Should Socrates Break The Law Or Injustice In Plato's Crito

The main theme of the book of Crito is about whether should Socrates break the law and escape from execution or stay and accept his death penalty. At the very end, Socrates pointed out that trying to escape breaks the law, and any act that breaks the law is unjust . Therefore, Socrates refused to escape and decided to accept his death penalty and execution. Socrates responded each of the three arguments Crito brought out. However, are Socrates’ arguments reasonable and is it always right to obey the law regarding the law itself is morally justice or injustice? First of all, we need to know what are the arguments mainly about? The book of Crito is a dialogue between Socrates and his good friend Crito. This argument between Socrates and Crito happened after Socrates was wrongfully imprisoned and announced to death. As the text reveals, Crito visited Socrates in prison before dawn and told him that plans were in place to prepare for his escape and journey to another city( Plato 45b) . However, Socrates refused to do so. Then, Crito gave Socrates three different kinds of arguments for why Socrates should escape from the prison, and …show more content…
However, not all authorities are delighted in God’s eyes. In addition, God’s laws are over all laws. It is wrong to obey the laws that break God’s laws. In Socrates’ case, the law had been incorrectly applied. He was mistreated. The law was used unjustly. This was what Socrates tried to prove in his trial. The accusation went as follows: "Socrates is an evil-doer who corrupts the youth, and who does not believe in the gods whom the city believes in, but in other new divinities"( Plato 9). During the trial, he denied all the accusations, but he was still announced death. Consequently, since the laws are unjustly applied, his decision not to escape from prison cannot be regarded as rational , and it is always right to follow unjust