with the state because he has already made an agreement to keep the laws even if he disagrees with them. Continuing to argue for complying with the laws, Socrates presents his retaliation argument. He argues that it is irrational for him to retaliate against anybody who has done him wrong. "Neither to do wrong or to return a wrong is ever right, not even to injure in return for an injury received"
(Crito,49d). Emotions motivate retaliation, not reason; therefore, it is irrational behavior. Escaping from prison is retaliation against Athens because it breaks and undermines the laws that Socrates has agreed to live under. Since irrationality leads to bad decisions, and rationality brings the good life, Socrates must choose not to retaliate to make a good decision and pursue the good life. Even if Socrates had the power to judge the righteousness of the laws and break his agreement, he could not do so because it would be retaliation and, hence, a bad decision.
"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
When he is questioned why he doesn’t want to attempt to escape his death, he states that he feels it is unjust to escape. Socrates did what he believed his job was, which was to enlighten the youth to the unjust ways of society. While the way he was punished for it was unjust, Socrates stated that he has lived a happy life, and if he can’t rightly persuade the Laws of Athens to change its mind and let him go, then he can accept that.
This is significant more so when one understands that in an Athenian court, it is the citizens who decide the fate of the prosecuted. Consequently, Socrates should believe he holds a
Socrates reaches a conclusion that defies a common-sense understanding of justice. Nothing about his death sentence “seems” just, but after further consideration, we find that his escape would be as fruitless as his death, and that in some sense, Socrates owes his obedience to whatever orders Athens gives him since he has benefited from his citizenship.
He says that the citizen is bound to the Laws like a child is bound to a parent, and so to go against the Laws would be like striking a parent. The Laws conclude, then, that Socrates has no reason to break the Laws now: he has had every opportunity to leave or disagree, and the Laws have made no effort to deceive him in any way. In fact, until now, Socrates has expressed great satisfaction with the Laws. There is a part of us, which is improved by healthy actions and ruined by unhealthy ones. Socrates refers to an argument with Crito in which he considers whether or not it is right for him to escape without an official discharge. If it turns out to be right, he must make an attempt to get away and if not, he must let it
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
There are times in every mans life where our actions and beliefs collide—these collisions are known as contradictions. There are endless instances in which we are so determined to make a point that we resort to using absurd overstatements, demeaning language, and false accusations in our arguments. This tendency to contradict ourselves often questions our character and morals. Similarly, in The Trial of Socrates (Plato’s Apology), Meletus’ fallacies in reason and his eventual mistake of contradicting himself will clear the accusations placed on Socrates. In this paper, I will argue that Socrates is not guilty of corrupting the youth with the idea of not believing in the Gods but of teaching the youth to think for themselves by looking to new divinities.
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
As Socrates said in Apology by Plato, “...the envy and detraction of the world, which has been the death of many good men, and will probably be the death of many more…”(Philosophical Texts, 34) Throughout history, many leaders have been put to death for their knowledge. In Apology, Socrates- soon to be put to death- says he was placed in Athens by a god to render a service to the city and its citizens. Yet he will not venture out to come forward and advise the state and says this abstention is a condition on his usefulness to the city. (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 believes that since he lived a fulfilling and content life in Athens, that he should be okay with the end result regarding the laws of city. While his choice is a bit submissive, the fact remains that Socrates is being help in prison under false convictions and thus a decision must be made by the reader as to whether or not Socrates could break out and not actually break the laws. Crito mentions that if Socrates is to make no attempt at escaping, he will leave his sons without a father. Socrates acknowledges t...
Though Socrates has been unjustly incarcerated, he refuses to escape due to his implied agreement with the Athenian legal system. This paper serves to argue that Socrates’ line of reasoning to Crito does not properly address actions committed under an unjust legal system.
Contrary to this widely accepted myth, I will try to demonstrate that Socrates' argument was erroneous, which made his decision less rational. In fact, had he decided to escape, his behavior would not have represented an unjust act. Although his argumentation and dialogue with Crito seem more like a moral sermon, his ...
...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.