A man being executed for simply having different beliefs from his society is quite shocking in this current time period, though the Trial of Socrates depicts just that. In analyzing the Apology and Crito it is important to applaud and recognize how Plato’s use of rhetorical devices depict the law system of Athens in a negative light. In the Crito, Socrates states that he is choosing to die because he does not want to undermine the laws of Athens by fleeing, since he believes that the laws are just even if his sentence is not. Nevertheless, through using ethos to establish Socrates’ moral authority in the Apology and Crito, Plato leads his reader to draw the opposite conclusion about the Athenian judicial system. Leading the reader to question …show more content…
Through the use of ethos, pathos, and logos Plato further develops his arguments in order to achieve his goal of forcing the readers to question whether a man like Socrates being sentenced to death reflects the problems inherent to rule by the majority, or are the laws of the Athenian government unjust themselves? To begin, in the Apology the use of ethos, pathos, and logos is evident throughout the dialogue. When establishing an argument, the use of ethos or appealing to expertise is important due to the fact that spoken information becomes more credible when a source is defined. Socrates establishes his credibility multiple times throughout the trial not only referring to himself as the wisest man on Earth but even goes to the extent in saying “I am that gadfly which God has given the state, and all day long and in all places am always fastening upon …show more content…
In the Crito, Socrates states that he is choosing to die because he does not want to undermine the laws of Athens by fleeing, since he believes that the laws are just even if his sentence is not. Socrates appeals to his expertise yet again when he claims he received a vision from “the likeness of a woman, fair and comely, clothed in white raiment…”(44). Socrates’ ability to communicate with divine power establishes credibility. When Crito argues for Socrates to flee prison, he uses pathos in order to appeal to Socrates’ emotional side. Crito says “I should say that you were betraying your children..”(45), and in return Socrates states his argument. Plato draws a distinction between the just Athenian Laws, which Socrates must follow by remaining in prison, and the unjust behavior of Socrates' accusers, who sentenced him to death. Although the use of pathos may be effective in some arguments, it clearly does not work when Crito presents it to Socrates. Socrates appeal to Athenian law contributes greatly to logos. Socrates explanation of Athenian Law on page 51 ties his whole argument together to assert that the Athenian Laws are just and must be respected and that his accusers are unjust and should not be respected at
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 “Apoligy” Socrates refused to admit his accusation, but in “Crito” he chose to accept the death instead of escaping. His value towards justice can be reflected by much of his word that “justice” is not limited to individuals but at a higher level; it is like a shared value inside all human being. When Crito said his worry of “shameful reputation” of spending money for friend”, Socrates asked him why he needed to consider other people’s opinions. “The best people, who are more deserving of our attention, will believe that the matter was handled in just the way it is.” (44c)
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.
For most, a wise conclusion would not end in welcoming death with the chance to escape an unjust conviction; yet, in Socrates case it did. By definition, logos is the use of documentation, facts, or inference to create a concrete argument; and it is present during each debate betwixt Crito and Socrates. Observing Socrates positions, “At the same time, I should like you to consider whether we are still satisfied on this point: that the really important thing is not to live, but to live well.” (Crito, pg 888), we are given an answer from Crito after he agrees
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.
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).
Polemarchus’s Justice In this paper, I will be analyzing the concept of justice, tackled during the conversation between Polemarchus and Socrates. The Republic, (book I), the dialogues oppose, one by one, different concepts of justice.. Cephalus, Polemarchus, and Thrasymachus offer each an answer to the Socratic question “What is justice?”. After discussing this issue with Cephalus, it is now Polemarchus’s turn to inherit the argument. After a debate, mostly monopolized by Socrates, the definition of justice is ambiguously concluded.
Position Paper #1: For Socrates’ Argument of Tacit Agreement In The Crito Socrates uses two metaphors to justify his reason for staying in jail and dying instead of leaving Athens and starting a new life in another town. The metaphor he uses that most justifies his reasoning is the argument of tacit agreement, that he agreed to the laws and regulation of Athens when he decided to live there. Socrates knew that living in he agreed to follow all rules that the city had.
The Apology was supposed to represent Socrates' trial for his being a busybody and corrupting the youth. Socrates defended himself by saying that he was merely performing service to the god that said that he waswiser than anyone else. Socratesremained defiant during the sentencing portion of the trial, which led to him besentenced to death, and as such he had to face his mortality. In this paper, I will explain how he came to this conclusion,and show why this conclusion is false. At many points throughout the Apology, Socrates insists that death is not bad.
Comparing Socrates words in the Republic for the philosopher to rule to the words of the Apology where philosophy is viewed as something that is punishable by death, this is where the defense or importance of philosophy is realized. For if the philosophers were the ones to rule, nobody would question whether or not what they were doing was right or wrong because the philosopher-kings make the rules through wisdom and knowledge. Plato wants to paint a portrait of the philosopher as not only something the city should want to have, but also as someone who would be fit to rule above all others. This contrasts, again, to the points made by the jurors to Socrates in the Apology for they saw Socrates as someone who brings the city
Socrates was a greek philosopher who found himself in trouble with his fellow citizens and court for standing his grounds on his new found beliefs from his studies about philosophical virtue, justice, and truth. In “Apology” written by Plato, Socrates defended himself in trial, not with the goal of escaping the death sentence, but with the goal of doing the right thing and standing for his beliefs. With this mindset, Socrates had no intention of kissing up to the Athenians to save his life. Many will argue that Socrates’ speech was not very effective because he did not fight for his life, he just accepted the death sentence that he was punished with. In his speech he said, “But now it’s time to leave, time for me to die and for you to live.”
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)
Socrates’s official new charge “asserts that Socrates does injustice by corrupting the young, and by not believing in the gods in whom the city believes, but in other daimonia that are novel” (24b, p. 73). By looking deeper into the dialogue of The Apology and Euthyphro, one can see how passionately Socrates strives to express to the Athenian people his innocence in teaching the youth and worshiping of the gods. Socrates maintains his innocence in teaching the youth for three reasons. Primarily, there is no proof or evidence from past examples in which Socrates has taught the youth because no one has come out and said so. Socrates brings up a valid point that his so-called ‘teachings’ haven’t changed over time and therefore if he is accused
Making enemies and becoming the topic of conversation, the Athenians began to view Socrates as a threat to their beliefs and way of life and sought to end it. In order to end this, Socrates was accused of blasphemy (Mod1SlideC7). Socrates’s accusers took him to court and after Socrates did not play their game by asking to be sent into exile, and in the end, he was sentenced to death. After reading the textbook and Plato’s writing influenced by Socrates, I realized that in the period of his life Socrates was indeed truly a threat to the Athens society, because he looked for answers that no one else bothered to find which challenged their culture.
The mores that one is instilled with is a complex concept to which we do not give much thought to in a day to day basis. In Plato’s The Republic, Plato dives into the inner workings of justice and other moral matters through the voice of Socrates, who serves as a character to give the reader a distinct perspective in the narrative. Throughout the text, Plato touches on many issues in Ancient Greek society in order to create a utopist city. Along the agenda, Plato emphasizes the quarrel of the rudimentary benefits of truth vs. lies, and which one of the two would conquer more with justice. In the transpiration of the debate, Plato convinces the reader that the truth is a closer fit to the principles of justice through a fallible initial argument, and analogical points, emphasizing the truth all the way from the tyrant to the slave.