Socrates Should Not Escape From Prison

Proponents to his decision of allowing his fate could point out that he was not considering the obligation he had towards his children – leaving them by choice is not the right thing to do. Another concern that is apparent is seen in how remaining in prison was the same as Socrates collaborating his own death and voluntarily accepting it, which seems wrong. Proponents would also try to argue that because the citizens committed an injustice to him, he should not have to follow the law and ought to be able to escape. As stated before, this would be an injustice to the laws. Until his demise Socrates did remain as his own moral guidelines and demonstrated his superiority to the law, showing his choice for his intellectual and philosophical way of thinking had in the end

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 his third premise, Socrates argues that men must do what they believe to be right, and keep their agreements. Socrates argues that he is under an agreement with the state to abide by their laws, and that escaping would be breaking their agreement, thereby knowingly doing wrong. He concludes that if he were to escape he would be breaking agreements and purposely doing wrong, and therefore would not be living justly and honorably, and not be living a good life. For these reasons he decides that he can not escape jail.

More importantly, Socrates’s relationship to the state is made clear during the dialogue with his friend Crito, when speaking as if Socrates is the state himself. When asking how important the state is, the law asks; “Is your…country to be honored more than…all your ancestors…that it counts for more among the gods and sensible men, that you must worship it…?” Rather than a statement, Socrates makes his point that the law must be upheld, even in his case of a death sentence. It is important to note that Socrates accepted his fate, even though he felt the accusations against him were false. Yet, as if speaking on behalf of the law, recognized that escaping would only turn those untruthful indictments into the truth, and as a destroyer of laws; “You will strengthen the conviction of the jury that they passed the right sentence on you.” By the definition of the word martyr, as one who dies for a cause, in this instance the laws of the state,

His position had an immense impact on the guilty verdict of his trial because he behaved arrogantly toward the judges who would choose his verdict and punishment. For example Socrates refused to refer to the judges to the as their titles but only as, Athenians. This caused an outrage towards Socrates this was seen as disrespectful. As well Socrates would talk back to the judges, “Do not interrupt me Athenians, with your shouts. Remember the request which I made to you, and do not interrupt my words”(pg. 41). Logically Socrates should have been much more agreeable towards the judges considering the situation he was in, but in contrast he remained true to his philosophical lifestyle and pursued his innocence in a way he felt was best.

Everyone knows that Greeks invented democracy, but it was not democracy as we know it now-days. The charges that were made to Socrates would be ridiculous today, but in Ancient Greece, they were legitimate crimes. At that time, speaking of other gods, having different ideologies, disagreeing with Athenian politicians, etc. were seen as unacceptable. Socrates was believed to be that kind of man. Plato and Xenophon, two of Socrates students, claimed that because of Socrates openly criticized of Athenian politicians made him gain many enemies. Not to mention that at that time Ancient Greece went through a time of war, famine, loss, and plague. There was crisis in Athens and Socrates came in with his new teachings. Many of Athens thought that his teaching were corrupting the youth, the only people that could now bring Athens forward (cam.ac.uk). But were the accusations true? Was Socrates actually innocent? I believe he was. Three reasons why I believe Socrates was innocent was because Socrates did believe in Athenian gods, he didn’t actually corrupt the youth, and many of the bad things said of Socrates were rumors.

Socrates’s offering to the jury is to tell the truth, despite not admitting that it is simply his truth and thus not the entire truth, he is not able to convey to the jury the importance of not killing him. A bad citizen would try to undermine the jury by committing perjury and disobeying the decision of the court. He however, wouldn’t even like it if the jury committed perjury on his behalf, “Socrates says what he means on the stand hold honesty above all else, so when he is offered a chance to escape from his execution he does not take it. By refusing to escape, he reiterates how sticking to agreements is important to him. Socrates' commitment to the societal agreement between him and the city where he is allowed to live in

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

The execution of Socrates is not justified. The charges that were brought against Socrates had taught all his adult life, without molestation, in a state that was well known for its democracy and fairness. The Athenians were not brutal people and executions were rare. Socrates had to drink a poisonous hemlock in order to die, a non-brutal method of death. We must understand Athens past in order to make judgment. I believe that the form of punishment was very extreme in this impressionable city and very uncommon and unalike the portrayed view of the typical Athenian. Socrates

To this question, first Socrates says that he should not revenge injustice. Because doing injustice is bad in any circumstances (Crito 49b), to return injustice just because of having injustice done onto himself would bad also (Crito 49c). Therefore Socrates should not commit injustice just to get even with Athens. Injustice is bad because it harms, and disobedience to the law would harm the city (Crito 50b); so it seems that to disobey the law would be an injustice. But why should Socrates obey the law of the city? Socrates reasons that since the city has done him great benefactions, such as giving birth to his life, taking care of his physical upbringing and his education, and granting him long years of benefits from the legal system (Crito 50e - 51c), Socrates owns the state a strong duty of gratitude just as a child would own to his father. One of those duties is to obey the state (like how a child obeys his parents), which always has included the possibility of death such as in times of war (Crito 51b). Socrates should obey the city because he has made an agreement to do so. This agreement is the social contract that he has implicitly accepted and lived under for 70 years. This contract is legitimate because Socrates had a thorough understanding of the legal system (Crito 51e - 52a), he did not leave the city when he was given the fair chance all his life (Crito 51 c-e), and 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.

Ancient Athens was the site of a growing culture. Philosophy was among the many improvements and discoveries being made. With these improvements and discoveries, great thinkers were able to stretch out their knowledge to new heights. The society they lived in, both welcomed and shunned their ideals. Socrates was one of these thinkers. It was because of Socrates open-mindedness that he was sentenced to death by two charges brought against him. One, Socrates corrupted the youth and two, Socrates believed in ‘false gods’. Yet, was Socrates guilty or not?

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 would rather be punished or die before he breaks the laws that were set forth by his state, and this he says later in the same passage, “I should run any risk on the side of law and justice rather than join you. (Cahn pg. 38 Apology b10-c2).”

If he were to escape then he would be causing more harm to himself as he would lose all self-respect and dignity. Socrates was against the escape plan and he gave really good reasons to why he disagreed with Crito. Socrates was not guilty for his accusation. If he were to escape then everyone would think otherwise. Socrates said his occupation as a philosopher was following what the gods commanded. Therefore, living life without practicing philosophy would not be worth it. There was only one way to define the good life, and that is a life of knowledge.