In all stages of society people are all held to certain set of rules, guidelines, and laws. Whether it be your mom telling you to clean up your dishes after every meal, your coach making you go to practice every morning, or not stealing a television from a store, we all obey these rules because that’s what we have been told what the correct thing to do. We may not always like these rules, since they often mean that someone is telling us what we can and cannot do, and for some rules people think what is being implemented is unjust. People who think the laws that are enforced are unjust will protest against that law by not obeying it or trying to get it fixed. In our society we have all these rules enforced in order to make the place we live …show more content…
The Law states that a just or unjust action is something that one does to someone else. The Laws of Athens is personified and is given a voice in the mind of Socrates which he listens to when he is in his cell. What Socrates takes from it is that if he were to listen to Crito and escape his cell it would be going against the law, and by doing that he is going against the law which is a determinate to Athens. People obey the law because it gives the state they live in structure, and if people were to go against the law it would lose the structure because a State without law would turn into chaos. Socrates believes that the world should be a place that is just and follows the laws. Socrates can easily escape from the prison with the help of Crito but he knows that if he did that it would be an unjust thing of him to do. The penalty Socrates faces is unjust, so why would breaking out of prison be unjust and who would it affect? Socrates believes if he breaks out of prison and flees it would be unjust towards the Laws of Athens but also to the state. Socrates views it better to stay in the cell and face his death because if he were to go against the Law it would be unjust to break out. By Socrates doing something unjust not only would it be going against the law of the state but also creates a harm to
Socrates lived in a political system. In order for someone to survive in a political system, it is helpful to obey the laws of the system, or city. Did Socrates follow these laws? According to the facts, no. He was indeed put to death because he broke them. But when looking at Crito, I wonder if he even intended or noticed the laws he broke to deserve him death. In Crito, Socrates follows the laws and does not escape, as recommended. If he was such a criminal to deserve death, why didn't he escape? Socrates viewed the laws with his own reference. It is obvious that he does not see any law being broken such as corrupting the youth. If he did see this crime take place I think he would not of defended himself. Socrates was a proud man, even though he did not sho...
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
King was well aware of the laws, and knew that his protests, even peaceful, would have resistance to it. Yet, at the same time King didn’t care that it would’ve been illegal. He clearly stated that any law that he feels is unjust, he would fight against it whether it was legal to do so or not. The same can be said of Socrates in Crito, because he knows he got there for disobeying the law. In the eyes of the law, he corrupted the youth of Athens by exposing them to questioning and examining everything around them. 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
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 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...
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
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
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.
I have to side with Crito when it comes to leaving Socrates’s friends and family behind just because Socrates is too proud to break the laws. Socrates sounds like he does not want to put forth the effort to leave Athens and try to live in exile just to stay alive a little longer. While it is moral to obey laws at all costs, I feel that the moral “rules” should be disregarded when you are served unjustly by those same laws. Socrates is content with the life he has lived and has no intentions in breaking the laws now, which he has so justly followed throughout his whole life. The whole meaning in Crito, is defined quite clearly. Socrates believes in the always obeying the laws no matter the circumstance, even if that means sitting in a prison until you are to be executed unjustly.
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.
When Socrates posited the idea that the laws and citizens work together synergistically, was this not broken when Socrates was unjustly convicted of a crime? The logic of Socrates would hold that one should act in accordance with just laws, but when the legal system becomes unjust, one is not required to follow the laws. The only alternative to abiding the law is to expatriate or persuade the government, so one would think that Socrates would find the code of law not worth adhering to after it was proven unjust through his trial especially after dismissing the wisdom of public opinion. The tacit agreement of the citizen to the system of laws is also a point to be disputed. An individual’s inhabitance of an area does not suppose that he has extensive legal knowledge of his place of residence. For a legal code to be truly just, the citizens must be aware of all possible infractions and physically indicate their subscription to them. If a citizen were unknowingly to commit a crime, how could he be justly held accountable? Socrates should not be held accountable for his crime unless he consciously agreed to the laws and understood his action was illegal before it was
Socrates questions Thrasymachus on why he adds the detail of the stronger to his definition of justice. Socrates than asks, if it is just for everyone to follow the laws that the ruler has made, if the ruler has made unjust laws. His argument is that people, even rulers make mistakes. This meaning that if a ruler makes mistakes on the law does that still make it just. It is a very conflicting argument to think about, if the rules are not just then why should they be followed but the rules were also put in place by someone who is supposed to know the difference between just and unjust and choose correctly. This relates to what Socrates says during his trial portrayed in the Apology. Socrates claims
...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.