Platos Dialogue and the Socrates' Argument - Essay Example

Philosophy Philosophy: Plato’s Dialogue Just men do not always try to run away from the law. If one wants to run away from the law, they need not to make an agreement with the authority by abiding by it for such a long time and only thinks of running away at the last minute when they are now acing great trouble. One as a choice to disagree with the way a state is governed and at this moment, they may decide not to corporate by fleeing to better governed states. However, by staying around for such a long time like seventy years, one is confirming their loyalty and agreement with the laws of a nation. In the book by Michael Boylan and Charles Johnson, there is this Plato’s dialogue between Crito and Socrates. Socrates faces charges of disobeying the gods of Athens and misleading the youths of Athens through his teachings. Socrates is offered a chance to escape through the help of his friend, Crito, who would have paid the right people to make this easily possible. Instead, Socrates turns down the offer and remains to face the law because he did not want to pay evil with evil. The essay will aim at discussion looking at the main objections that the philosopher presents as his main reasons for not accepting the offer to escape from the prison, theoretical explanation and its significance. Objection Premise 1 According to the Philosopher, “…shall we insist on the truth of what was then said, that injustice is always an evil and dishonor to him who acts unjustly?” (Boylan and Johnson 55). Here, Socrates posed a question to Crito to ask him whether they were justified to do evil or insist on truth. Crito agrees with him that injustice is always an evil and dishonor to the unjust, therefore this would imply that Socrates need to stick to what is right as doing an unjust act will lead him to evil and dishonor. Reply From Socrates argument, it is not just to do evil against many people. It means, one must critically think of the consequences of their action before they act. By accepting to escape from the prison, he will be injuring the people of Athens since “…doing evil to another is the same as injuring him,” (55). In order not to find ourselves in positions such as these, then we need not to retaliate or do evil for evil. This is because, when we do evil for evil, we do not tend to solve any problem, but add on a lot of problems to ourselves. Here, it is true what Socrates was talking about. Socrates is not in any way trying to justify the wrong he committed by going against the laws of Athens. He agrees to all that. Or this reason, he has been imprisoned. He feels that it is right to pay for his wrong doing according to the law without running away from it. This is because, by trying to run away from it through planning to escape, he would be committing another evil to these people for having imprisoned him. This will not be what the law may want and going against the law is going against the people. Socrates does not want to do any wrong to the people any more by going against them or the law. By running away from the prison, Socrates will be going against the principles of the land, in the law, which they had acknowledged to be just. It will be like saying something you don’t actually believe in or practice. Objection Premise 2 The second reason why Socrates was justified by not escaping from prison as advised by Crito and his friends, is the fact that, Socrates and his friends will be “…driven into exile and deprived of citizenship or will lose their property…” (59). Crito suggests that Socrates may go into exile after escaping the prison. Also, Crito himself and his friends may also disappear so as to avoid being captured by the Athenian government. Reply According to the philosopher, this will not be right idea since those other cities that Socrates and friends consider to be governed in the best ways possible, will ultimately consider them as enemies. When they escape to Thebes or Megara, first, it will not be easy for them to obtain citizenship as they will be running away from the law of their mother city. Everyone including the government and their patriotic citizen will be against Socrates and his friends. They shall added to themselves more trouble than they could contain. It will be very easy I these new cities for the fugitives to confirm to the judges that they were in those cities illegally and were subverting the law. At this point, there will be no point of return, and the best that the government of the foreign city will do is to deport the fugitives to their country and face the law there. In this way, Socrates and his friends shall have not succeeded in helping him escape, but instead, just extended his execution time, since that is what must be done, ultimately. Socrates’ argument for not allowing to escape, therefore, becomes justified as there it is better that he dies alone in the prison than being deported by together with his friends from the foreign cities for all of them to face the law. Objection Premise 3 Crito also advices Socrates to go to Thessaly to his friends, “…there are friends of mine in Thessaly, if you like to go to them, who will value and protect you and no Thessalian will give you any trouble,” (52). However, according to Socrates, this is not right too. Reply Socrates considers that running away to Thessaly cannot be a reason enough to justify his escape from the prison. Crito’s friends will be charmed to hear the tale of Socrates’ escape from prison. One reason against this is that, Socrates shall have lost his virtue to leave his children in another country as he enjoys in a different county. Socrates will not be able to carry his children with him to Thessaly and educate them there as this will deny his children of Athenian citizenship. If Socrates friends are good friends as they say they are, then taking good care of Socrates’ children will not be a hard task to do for him in his absence than help him escape from the prison. In his argument, he finds it proper to think of justice first before the life of the children. This is justified, since when he does justice, everything else will fall in its place. Observation It is of no good reason to justify Socrates’ escape from Prison. Instead, with all the evaluations, he will be getting into worse trouble than just staying in prison and face his sentence. Running way will cause more harm to himself, his friends as well as his children and family. Socrates will save himself, his friends and his children all these trouble by just agreeing to stay I prison and to face hi sentence. Significance Rightful and just men need not to run away from the law. The law catches up with those who tend to run away from it, no matter how long it would take. Secondly, every bad doing has its evil consequences one must face. If Socrates try to escape from prison, he will be adding more evil doing to himself and many more Athenians. It means, the consequences of his bad doing will increase. For instance, if he escapes from prison so that they go to exile with his friends, when they get deported, the amount of people who will have to face the law will increase and the sentence could be even worse. However, if Socrates’ main reason for wanting to escape from prison is so that he can take care of his children, it would be better that he does the right thing, which is face the law as he has good friends who will, for sure, help him take care of his children. Conclusion It is only a justified decision that Socrates should not escape from the prison. Socrates has acknowledged the fact he has gone against the laws of Athens. He, therefore, needs to stay and pay for what is unjust. By trying to escape from the prison, according to his argument, will amount to him going against the agreement and covenant that he had agreed to become a signatory of. Secondly, he will be causing even more trouble to more people due to something that could have only been solved by him and save everyone the trouble. Work Cited Boylan, Michael and Charles Johnson. Philosophy: An Innovative Introduction: Fictive Narrative, Primary Texts and Responsive Writing. New York: Westview Press, 2010. Print. Read More