Reflection Of Crito

3. In the first text the Euthyphro, Socrates ironically asks Euthyphro what the definition of piety is, in the mist of his awaiting to be put on trial. In the Apology, Socrates goes in front of the court and jury and presents his case of why he shouldn’t be punished for allegedly corrupting the youth with his teachings. In the Crito, Socrates awaits his execution and ponders the system of laws, and whether or not it is unjust to break a law in all cases.

In Alexander Sesonke’s review of “Plato’s Apology: Republic 1”, he boasts Socrates appeal to logos writing, “His method in Republic 1 as throughout the early dialogues, is to seek truth via refutation; to elicit opinion and then confront it with a contrary opinion held with equal firmness. It is a method requiring great logical agility whose exercise is based upon the faith that conviction and truth are to be achieved by finding in each respondent the true voice of his true self.” Despite facing the death penalty, Socrates logically defends his way of life and maintains his composure. In a large portion of his speech Socrates used the syllogism to appeal to his audience’s reason. The syllogism was a schematic device that Aristotle invented to analyze and

Crito argues that Socrates should escape jail, and relies on the premises that he must consider the opinion of the public and that Socrates is betraying his children. Crito believes that Socrates is being foolish by remaining in jail and not escaping when given the opportunity. To support this argument, Crito presents two premises. The first of which claims that Socrates

Socrates was a great thinker and debater dedicated to truth. He spent his golden years walking the streets of Athens in pursuit of wisdom. Socrates lived the destiny that was revealed to him in the Oracle. He created and perfected his own cross-examination technique; we today know it as the Socratic Method. He was thorough and unrelenting. His subjects were often humiliated. Socrates would methodically disprove anyone he thought was wrong. In his eyes, most of the people he interviewed were blind. It did not matter if one was wealthy and influential or if they were young and impressionable. Socrates could question anyone and turn him or her inside out. Unfortunately, he did so without regard to the

In the Crito, Socrates believes that breaking the laws of the city harms all of society. The consequences of escaping the city outweigh the benefits for it puts his family, his friends, and himself in danger. He believes in a personal morality that one must live a good and just life, and not just any life. If Socrates breaks the law then he would not be acting justly,

In Crito, there is a conversation between Crito and Socrates. Crito is attempting to convince Socrates

Although Socrates violates the absurd and appeals to oracles and divine beings, there are lessons to be learned through a close reading of the text when using absurd logic as a tool. It would be fallacious for a reader to dismiss the philosophical ideas Socrates is delivering, based on him negating the absurd. For example, in the Apology, Socrates introduces Socratic Irony and the Elenchus. Socratic Irony as mentioned earlier is the idea that one knows that he does not know, and the Elenchus or Socratic method is a form of a cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, which is still used today in education and courtrooms. Although Socrates commits philosophical suicide, it remains important that a student of liberal arts be aware of the importance of Socratic thought. A close reading through absurd lenses allows one to comprehend these important Ideas.

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;

Socrates believes that he is an individual who had the potential to accomplish extraordinary feats due to his unique set of traits. He claims, “If they were of any use, Crito, the many would be able to do the greatest evils, and so they would also be able to do the greatest goods, and that would be fine. But as it is they can do neither, since they cannot make a man either wise or foolish” (Crito, 44d). Only certain people have the capacity to complete enormous feats, and those people are not average citizens of the state. Instead, they must have qualities that set them apart from the rest of the population. Furthermore, “it is reputed at least that Socrates is distinguished from the many human beings in some way” (The Apology, 34e).

For these two articles that we read in Crito and Apology by Plato, we could know Socrates is an enduring person with imagination, because he presents us with a mass of contradictions: Most eloquent men, yet he never wrote a word; ugliest yet most profoundly attractive; ignorant yet wise; wrongfully convicted, yet unwilling to avoid his unjust execution. Behind these conundrums is a contradiction less often explored: Socrates is at once the most Athenian, most local, citizenly, and patriotic of philosophers; and yet the most self-regarding of Athenians. Exploring that contradiction, between ¡§Socrates the loyal Athenian citizen¡¨ and ¡§Socrates the philosophical critic of Athenian society,¡¨ will help

Throughout the readings of The Apology of Socrates and Crito I have found that Socrates was not a normal philosopher. It is the philosopher's intention to question everything, but Socrates' approach was different then most other philosophers. From one side of the road, Socrates can be seen as an insensitive, arrogant man. He did indeed undermine the laws so they fit his ideals, leave his family, and disregard the people's values. On the other side he can be seen as an ingenious man who questioned what many thought was the unquestionable. As he can be criticized for disregarding the many's ideals he can also be applauded for rising above the daily ways of popular thought. He

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.

The next argument that Crito address to Socrates; is does he fear of putting his friends endangering or at an inconvenience for escaping. Crito and others friends are willing to face the danger of this and understand the risk. Crito doesn’t want Socrates to fear living in exile because he can ensure that Socrates will leave in comfort. Several wealthy men have been willing to put their money to aid Socrates and to also ensure his protection. Crito believes that Socrates’ behavior is a poor refection on Socrates himself as a friend

Throughout his life, Socrates engaged in critical thinking as a means to uncover the standards of holiness, all the while teaching his apprentices the importance of continual inquiry in accordance with obeying the laws. Socrates primarily focuses on defining that which is holy in The Euthyphro – a critical discussion that acts as a springboard for his philosophical defense of the importance of lifelong curiosity that leads to public inquiry in The Apology. Socrates continues his quest for enlightenment in The Crito, wherein he attempts to explain that while inquiry is necessary, public curiosity has its lawful price, thus those who inquire must both continue to do so and accept the lawful consequences

Socrates had a unique way of teaching and expressing his thoughts and ideas. He taught by constantly posing questions with the assumption that any person could approach the truth through logic if he set aside ingrained prejudice and received knowledge (Hattersley 17,18). His dialectic method of questioning consisted of a subject being broken down by one or more people, in search of the same truth but with differing views. Instead of merely trying to convince listeners, Socrates would approach others by questioning what they felt to be true and therefore would be able to determine that person’s true feelings and the basis for those feelings. Socrates was open to receive knowledge wherever he could find it, yet when he approached people who claimed to be wise, he found they really knew nothing. He would challenge preconceived opinions, based on the words of others and fallacious logic. Many felt that he was attacking their identity and security causing them to resent Socrates when he pointed this out. Due to his search for truth, Socrates would, eventually, pay the ultimate price. Socrates teaches us to assume nothing and to question everything. In scientific study today, this is a fundamental element of scientific study, starting with a theory and afterward refining it to the point of when a decisive conclusion is made.