Euthyphro And The Crito Analysis

On his way to his death some might say he should escape since his trial is unjust. Some might argue, like Socrates, that it isn't right for him to escape and go against his word. His friend Crito is trying to argue the reasons why Socrates is in the right for escaping, while Socrates is arguing the opposite, why his morals will not allow him to do so. Socrates argues many things and makes very firm arguments.

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.

Specifically, Socrates’s good friend, Crito, believes that Socrates should disobey the law and break out of prison. This brings into question what one

The Social Contract Plato’s Crito depicts a conversation between Socrates and Crito. Socrates’ friends intend to help him escape from prison before he is executed. Their conversation touches upon subjects like justice, injustice and the appropriate response to injustice. Socrates argues that one must not answer to injustice with more injustice as that would be an injury to the laws and to the city of Athens.

Even though Socrates claims to be innocent of the charges brought against him, he is ultimately sentenced to death. After he hears the jury's decision, Socrates is sent to jail to await his execution. Crito arrives before Socrates is scheduled for execution and offers him a chance to escape. Crito believes the jury's decision was unjust. In Crito's eyes, Socrates is innocent and therefore has the right to escape. However, even though Crito believes Socrates has the right to escape, Socrates disagrees with him. 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

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 should remain in prison after evaluating Critos arguments although Socrates’s were stronger. I’ll begin with Crito’s argument and what makes them strong, and what doesn’t. Next, I’ll focus on Socrates arguments and what makes them good and what makes them weak, mainly his focus that living with a bad soul isn’t worth living when you have a bad soul. Crito gives Socrates three arguments.

Crito was afraid because his friend Socrates was willing to be executed; Crito made haste to explain that he can and must help Socrates to escape. All it would take is a few appropriate bribes to the guards and anyone who was willing to provide meaningful information, which would not be at all difficult to take care of. Crito further explains that if Socrates does not escape, no one would believe that he had willingly faced execution. Instead, Crito would be accused of not helping Socrates, He would rather be accused of being materialistic. Socrates suggests that one should only be cautious of the opinions of sensible people who will see things exactly as they turned out. Crito then replies that popular opinion is

I have come to the conclusion that it was wrong for Socrates to obey authority in this case. He should have escaped with Crito in order to save his life. Crito’s reasons for escape were very compelling; he mentioned how Socrates had his family to think of and that he

During his discussion with Socrates, Euthyphro agrees with much of Socrates reasoning. One of these many concessions is that “the gods love the pious act because it is pious”. This concession ultimately leads to Socrates defeating Euthyphro’s claim. Therefore, Euthyphro should have answered slightly different than just a defeated “yes”. However, because of Euthyphro’s definition of the pious, equating the pious to the god loved, the statement is circular in understanding, but it remains a true statement. It would be wrong to refute the statement that the god loves the god loved acts because they are god loved. Therefore, Euthyphro must not deny the claim, but rather challenge the relevance the claim has on testing the definition of pious acts

In Plato’s Crito, we see that he tries to point out the problem of political obligations of the citizen by using the relationship between Socrates and Crito and how they have different views on these obligations. As known, Plato portrays Socrates as a model citizen. Socrates has just been sentenced to death, but is sent to jail as he awaits his fatal fate. Socrates believes in the commitment to civic obligations and the rule of law and is willing to stand by his beliefs, even if he has to stay in jail and even if he will be in danger of being put to death. His friend Crito tries to talk him into attempting to escape the jail, by talking about voluntary injustice, talkina about how citizens regard the rule of law as just but they have the will to commit injustices.

Crito accepts his arguments and Socrates decides he is going to

In Crito, a play by Plato, Socrates and Crito deliberate about the justifications of breaking out of prison. Crito provides numerous evidences that should appeal to Socrates emotional side by bringing up his friends and family, however, Socrates maintains his composure. Instead he contributes a logical and concise argument to act justly by staying in prison and accepts his punishment for ‘corrupting the youth’, among other things. I believe that Socrates argument is most effective due to his content, which is filled with logic and reasoning to prove his premises, as well as his style; not filled with flare and insignificant common phrases. Socrates most effective strategy is his use of logos, he always uses rationale and logic to decide his next point or explain his most recent assertion.

In Crito, Plato portrays Crito as Athens’ common man. Though wealthier and more educated than most, Crito’s intellect is used as a tool to exemplify how Socrates’ dedication to the polis differs from the majority of Athens’ population. Socrates maintains that “not living, but living well is to be regarded as most important” and therefore escaping from prison is not an option because it would be violating this principle (48b4-5). Socrates justifies this to Crito by refuting his arguments for escape and showing that fleeing would result in disobedience to the fatherland, violation of the social contract and his inability to continue to teach philosophy which would ultimately cause him to betray the polis he has striven to enhance.

Understanding “Crito” I. Introduction Crito was one of the important five dialogues of Plato about his teacher/character Socrates who underwent trial and death. In this work entitled Crito, Socrates refused the proposal of Crito that escaping into exile than drinking the hemlock would be of better option. This means that the discussion will be on the Socrates as expounded on Crito rather than the historical Socrates. II.