Kriti Dhungel Phil 101-3001 Paper 1 2/26/2017 Crito 's first argument states that if Socrates does not escape then he will hurt Crito. Crito and Socrates had been friends for a long time and if Socrates is executed then Crito would lose really good friend and hence will be hurt. Also, Crito will gain a bad reputation because it would seem that Crito made no effort to save Socrates. No one in the country would know that it was Socrates choice to be executed and hence Crito would be blamed for not putting enough effort to save his friend. He can be blamed for having more love for money rather than his friend. Crito argues that it is a bad thing for a person to do something that would hurt a friend. In his second argument, Crito tries to find
However, instead of planning the escape Socrates started the dialog about why he would rather obey the law and be executed. At first, Crito presented two arguments to
With the Apology, and the Crito, Socrates comes to delve into his many teachings and finds himself put to death with the words of wisdom that have been passed down generation after generation. Socrates for many in this present day is a man of many words and great teachings, but anyone but Socrates thought differently, in Athens people thought of him as an annoyance rather than an integral part of society. As Socrates stood in front of the counsel of judges, he stood for what he thought was right and never changed opinion of himself or of his words. That’s why Socrates is still talked about in classrooms everywhere today.
Crito is distressed by Socrates reasoning and wishes to convince him to escape since Crito and friends can provide the ransom that the jury demands. If not for himself, Socrates should escape for the sake of his friends, sons, and those who benefit from his teaching according to Crito. However, Socrates denies the plan of escape. The three arguments to be acknowledged are as follows: the selfish, the practicality, and the moral. Socrates reason not to escape, Socrates explanation of the good life, and an objection for breaking the laws that would put no harm to his fellow citizens is
Socrates is one of a kind, and Crito does not want to lose him. Crito 's next argument is what people will think. Crito was worried that people would think that he did not care for Socrates if he did not break him out of jail. Crito did not want to be seen as someone who valued wealth more than valuing the opportunity to bribe the jailer and save Socrates. The most interesting argument is that Crito tells Socrates that it is morally wrong for him to stay and allow himself to be executed.
Socrates’ Arguments in the Crito In The Crito, Socrates argues that he should not escape prison because it would be morally incorrect. He says that the really important thing is not to live but to live well. Therefore, by escaping prison, not only will he suffer the consequences but also his family, his friends, and the city of Athens. Socrates argues that the city of Athens would be affected if he escapes from prison.
In conclusion, therefore I should stay in jail and accept the death penalty. 3. Agreement argument – if I escape, then I will break an agreement I made with this city, to break an agreement is an unjust action, doing unjust actions harms the soul, and it is better to die than to live with a ruined soul. In conclusion, Socrates should stay in jail and accept the death penalty. In conclusion Crito's arguments are very narrow.
Each opinion is worthy of existence and is supported by historical facts, so which side should take the person - it depends entirely on the personal point of view of the individual. But at the same time it is worth to consider that Socrates was executed only by his own wish. The
For most, a wise conclusion would not end in welcoming death with the chance to escape an unjust conviction; yet, in Socrates case it did. By definition, logos is the use of documentation, facts, or inference to create a concrete argument; and it is present during each debate betwixt Crito and Socrates. Observing Socrates positions, “At the same time, I should like you to consider whether we are still satisfied on this point: that the really important thing is not to live, but to live well.” (Crito, pg 888), we are given an answer from Crito after he agrees
Book I By Ivan Miranda Book I of “The Republic of Plato” is mainly about one question asked by Socrates: “What is justice?” Although Socrates was the one asking the question, Socrates never gives his definition of justice, only counter-arguing the men who dare to try to define justice. Socrates vs Cephalus: “Justice is telling the truth and giving back what a man has taken from another” Cephalus is the first to offer a definition of justice. He says that justice is simply living an honorable life: following the law, returning what is lent to you and being honest. Socrates response is: “Would be right to return a weapon to an angry friend?”
In Apology, Socrates faces possible execution as he stands trial in front of his fellow Athenian men. This jury of men must decide whether Socrates has acted impiously against the gods and if he has corrupted the youth of Athens. Socrates claims in his defense that he wants to live a private life, away from public affairs and teachings in Athens. He instead wants to focus on self-examination and learning truths from those in Athens through inquiry. Socrates argues that "a [man] who really fights for justice must lead a private, not a public, life if [he] is to survive for even a short time" (32a).
Position Paper #1: For Socrates’ Argument of Tacit Agreement In The Crito Socrates uses two metaphors to justify his reason for staying in jail and dying instead of leaving Athens and starting a new life in another town. The metaphor he uses that most justifies his reasoning is the argument of tacit agreement, that he agreed to the laws and regulation of Athens when he decided to live there. Socrates knew that living in he agreed to follow all rules that the city had.
The version of Socrates presented in both The Apology, Crito, and The Republic could very well be two different versions of Socrates as presented by Plato. However, both versions of Socrates have one thing in common: they both value the importance of philosophy and they both defend philosophy as something that is important to humanity. The Apology is Socrates defending not only himself, but also philosophy as an area of study that could be useful to the city of Athens. Socrates is trying to defend himself and his study and he tries to distance himself from the sophists in that they charge for money.
Crito and others have the money to bribe the informers and wants Socrates to let go of his fears if he has any because it is well worth the risk. (Crito,45a.) Crito believes he will be welcome in cities such as Thessaly where he has friends that
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.
While visiting the Metropolitan Museum of Art, I was assigned to look at two very significant paintings, one which was Rembrandt van Rijn’s oil canvas of Aristotle with a Bust of Homer. The seconded painting was The Death of Socrates is also an oil canvas that was painted by Jacques-Louis David which depicts the closing moments of the life of Socrates. The question, why Socrates was executed and if he deserved the charges put against him has been asked by historians for centuries. Socrates has a unique position in the history of philosophy; for one, he is one of if not the most influential philosopher.