Socrates & Crito

8 Pages 2074 Words

Topic: Does Socrates convince you (as he seems to have persuaded Crito) that an agreement obliges him to remain in Athens and face execution?

Crito is a dialogue between Socrates and the title character in which both men discuss whether Socrates should or should not attempt to escape from an execution sentenced by the state of Athens. The scene is set a few days before the actual execution of Socrates is scheduled to take place. Crito approaches Socrates in his prison cell and attempts to persuade him into running away with the monetary and physical help of Crito and Socrates’ other friends and admirers. Crito gives a number of reasons why Socrates should run away basing his reasons around how Socrates should avoid harm (e.g. by running away, Socrates will avoid harming his friends and their reputation, his children, and so forth). Socrates is faced with making a decision in a limited amount of time (i.e. the decision to run away). Socrates rejects Crito’s reasons for running away, and then presents his own arguments about why running away would be committing a wrongful act.
Before Socrates begins his two arguments, Crito concedes to Socrates’ assertion that if two parties have come to an agreement, then the agreement must always be held. By not upholding the agreement, one party is causing harm to the other. And, both Socrates and Crito believe that it is always wrong to harm another, in any situation.
Socrates then begins to speak of his association with the laws. He states that if he were to run away, he would destroy the laws because he would leave the laws equivalent to nothing. If Socrates were to claim that the city had wronged him, and its decision was not right, the laws would reply that there was an agreement between Socrates and the nation of Athens (and its subsequent laws) which both parties had agreed to and as a consequence, the agreement required Socrates to remain in prison and serve his sentence...