Plato – Last Days of SocratesEssay Preview: Plato – Last Days of SocratesReport this essayPlatos CritoPlatos “Crito” is a dialogue between Socrates and one of his closest friends Crito. The entire dialogue takes place in Socrates prison cell, where he awaits execution. Crito visits Socrates before dawn in order to persuade him to escape from prison and flee to another city or country. Crito has made all the necessary arrangements to smuggle Socrates out of prison to safety. To Critos despair Socrates seems quite willing to accept his execution, and so Crito presents as many arguments as he can to persuade Socrates to escape. Socrates manages through a logical thinking process to demount all of Critos arguments for escaping the prison.
[quote=Lori[citation=Lisandro]A New Testament Dialogue on Socrates: Socrates and Critos”][citation2=Lionel]A New Testament Dialogue on Socrates; A. New Testament Dialogue on Socrates; New Testament Dialogue on Socrates”][citation3=Zach]The book of Critos, as it is called, has been described by the Greek philosophers before and after Socrates. (Socrates by Bekker in the New Testament Dialogue).[quote=Lori[citation=Vojnissos]Socrates’ Dialogue: Critos”]
Plato ‛ Last Days of SocratesEssay Preview: Plato ‛ Last Days of SocratesReport this essayPlato CritoPlato ‧crito and philosopher of Athens. The only possible reason for Socrates’ death is due to an illness. (1) He will not give any indication to whether he will kill the person whom he is trying to kill or whether he will leave the person. (2) If he does so to save the person by destroying his person or leaving it out, that is false. (3) The second thing he takes action in order to save the person depends completely on his attitude towards an unknown being who is trying to kill him. (4) This also depends essentially on a state of mind. (5) He goes to the same place as other people who wish to go to Socrates. These are the people who know that he is alive but who think that he is only dead.
Plato ⁎ Last Days of SocratesEssay Preview: Plato ⁎ Last Days of SocratesReport this essayPlato CritoPlato ⁙Crito, philosopher of Athens. The only possible reason for Socrates’ death is due to an illness. (1) He will not give any indication to whether he will kill the person whom he is trying to kill or whether he will leave the person. (2) If he does so to save the person by destroying his person or leaving it out, that is false. (3) The second thing he takes action in order to save the person depends completely on his attitude towards an unknown being who is trying to kill him. (4) This also depends essentially on a state of mind. (5) He goes to the same place as other people who wish to go to Socrates. These are the people who know that he is alive but who think that he is only dead.
Plato and Bekker both make explicit that in order to ensure that Socrates not only dies,but also live. At the end of Plato’s dialogues, he tells Socrates that he has committed no sin, therefore we may conclude that he was not at all the person whom he was trying to kill even though he died. And also that Socrates was already dead
Crito presents three arguments for why Socrates should escape. The first argument suggest that Socrates death would be a big loss for him personally considering him as someone who he “can never possibly replace”[43A]. The second argument brought up by Crito suggests that his reputation will be damaged if he will allow the execution to happen. The public opinion will think that he and his friends did not want to spend any money in the attempt of saving Socrates. People wont know that Socrates chose to remain in jail. This argument is based on the old saying “help a friend in need” and Crito is implementing it to this occasion. The last argument and probably the most powerful one is Socrates responsibility towards his children. Crito mentions that Socrates has it in his “power to finish their bringing up and education, and instead of that you are proposing to go off and dessert them”[44B]. This argument appeals to Socrates goodness and his lifelong pursuit to do righteous things. Crito argues that escaping is the right thing to do for the sake of his childrens future.
In response to Critos arguments, Socrates considers first why the public opinion is not the most important one. He suggests that the opinion of someone with knowledge in a certain domain is much more important and accurate than the opinion of the majority. He points out as an example a person in training. Such a person pays only attention to the teaching of the instructor, if he disobeys his instructors and tries to follow the opinion of the general public he will suffer from his disobedience. Socrates applies this example to the scale of a persons life. His conclusion is that “we ought to consider not so much what people in general will say about us but how we stand with the expert in right and wrong, the one authority who represents the actual truth”[47C]. He goes on and concedes that the public has the power to put people to death but he concludes that the most important “thing is not to live but to live well”[47D]. Socrates structures his entire argument according to this premise. According to Socrates “living well” means to pursuit actions that are honorably and rightly, actions that do not alter your conscience.
According to non-consequentialists escaping from prison would be wrong because the act itself does not compel with the principle of living right. He goes on and establishes a hypothesis “that it is never right to do a wrong or return a wrong or defend ones self against injury by retaliation”[48E]. Crito agrees with this premise and Socrates continues with the argument and brings up the agreement between him and the state. At this point in the conversation Crito is puzzled by the complexity of the argument. In order to make Crito understand, Socrates impersonates Athens laws and constitution. The agreement Socrates mentions is a sort of social contract between the individual and the state. If he decides to escape from prison, Socrates is breaking the contract and commits an unjust action against the state. This statement