Perpetua Vs Socrates

According to Socrates, the people who lead the society were the philosophers or the people who believed in truth, if a person is unaware of the truth then they were not allowed to rule. The concept of morality basically depends on association, interdependence and organization. Its major component is the goodness. When Crito visited Socrates telling him that he owns enough money to bribe the guards so that he can escape the jail; he rejected his idea saying that it’s better to die rather than living a life full of unjust. Socrates was against the breaking of law, that’s why he denied Crito’s offer. He believed that people should follow their own path instead of following majority because it is not necessary that majority are always right and minority are always wrong. His death penalty was unjust to him by the system of law. The charges against him was not that serious to be given death penalty. It was considered as the unjust application of law. Crito presented few

The end of Socrates life was a display of moral martyrdom and a tribute to his long-standing ethical commitment to do what he thought to be just. His ultimate life position ended in his enactment upon what his intellectual being thought to be the right thing to do, rather than to do the opinion of the most. Socrates ultimately felt that; one should live justly, one should never do wrong, and that one should keep agreements – even if that meant he was to die. Similarly, the laws held that Socrates should not escape from prison for if he would, then that would be equal to destroying not only the laws but the city as well. The platonic dialogue in Crito involving piety brings into question

Socrates motives for not escaping could also be understood by his principles. His principle says, “And a good life is equivalent to a just and honorable one.”(1). Socrates believes and lives by doing well to himself and other people. Even though staying in prison would cause him physical damage, he is willing to sacrifice his body in order to save his soul. Because of his belief in living an honorable life, Socrates reasons to stay in prison rather than escaping.

In this literature review I will discuss both Socrates and Jesus Christ (Jesus). I will compare and distinguish them, by their trial, misdeeds (through the view of society), law, justice and punishment. In addition, I will write about their influence in today’s society and what impact they have made through time. Both Socrates and Jesus had many things in common yet, they we’re different. Both had different religious beliefs. While, Socrates was polytheistic, believing in several gods. Jesus, in the other hand was monotheism, believed in only one God. Both were charged, tried, and executed for their “radical”

Socrates should not escape from prison to avoid his death sentence because he would be breaking the law which ultimately led to him straying away from his own principles. He was a person who believed in what was just and doing what was morally correct. If he were to escape from prison, he would essentially be harming others and the State. He thought through harming others, he would be harming himself and his soul, so Socrates did not believe in harming others and thought it was unjust and morally wrong. Even though Socrates had the opportunity to escape and he was given plenty of reasons from his friends to do so, he did not want to go against what he believes in and his philosophy. He could not live a life where he would have to stop

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.

As the anecdote preceding Crito implies, no death sentence can be carried out during the religious mission to Delos. Essentially, the state religion provided a moment in which Socrates could have fled imprisonment, potentially saving his life. However, escape meant compromising and demeaning the laws that protects the society Socrates greatly admired and respected. The state provided the foundation upon which his convictions were built.

On a more ethical level, Crito presents two reasons for why Socrates should escape prison. Crito thinks that it is not just for Socrates to give up his life when he can save it. If he stayed, he would be aiding his enemies in wronging him unjustly, and would thus be acting unjustly himself. Secondly, accepting death means that Socrates is showing no concerns for his family’s fate, and by escaping, he could live in exile and raise and educate his sons. Those reasons are what made Crito believe that Socrates should not give up his life and should escape and live in

Socrates was brought into the courts under charges of impiety and corruption of minors. Socrates did not believe in the divinities of the city-state. The punishment decided upon was an execution, in the hope that Socrates would choose exile, a punishment that would have satisfied the jury.

Socrates has presented a period of questions and answers through dialogue with Crito to examine if he going into exile will damage his reputation. Socrates questions and answers with Crito establishes that a person must decide whether the society he or she lives has a just reasoning behind it's own standards of right and wrong and that a person must have pride in the life that he or she leads. By confirming these two concepts through questions, Socrates attempted to prove to his companion Crito, that the choice that he has made is just: "I am the kind of man who listens only to the argument that on reflection seems best to me. I cannot, now that this fate has come upon me, discard the arguments I used;

In the Dialogue Crito, Socrates employs his Elenchus to examine the notion of justice and one’s obligation to justice. In the setting of the dialogue, Socrates has been condemned to die, and Crito comes with both the hopes and the means for Socrates to escape from prison. When Socrates insists that they should examine whether he should escape or not, the central question turns into whether if it is unjust to disobey laws. Socrates’ ultimate answer is that it is unjust; he makes his argument by first showing that it’s wrong to revenge injustice, then arguing that he has made an agreement with the city’s law for its benefits, and finally reasoning that he

He also explains to Crito that the citizen is bound to the laws like a child is bound to a parent, and so to go against the laws would be like striking a parent. Rather than simply break the laws and escape, Socrates should try to persuade the laws to let him go. These laws present the citizen's duty to them in the form of a kind of social contract. By choosing to live in Athens, a citizen is endorsing the laws, and is willing to follower by them. Therefore, if he was to break from prison now, having so consistently validated the social contract, he would be making himself an outlaw who would not be welcome in any other civilized state for the rest of his life. Furthermore when he dies, he will be harshly judged in the underworld for behaving unjustly toward his city's laws. In this way, Socrates chooses not to attempt escape but he dies as a martyr, not for himself, but for his city and its system of justice.

In Plato’s works Apology and Crito there is an attempt by Socrates to defend himself in court and defend his choice to receive the death penalty when found guilty. Although he makes very valid and strong arguments throughout one can only wonder why such a wise person would choose death over life. The following essay will analyze three quotes from Apology and Crito, find the correlation between them, and reveal any flaws that may exsist inside these arguments made by Socrates.

Socrates spent his time questioning people about things like virtue, justice, piety and truth. The people Socrates questioned are the people that condemned him to death. Socrates was sentenced to death because people did not like him and they wanted to shut him up for good. There was not any real evidence against Socrates to prove the accusations against him. Socrates was condemned for three major reasons: he told important people exactly what he thought of them, he questioned ideas that had long been the norm, the youth copied his style of questioning for fun, making Athenians think Socrates was teaching the youth to be rebellious. But these reasons were not the charges against him, he was charged with being an atheist and

One’s main concern in life was doing what is just and pious. He explains that if a man is good he cannot be harmed in either life or death. Socrates conducted his defense in a way that upheld his beliefs on the significance of life. He explains that if he “would much rather die after this kind of defense than live after making the other kind.” 38e. The other kind of defense being one in which he did not obey the gods. Such as if they acquitted him on the terms in which he did not practice philosophy, he stated he would “obey the god rather than you, and as long as I draw breath and am able, I shall not cease to practice philosophy.” 29d.