Erroneus Assumptions in The Trial and Death of Socrates...

Erroneus Assumptions in The Trial and Death of Socrates In Platos Crito, Socrates explains to his old friend Crito his reasons for refusing an offer to help him escape execution. One of the tools Socrates uses to convince Crito of the righteousness of his decision is a hypothetical argument concerning the state and laws of Athens. Central to this argument is the congeniality that Socrates had always found in Athens, reflected by the fact that Socrates chose to remain in Athens for most of his life. Such a choice, the laws insist, implies a tacit agreement between Socrates and the state of Athens, stipulating that Socrates either obey the laws or, when he deems the laws unjust, persuade the city to act in a more suitable fashion. It†¦show more content†¦I will then argue that its impiety makes upholding the agreement unacceptable in the eyes of the gods and that it is the opinion of the gods that must direct Socrates decision. Socrates first step is to establish that one must never do wrong (not even in retaliation for a wrong done against oneself) and that one must fulfill any just agreement into which one enters (49B).[1] Crito offers his consent to this claim, but cannot agree with Socrates assertion that fleeing Athens in defiance of the law would injure the city. He believes that Socrates would not be doing anything wrong by avoiding execution. Here Socrates makes a hypothetical argument on behalf of the Athenian state, although he makes it clear that their argument is also his own. Athens, Socrates believes, is correct in asserting that an attempt to escape his death sentence would also constitute an attempt to destroy the city by undermining its laws. It is worth noting that harming Athens is explicitly described as impious in Socrates argument. Crito stands by the defense that Socrates has a right to destroy Athens because its decision to execute him was unjust. Socrates, again speaking on behalf o f the Athenian state, responds by explaining that he is bound by a just agreement either to obey the decisions of the state or to convince it to do better; he cannot simply subvert its orders whenever he so chooses (51E). This is the agreement Socrates himself made with Athens when he