Persuasive Letter Socrates

Near the end of the Apology, Socrates had been deemed guilty by the court and had been sentenced to death. However, in response to the members who deemed him not guilty and or for his acquittal, Socrates bring up the argument that those voted against him had not really punished him. Rather for all they know, they may have done him a blessing (44 d).

Socrates, in his conviction from the Athenian jury, was both innocent and guilty as charged. In Plato’s Five Dialogues, accounts of events ranging from just prior to Socrates’ entry into the courthouse up until his mouthful of hemlock, both points are represented. Socrates’ in dealing with moral law was not guilty of the crimes he was accused of by Meletus. Socrates was only guilty as charged because his peers had concluded him as such. The laws didn’t find Socrates guilty; Socrates was guilty because his jurors enforced the laws. The law couldn’t enforce itself. Socrates was accused of corrupting Athens’ youth, not believing in the gods of the city and creating his own gods. In the Euthyphro, Socrates defends himself against the

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.

The Apology is a seemingly misleading title. If your teacher spoke Greek, you too would learn that our word apology is actually derived from the Greek word apologia; meaning “in defense of.” Therefore, Socrates does not beg for forgiveness, rather justifies his profession. The Apology is his chance to “protest” against the authorities and make them listen to his side. Piece by piece, he dissects the charges against him. By doing so, he irritates the jurors. This is why the Apology seems to some proof of Socrates’ disrespect. When the vote came in, Socrates was declared guilty by 280 of the 500 jurors. Socrates is then given the chance to suggest a worthy punishment for himself. Most convicted persons would use this time to plea for their lives and families; Socrates had something else in mind. He says that they should reward him, as they do for the athletes, rather than punish him. The jurors came back and condemn him to death. The jurors were so incensed, even more votes shifted against him this time. Socrates does not break down and plea for his life. He simply thanks the jurors that stood behind him, and asks the others to open their minds more in the future. Socrates tells his audience “ a life

According to the majority of the jury members of Athens, Socrates is a corruption to the youth, doer of evil and does not agree with the gods of his people. In the Apology, written by Plato these are the assumptions and accusations Socrates is held in court for. In court, he is faced with what most men fear, being wrongly accused leading to the death sentence. Socrates argues and strives to prove that he has no fear of being hated, being accused of serious crimes, being threatened with punishment, or being put to death.

He knows that if he escaped, it would be a crime. I find it ironic that he would argue his trial, but not argue his punishment from the trial he argued. The bottom line with Socrates and laws is that he probably did not live by them very closely. It is my belief that Socrates was a good person with good morals. He probably saw laws for the weak minded, and he was certain he was not weak minded. The question of whether he would abide by these laws is that he would and he did. He died for them.

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 reading Plato tells the story of Socrates and his trial which ultimately lead to his death sentence. Socrates was a 70 year old man at peace with his own mortality yet willing to face his accusers with an almost definite possibility of death to maintain his own integrity and beliefs and morality. He fully understood from the beginning of his trial what the sentence handed down would be yet on a level of honor and courage not seen in abundance in modern society he maintained his stance and delivered a compelling and convincing argument. He openly stated that he knew his actions had offended Meletus and

They wished for him to formally apologize or the result would be death. The court protested that if he stopped teaching his theory, then the charges against him would be dropped and he would not have the ultimate punishment, being death. Socrates believed that his argument could be sensibly defended without death being the penalty, which is why his apology ceases to apologize for insulting the wise men. He tells the court "if I was bound to be acquitted....you are bound to put me to death, because if I were to escape, all your children would forthwith be utterly corrupted by practicing what Socrates teaches..."(78). Inevitably he dies for protesting the court's wishes to stop teaching his beliefs.

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 suggested that if he were to get what he deserved, he should be honored with a great meal for being of such service to the state. He rejected the sentences of prison or exile, offering instead to pay a fine. When the jury rejected his suggestions and sentenced him to death, Socrates accepted the verdict and said that no one but the gods know what happens after death and so it would be foolish to fear what one does not know. He also warned the people who voted against him that by silencing him rather than listening to him, they have harmed themselves much more than they have harmed him.

Do we have an obligation to obey any law, no matter how unjust or evil, provided only that it is in fact a valid rule of the legal system in which we happen to be physically located? In the following composition, I am going to examine the answer to this question in accordance to what Socrates believes. The best way to understand this almost “WWSD” (What Would Socrates Do) approach is by looking at Socrates' actions in the three Platonic dialogues we have read. These dialogues bring forth three possible bases for why Socrates believes one should obey the law. First, that there is a distinction between the the “justness” of a law and how that law is applied. Second, that if one willingly accepts living in a

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

2. During his main speech, to explain why he chose to live the life he did at risk of being “in danger of death” 28b, Socrates uses an example from the Iliad in which a young man chose to avenge his friend's death at the risk of immediate destruction as opposed to surviving. 28D paraphrased. This example of a life of integrity allows Socrates to demonstrate that all men should “remain and face danger, without a thought for death or anything else, rather than disgrace.” 28e. It is in this same moment that Socrates explains that were he not to live the life he has lived that he would be disobeying a god.

Socrates shocked everyone when he said he would choose death over anything else. However, the answer to why he would do that lies in his statement. Socrates knew that, had he choose to go into exile, he would be expected to stop living the way that he was. He would no longer be able to teach others, let alone question and examine his own life. For Socrates, this would be absurd. He believed the entire point of living life was to examine. He felt obligated to live a life where he questioned not only what was going on in his life but also the rights and wrongs that happened. He would rather give up his life than not be able to question what was happening.