Crito's Arguement Analysis

As Socrates waited for the ships to arrive from Delos, Crito proposed to Socrates a way he could escape his death penalty. This would mean disobeying the law, however Crito insisted for Socrates to listen to his proposition because he believed he still had a life to live for. In response Socrates suggested they should examine Crito’s proposition before planning for his escape: “I think it important to persuade you before I act, and not to act against your wishes.” (Crito. 48e). Socrates’ response was much more than an argument; it was an analysis of the most probable outcome that would lead after him running away. As Crito listened and answered Socrates’ entire questions, he realized that there was no further argumentation that could be done to change Socrates’ destiny. In the beginning of the chapter Crito expressed to Socrates why he felt he should agree to run away. He disputed topics such as: what would happen to his sons without their father, and what kind of men they would be if they didn’t try to save Socrates or save himself. In my opinion, I feel the most persuasive statement Crito shared was: “You seem to me to choose the easiest path, whereas one should choose the path a good and courageous man would choose, particularly when one claim …show more content…
Again he began questioning Crito if one should never do wrong or if one should do wrong in certain ways. Crito’s response was that one should never do wrong nor repay a man with wrongdoing even if they betrayed you. In my perspective, Socrates asked this question perhaps because he wanted to show Crito that even though the men of Athens condemned him to a death penalty. He should not break the laws they have set because then it is considered as wrongdoing. Socrates then explained Crito that only a certain amount of people really feel this way, and that only difference between the two was the despite one felt against the