Socrates Just And Unjust Act Analysis

935 Words4 Pages
There is a resonating difference between a just and unjust act. A just act stays true to the moral principles of a civilization, while an unjust act is frowned upon by society. However, is it possible for this difference to sometimes seem vague? Socrates was put on trial for his beliefs and for what he argues to be a service to humanity. Yet, the jury did not agree. They believed that he was corrupting the minds of the youth. As Socrates sits waiting for execution, his friend, Crito, attempts to help him escape. I argue that Socrates’ duty to stay and face his fate outweighed his duty to his family and to flee because Socrates must act in an honorable and just way to thereby preserve the Laws of the Athenian system. Crito gives multiple reasons for Socrates to escape Athens, but Socrates takes them all into consideration and then articulates his points. One such point is the Athenian Laws. When Crito suggests escape, Socrates questions his patriotism and citizenship of Athens. Socrates first examines if “it is just for [Socrates] to try to get out of [jail] when the Athenians have not acquitted [him]” (Plato 48c).…show more content…
However, Socrates’ next question confuses Crito and which yields an unresponsive answer. Socrates asks Crito, “If we leave here without the city’s permission, are we harming people whom we should least do harm to?” (Plato 50a). This question goes to the heart of the matter at hand, is it just for Socrates to escape? Socrates does not need “to persuade Crito of the truth of what the Laws believer, or even of the rightness of Socrates’ execution,” he just needs Crito to “reflect more thoroughly on justice and law” (Moore). By making Crito consider the Athenian Laws in a different light, rather than pointing out the injustice he believes Socrates is facing, it forces him to look at the grander scheme and the impact of Socrates’ decision on whether to escape or to
Open Document