He seemed almost ambivalent to the continuation of his life but instead was concerned with the wisdom of his actions during his life. “You are wrong, sir, if you think that a man who is any good at all should take into account the risk of life or death; he should look to this only in his actions, whether what he does is right or wrong (Apology 28b).” Socrates believes that it is a disgrace to back down in the face of danger when he has done the right thing. This is especially true for Socrates because of the charges against him. He refutes all of them and shows that he does believe in the state Gods, that he does not charge a fee for teaching, and that if he pollutes the minds of young people it is of there own free will. His strongest argument is that if he did do wrong he did so unknowingly and therefore should not be punished.
Socrates says that "one must never willingly do wrong" because wrongdoings damage the soul. I agree with Socrates beccause no matter what you should never return a wrongdoing with a wrongdoing. He uses a anti-retaliation principle and even though most people dont believe in retaliation, I do believe in it. Socrates wants to say that escaping from prison would be unjust, but he must also say whom he would be wronging. His best answer is that he would be wronging the Laws of Athens.
They continue to bring up the topic of pious and unpious actions. Euthyphro claims “the pious is to do what I am doing, to prosecute the wrongdoer…not to prosecute is impious.” Then, Socrates exclaims he is the defendant in his case because he believes it is difficult to accept the common knowledge the people believe about the goods, since there is no plausible evidence. As the dialogue continues, Socrates claims that “different gods consider different things to be just…for they would not be at odds with one another unless they differed about these subjects…(page 9, 7e)” Then the same things would be both pious and unpious. Simply, the nature of Socrates is to question and further complicate matters by counter arguments. Then Socrates states that the matter is finding who the wrongdoer is rather than how he must be punished.
After the examination Socrates concludes that the act of escape would be just and he would be morally unjustified and committing the act. The first argument that Crito presents to Socrates brings up the issue of what the majority think. Crito says, “Many people who do not know you or me very well will believe I might have saved you had I been willing to give money, but that I did not care to do so.” (Grude, Pg 47) Crito’s argument is clearly concerned with his own reputation, especially with what the majority
To prove the Oracle wrong Socrates went searching for a wiser man than he in Athens. During his trail he mentioned of his search and how he made enemies of men take he interviewed and told them they were knowledgeable but not wise. I learned what made the other men unwise is that they consider themselves wise and full of knowledge, one person should alway strive to be wise but never attaining it, because it is impossible to know everything and have absolute
He says that “ The things and the men that are pleasing to the gods are pious, and the things and the men that are displeasing to the gods are impious.” Socrates approves of this definition because it is of a very generalization. But he also states that Euthyphro’s definition has flaws because the gods would disagree on what is considered pleasing. Socrates’ case is that the gods are very irrational when it comes to arguments and disagreements. Normal rational people would find answers and come to a settlement on the correct answer, but when it comes to the gods any slight disagreement causes them to become enemies and angry towards each other. Socrates goes on to
His friend Crito comes to his rescue except, Socrates declines this rescue as he explains that doing so would be a breaching of the laws. His reasoning behind is, that by escaping he is favoring those who have condemned him and failing that which is fair and just, the laws; even when these have wrongly condemned him. So he questions whether he ought to break the laws or not. (Plato 49-51) Whether he was persuasive in terms of his escape that is very clear as he does feel he should side with the law, the reader could perceive it differently. While there is a clear understanding of what is right and wrong, looking at both points of view it seems that the overall point is lost to Socrates.
A last example of the Greek cultural value of being devoted to the gods is made visible by the reason that Oedipus is accursed. Creon finally tells Oedipus to “not seek to be master in everything” (Sophocles 470). Because Oedipus relied so heavily on himself, instead of being loyal the gods, he greatly suffered. Because Sophocles wrote the play so that Oedipus would suffer for not being loyal,
compare and contrast Many people may feel that Socrates and Dr. King made their decisions off of unjust morals in no regard to the heath and safety to any other human being. Socrates and Dr. King may have caused harm not only to themselves but to their society as well. It only may have looked that way to some but that is not the case of these two great human beings. Socrates and Dr. King changed the way people feel, act, and think toward the rule or law which stood in their time. Even though these two men have differences of have they provided there point of view to the society but they also had similarities of how they made their points across to society.
Socrates continued his point in saying that “an action or a man dear to the gods is pious, but an action or a man hated by the gods is impious” (Euthyphro, 7a). However, Socrates also points out that gods, just like people, can have their differences and disagreements about anything. Therefore, there could be no unification in what is right and wrong, good and bad, or pious and impious. Again, we see Socrates’ doubt in having more than one god. If the gods can have their disputes about piety and impiety, then how would we ever know what exactly is the right course of action?