Socrates was a Greek philosopher who generated much controversy among the people of his time. While he raised skepticism among authority figures, he himself made his decisions and formed his ideas on a very strict logical basis. He demonstrated this even unto his incarceration. After his trial, he was imprisoned on what he concluded was a false basis, the subjective definition of “piety.” Euthyphro brought the charges up against Socrates under what he believed had performed an act of impiety. In ancient Greece, impiety charges could only be brought up against perpetrators by the family members of the victim. In this case, he is not brought up on charges which were filed by the deceased victim’s family.
Socrates believed that the charge of manslaughter that he was brought up on was not on an unjust basis. However, he conveyed in his dialogue with Crito that it was based solely on his respect for the institutional law of the Greek government that he would be performing an unjust action by escaping the confines of his rightful captor. He stated to Crito that he is bound to his city by law, and that breaking further laws would constitute an attack on his rightful owner. He stated that if it is not good to do something unjust, then it surely cannot be good to respond to another unjust action as such.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Socrates and Greek Philosophy".
Socrates’ logic remains consistent throughout both dialogues. He is shocked that Euthyphro is unaware of his own ignorance which hinders his perspective on law and ethics. He is appalled that Euthyphro is unaware that he himself is not in accordance to Athenian law, as he is bringing up impiety charges against someone who he was not legally able to. However, despite his best efforts in disproving the true meaning of piety, it came to be that Socrates’ logic was rendered useless by Euthyphro’s definitions of “piety.” He especially referenced it to the wills and pleasures of the Greek gods, whom Socrates disregarded in terms of faith. Still, this did not hold up well for Socrates during his dialogue with Euthyphro, even after attempting to convince him that all which was pious was also considered to be just. Clearly, Socrates was brought up on unjust charges which were not his fault.
While Socrates clearly disagrees with the outcome of his trial, he retains his respect for logic and the definition of “unjust,” even in his most trying of times. He states in his dialogue with Crito that simply breaking the law in and of itself is unjust, and that by breaking one of them, a person would break them all. He affirms his statement to the point where he is willing to face death than to escape from an unjust death sentence. In theory, I agree with Socrates’ viewpoint of finding it necessary and just to obey civil law, especially since his persecutor’s seemed to be exempt from it despite his logical arguments during trial.
It is fair to say that two wrongs do not make a right, a concept which Socrates tried to convey to Crito. However, he was not oblivious to the unjust action which was taken against him. In this circumstance, I would not agree with his logic to the extent of not wanting to escape prison. I would agree that any unjust action which hurts or disadvantages anyone else would also be an injustice. However, saving his own life is not going to negatively affect anyone else’s, not even his persecutors. Still, it is honorable that this man remained true to his noble wisdom and reasoning, even to the point of ending his life.
