Philosophy

Introduction

Socrates' life had posed challenging questions to democracy, his death at its hands seems to lead Plato to a disgust with democracy that matched the disgust of the oligarchical faction in Athens that he had already conceived (despite being closely related to several of the leading conspirators). Athenian democracy was clearly unable to tolerate Socrates. This posed to Plato the questions not only of how one should live like an individual, but of what a society would look like in which someone like, Socrates would be valued as beneficial rather than feared as dangerous, and more, of what was the nature of public knowledge, and how it could be expressed in social arrangements, including rule and education. To answer these questions, Plato invented a new literary genre and indeed transformed the notion of philosophy itself. (Chroust, 89)

(Crito) List the reasons Socrates gave to why it would be wrong for him to escape

According to him, if escaping is right, then it is something good for him. If it is wrong, then it is something bad for him.

Given that Socrates, like any rational agent, wishes to attain what is good for him, it follows then that not only would it be wrong for him to escape, but it would also be stupid, because he would be depriving himself of a very powerful good.

The quality of his life would be destroyed. If this line of reasoning is correct, then the moral question raised in the Crito is subordinated to the prudential question, the coincide ration of one's own good or benefit.

This allows us to infer with a high degree of confidence that Socrates' moral philosophy is not deontological, for it is not fundamentally grounded on the imperative, to do one's duty regardless of the ensuing good or evil for oneself. It turns out not to be strictly teleological either, because the right is not defined as that which is conducive to an independently defined non-moral good” (Taylor, 56).

At this stage of our inquiry, then, the sole constituent of Socratic happiness appears to be the morally upright life. Interpreting the Crito along these lines is a first step toward taking sides in the dispute concerning the question of the relation between virtue and happiness in Socratic ethics. We should accept, at least provisionally, that with regard to this question, and its reformulation as entail what has been called the simultaneous interpretation, which excludes the instrumental one. The practice of the virtues is not, according to Socrates, a means to attain happiness. Virtue is not conducive to happiness. It is happiness.

It should be noted that our interpretations of the Crito have uncovered a new Socratic paradox. By these actions and his arguments, Socrates shows that if he escapes and continues to live, he will destroy his virtuous life; and if he stays and dies, he will have attained the moral life.

Why did he believe all laws authorized by the state should be obeyed? Do you agree with him, why or why not?

Accordingly, Socrates' moral commitment to ...