Conceptual Reconstruction: The Dialogue Of The Crito, By Plato

Crito thought that it would be a great disgrace if the people thought that he could save Socrates by giving money for his escape, but didn’t. He believed that the people would judge them wrongly if it looked like Crito and the followers did not help Socrates. Socrates asks Crito “My dear Crito, should we care about the opinion of many? Good men, and they are the only persons who ae worth considering, will think of these things truly as they happened.” (Plato).

Socrates says that whether he dies or not his children must still be taken care of by friends. The best education for the children is in Athens. As was widely accepted then and is stated by the laws �your country is to be honored more than your mother, your father, and all your ancestors... (51a). �

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

In this paper I will argue that Socrates’s argument at 50a-b of the Crito would be not harming his fellow citizens by breaking the laws. Based on the readings from Plato’s The Five Dialogues, I will go over the reasoning of Socrates’ view on the good life. I will then discuss the three arguments Crito has for Socrates regarding his evasion of the death sentence including the selfish, the practicality, and the moral arguments. I will deliberate an objection to the argument and reply to the objections made in the paper and conclude with final thoughts. Socrates argues in the Crito that he should not escape or disobey the law because it is unethical.

He reminds Crito “no human being should do injustice in return, whatever he suffers from others”(Crito, 49c). Socrates argues even if the jury's decision was unjust, it is never permissible for him to do injustice in return and therefore he will not try to escape. In essence, even though Socrates is offered the opportunity to

Breaking this agreement would leave his conscience guilty and make his life not worthwhile. He also believes that if he were to leave it would tarnish his reputation of him, his children, who he wanted to raise in Athens, would also have to bear his reputation which would be ruined if he left. Socrates would rather die knowing that he did not break his agreement with Athens and ruin his reputation and have a clean conscience than flee to another city and live out the rest of his life with the guilt. Socrates also says that if he were to escape it would be hurting the city by undermining the judicial system and giving it no credibility to convict other criminals who would escape just as he did and leaving it susceptible to a state of no order and

(Crito,45d). Crito believes you should not have kids or stay with them to the end, raising them and educating them. Crito believes that the trial was unfair and should have never happened so with that said not doing anything to save Socrates or Socrates not saving himself is cowardly and unmanly. Socrates Counter-Arguments The first of Socrates counter arguments is about the opinions of men and whether you should listen to some peoples opinions, but not to others.

Crito accepts his arguments and Socrates decides he is going to

Besides that, Socrates wouldn't be doing his sons any favor if he escaped and took them with him. This would just teach them the wrong idea about how laws work and how to accept the consequence of your wrong doing. If he were to leave them behind, in Athens, it wouldn't matter if he was dead or just exiled in some other city because they wouldn't be able to see him and he wouldn't be teaching them and being there when they grow up. Socrates confidently believes that if he left his sons, his friends would make sure they were taught the right

From beginning to end, Aristotle’s captivating reading, Crito, is composed with of the three rhetorical devices: logos, pathos, and ethos. Consequentialy, one of the existent rhetorical devices is more robust than the others. Whilst logos and pathos spawn well-founded emotional and logical enticement, the most indisputable rhetorical device used throughout the story is ethos. Undoubtably, ethos is the utmost evident rhetorical device in the story, Crito, as Socrates honorably stood by his morals, even after Crito tried to prompt the man to abandon them; demonstrating his thickness of character, integrity, and honesty.

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.

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.

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).

Socrates believes that justice benefits the just, but also benefits the city (other people) too. He is faced with a seemingly simple choice, escape Athens or remain in prison and be sentenced to death. Socrates’ central argument against escaping his circumstances is twofold. First, Socrates argues that “one must never do wrong.” (49b)

The one strong argument he gives about children is effectively refuted by Socrates. Socrates' consequential argument is not necessarily compelling, but if we accept his primary argument about only lives that are lived well having value, then his second argument concerning his agreement with the state to follow its laws is a compelling one, therefore Socrates was right to decide to remain in