Plato's Crito: Argumentative Analysis

571 Words3 Pages
In Plato’s Crito, Crito goes to Socrates cell while he is sleeping and tries to convenience him to escape. Crito gives Socrates six reasons why Socrates should not just allow the execution to take place. First, Crito states that why should he die when he could escape and live a long life. Next, by allowing this, he is betraying his family. In addition, he states a good man would not allow himself to be executed without a fight or attempt to save himself. Also, he is causing shame to all of his friends. Furthermore, he is bringing more shame because he has the ability to escape but does not. Lastly, everything that occurred was unjust and should not have taken place. However, Socrates is not convinces because he needs to be guided by reason.…show more content…
First of all, King believes that one has the moral responsibility to defy laws that are unjust. He believe that if we continue to follow the rule that unjust things will continue to occur. The only way to stop this unjust things is to disobey the laws that are unjust. King also believes that an unjust law is not a law. Therefore, he believed that if a law was unjust that it would not be a law therefore you can disobey it but must be ready to accept anything that follow. For example, if the law stated that everyone had to wear pink on Wednesday or they were sentenced to thirty days in jail. However, you decided that the law was unjust to all the other colors and to people who did not have pink and decided to break the law then you would need to accept that you are going to spend thirty days in jail as punishment. Therefore I believe that King would agree with Socrates that there are unjust laws however he would complete disagree the reaction to these laws. Furthermore, Socrates believed that unjust laws occurred but one had to follow them. King also believe there are unjust laws but that they should be broken (as long as they accepted the
Open Document