Compare And Contrast Socrates And Crito

1464 Words6 Pages
Both Martin Luther King Jr. and Socrates derive from two very distinct eras. Nonetheless, in the course of their lifetimes both encounter similar modes of injustice imposed onto them by their governing system. Be that as it may, when responding to these injustices both King and Socrates apply and possess their own unique theories of how a citizen must approach these circumstances. Therefore, when comparing Crito and “The Letter from a Birmingham Jail” one can note the ways in which Socrates’ and King’s notions of the obligations of a citizen differ. In Crito Socrates position on the obligations of a citizen is disapproving of breaking laws or civil disobedience. In the dialogue between lifelong friend Crito and a jailed Socrates, Socrates attempts…show more content…
King makes it clear that there are specific circumstances that advocate towards civil disobedience. Keeping this in mind, it is essential that citizens are given the opportunity to be involved in legal matters, such as laws and defying the law in an effort to improve the state. However, in the event that civil disobedience is necessary King emphasizes that citizens must comprehend the difference between just and unjust laws, as well as partake in disobedience through civil means. On the other hand, Socrates believes no laws that are worth breaking. His reasonings support his overall idea that an unjust law or act, does not defend retaliating through unjustly means. Additionally, both King and Socrates are on a disaccord concerning the determining factor of just and unjust behavior. While Socrates relies on rational argument to be the expert on justice and the morality law, King sees the determining factor as grounded from God. As shown above, both Socrates and King have differing views on the obligations of a citizen in respects to the laws of the

More about Compare And Contrast Socrates And Crito

Open Document