Once Socrates is convicted he is sent to jail to be executed. Socrates is confined to his cell for thirty days before his execution because a ship has set sail on a sacred mission. Thus all executions must wait till the ship returns. Before the ship returns Socrates friend, Crito comes to break him out of jail and bring him to another country. A series of arguments precedes the dialogue, which helps unveil Socrates’ voice of reason.
Crito opens the argument by saying the majority of the people would agree that it is just to escape. Socrates feels Crito is using argument by ad populum. To Socrates this is a fallacy because he believes by having the majority population on your side does not justify between what is right or wrong.
We all are aware of the obvious arguments: live rightly, never do wrong, keep agreements and its wrong to break laws. I feel all these arguments are crucial to Socrates’ ideology. But one argument Socrates should have brought up to Crito is the aspect of being human. As we learned being a human has certain qualifications. Interacting and functioning within society is key to being a human. The right to personality, belief, reason, and socio economic status separates us from our biological being thus making us human. Socrates life was society; he brought inspiration into young minds and held open seminars in courtyards spreading his brilliance. If he were to flee from prison he would have no purpose. He would be an outlaw and a hermit, therefore no longer being a human. I feel this would be the most persuasive argument and would help Crito understand Socrates’ voice of reason. Socrates would rather be dead then not be apart of society.
6 comments:
I agree that being outside of society is definitely a dehumanizing idea, but Socrates taking exile after escaping wouldn't necessarily remove him from society entirely. He would still be in a 'society,' albeit a smaller one. I think that his argument is best won if he focuses primarily on the just nature of his willingness to die. The acceptance of his punishment without any malicious intent in retaliation shows a strong commitment to maintain a fully just life, despite injustice around him.
I agree that Socrates accepted his punishment to death even though it was an injustice. In his mind he was living a just life and til the end he stood up for what he believed in even if it meant getting thrown in jail. His belief in righteousness would have changed if he escaped because he would have been breaking the law.
I believe that Socrates was standing by what he believed was just, which was accepting his punishment even though it was death. It was what the jury voted for and escaping the punishment would have simply made him a hypocrite. I also agree that if he would have listened to his visitors who tried to convince Socrates to escape prision, he would not be apart of a society and therefore would not have been content with his life.
The way I think doesn't allow me to agree with any one but Crito in this situation. In my opinion Socrates is embracing an unjust decision or act. The "two wrongs don't make a right" saying doesn't apply here at all because by escaping prison Socrates is FIGHTING an unjust decision. Even though Socrates defense would be ruined and he would look like a liar, does that really matter? The society he's trying to be "just" for is already putting him to death. Socrates KNOWS he is right and that the "men of Athens" are wrong; so how is accepting the "unjust" ruling the right thing to do? Escaping from prison is only "unjust" if you've actually done something wrong. For example (if you've seen it); Is Harrison Ford's character from the movie "The Fugitive" a "unjust" man?
I also thought a lot about how Socrates' response to his sentence has a lot to do with how he would function in society after the fact. I agree with Leo that if Socrates escapes and flees his death sentence he can no longer teach young people and live his life trying to understand and achieve justice because he would have acted against his teachings in a significant way. Even though he could have gone elsewhere and continued living in a new community instead of dying, Socrates would not have been able to speak of justice and it would not matter whether or not he would act rightly because escaping his punishment would mean giving up his philosophical or scholarly merit. I think if Socrates decided to escape, when the truths that he had come to over his lifetime about justice would have him accept his punishment and not challenge the laws, his life would not be worth living.
I believe Socrates made the wrong decision in going ahead with death. He is obviously more concerned with making sure everything is “just” than he is with his family. He’s leaving his sons to morn his death and carry on in life without a father. I think Socrates should have escaped, whether just or unjust strictly because choosing to leave his sons fatherless is definitely unjust and selfish. The way Socrates can show his pride is by shamefully escaping, looking like a hypocrite to the people of Athens, and raising his sons.
Post a Comment