The Injustice In Socrates: The Case Of Crito

1013 Words5 Pages
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…show more content…
One of Socrates' main reasons for refusing to escape prison is because he is committed to a social contract. In essence, the social contract is the implicit agreement between Socrates and the polis. It argues that if Socrates stays in Athens, he tacitly agrees to abide to Athenian laws. Socrates explains the concept of the social contract when he imagines how the laws would depict it. The laws explain “whoever stays here...
Open Document