Essay 1

Senator Thompson said that the past few months have been successful and that he enjoyed the move in process, even with the challenge that naturally accompanied the task. Similarly to Senator Summers, he was eager to share the accomplishments that have been made with the CAB and ASGCU partnership in allowing them to survey at commuter events. He is also working on the survey in regards to adding additional lockers for commuter students around campus. Senator Thompson wrote the bill for the PASA club that was passed during September. Andrew spoke highly of the legislative hangout and also mentioned that he would like to have more activities at Pablo’s house. Additional responsibilities for Senator Thompson have included being a member of

In his Crito, Plato lays out three arguments explaining why Socrates’s should escape the prison, flee to live in exile. He first argues that by choosing to remain in prison and be executed, Socrates would be hurting Plato in two ways; by forcing Plato to lose a good friend, and by hurting Plato’s reputation. Plato believes that since people will not be aware that Socrates chose to remain in prison, they will assume that Plato had the chance to help Socrates escape, and that he wasn’t willing to spend the money or put in the effort. This will lead people to believe that Plato cares more about his finances than his friend, and his reputation will be damaged beyond repair. This argument relies on Plato’s belief that is wrong to commit an act that will hurt a friend. I find this

In this paper, I will present and explain the argument Socrates gives for the conclusion that it is unjust for him to try to escape Athens against the will of the authorities. Socrates is in jail during this part of The Crito. Crito visits Socrates one or two days before his execution with idea of helping him escape, and moving him to a place out of the Athenian authority’s jurisdiction. During this time Socrates brings up an argument. I will be covering this argument and it is that “one must not act unjustly at all” (The Crito, pg. 71). What Socrates means by this is that no one should do anything wrong no matter what. Socrates was sentenced to death for unjust reasons. He then goes onto talk about some principle morals. One of the things he brings up is that no one should do injustice. Even if you are subject to injustice (The Crito, pg. 71). Socrates brings up the point that when someone is subject to ill-treatment it is not right to return it. After bringing up this point, Socrates goes onto stay that “there is no difference, I take it, between ill-treating people and treating them unjustly” (The Crito, pg. 71). So, Socrates creates this premise, and it is as follows “neither doing nor returning injustice is ever right, nor should one who is ill-treated defend himself by retaliation (The Crito, pg. 72).

Plato’s Crito records Crito’s endeavor to persuade Socrates to escape from jail to avoid his unjustified death sentence. Crito’s plan is foolproof that Socrates’ will be able to successfully escape to another state. However, Socrates’ contention straightforwardly identifies with the laws of the state and the citizens’ obligations towards the sate. In his argument, Socrates compares the state-citizen relationship to the parent-child relationship. Socrates is shown as a model citizen, who being unjustifiably sentenced will surrender his life in dutifulness to the state. I, with a different perspective, would have to disagree with Socrates’ philosophy regarding the state and its citizens. If I had been wrongfully sentenced to be executed and had found a way to save my life, I would let no chance to slip by my hand.

swift seduction into the position of authority had led you down the proverbial rabbit hole, Capri. This committee had decided on dropping all charges against you, with one exception, because of your level of involvement. Given the fact that you were only an informant, we’ve granted you leniency in light thereof. Your inappropriate use of this office and the necessary technology impeded fellow officers from doing their jobs efficiently and effectively. Consequently, you won’t be eligible to receive any financial investments, pension, etc. This, along with your letter of termination, will take effect immediately.”

If Socrates escapes from prison Socrates would be validating laws of Athenians. Is living your life in fear of the Athens worth it? Crito eager to help his friend, is escaping the right thing to do? Who wants to live a life with a ruin soul? Crito argues agreeable arguments on why Socrates should escape from prison.

Police Brutality has become a serious topic in today’s time being that every time you turn on the TV you see them mention another act of violence from the police and since that were in 2015, cellphone cameras are being used to capture every single second of it, so it won’t become he say, she say evidence. According to Salem Press Encyclopedia, police brutality is abuses of authority that amount to serious and divisive human rights violations involving the excessive use of force that may occur in the apprehension or retention of civilians. Police brutality has become the issue of today’s time with civilians of this country; recent examples of police

I agree with Pacificus because the authority is given to the executive to preserve the peace in the nation, yet Overall I agree with the idea that the president’s power should not be limited for he is representing the entire nation.

I find this interesting because these are the symbols found in Speak, so this could be a message from Laurie Anderson.

In The Crito by Socrates, both Crito and Socrates present arguments, one that Socrates should escape prison, and one that he should not. Crito’s argument contains logic fallacies that undermine his argument and make it weak. Therefore, Socrates argument that he should remain in prison and face his death is valid and strong, and is better than Crito’s.

“For war, as a grave act of killing, needs to be justified.” These words were written by Murray N. Rothbard, dean of the Austrian School and founder of modern libertarianism, who spent much of his academic career trying to determine what, exactly, defined a “just war”. In fact, for as long as humans have been fighting wars, there have been quotations referring to the justification and moralities of wars and how warfare can be considered fair and acceptable to each society’s individual standards. While the time and place of each war differs, the reality of the devastation of battle may be found warranted by those fighting using these just war standards to vindicate their actions.

He points out that pursuing goodness is how Socrates professes to lead his life, and that a good man would see that his children are cared for. Crito says that staying in jail is the easiest thing to do, but fleeing requires courage, and what is right, what is good is worth for his children.

From George Washington to 2017’s Donald Trump, the United States Executive responsibilities have increased drastically. In respect to the powers that the president was to be given in the early America, funnily enough the Framers were just breaking away from a tyrannical monarchy that put one person in power of everything, and to repeat that system with a president was probably the last thing they wanted to do. But now presidents can make executive orders, purpose legislation to congress, and even gain much more control over the nation during a time of crisis or war. This would seem to directly contrast what was to the president’s original role. After reading the section in the textbook and gathering my notes, I will be trying to answer the

Although one may believe that war is morally justifiable, others may ponder upon the fact that it is not. For instance, James Boswell states “my mind expanded itself in reflections upon the horrid irrationality of war.” in his essay “On War”. Those who may have the same mindset

In the text, Socrates in rebuttal to Crito’s first and second argument, he explains that the opinion of an expert is much relevant than listening to the opinion of the majority. In “Crito”, Socrates explains that if we listen to the majority, “we could harm our souls, the part of us that is mutilated by wrong actions and benefited by right ones” (“Plato”). Take for example- a college student taking a course for his future job. If you had a difficult problem to solve, who would you trust more: a group of peers or a professor? Generally, the student will listen to the professor, not the group because a professor has the qualities and qualifications that makes them credible. In addition, I think it is reasonable to explain how Crito is being selfish. Crito is only talking about himself and not how he can positively impact Socrates by convincing him to escape besides giving him more than one valuable argument as to why he should escape prison. Lastly, Crito’s most effective argument regarding his sons fails to persuade because there are scenarios where escaping can affect his sons in a negative way. For example, Socrates could ruin the lives of his sons in terms of reputation and harm because now they would be known as “the son of a destroyer of the law.”