We live in a legally governed community. However, there are times when people question their need to observe the law, even if it is terrible or unfair. The Socrates dialogue offers a unique viewpoint on legal obedience and disobedience (Garver, 2012). Ethics and the law are inextricably linked. The ethical obligation to obey can be attributed to implied or explicit agreement as to the assenting of laws; the actions of citizens prevent them from disobeying based on the legal aspect; the person may benefit or profit from the actions of others, so they must obey the enacted laws (D'Amato, 2010). Historically, two individuals confronted the application of the law. Socrates and Thoreau were unjustly condemned and jailed for refusing to remit taxes respectively (Garver, 2012). However, the research paper will center its discussions on Socrates who was forced to oblige to the laws and submit to the execution. Thus, there is need to examine Socrates’ argument in the Apology and Crito. Moreover, the paper will look at their contribution to nature of citizenship and duty of political obligations.
Socrates faced a lot of challenges in the Athenian Court upon the accusation that his teachings were used to corrupt the young. Socrates was placed in a trial that comprised of 500 or 501 jury members (D’Amato, 2010). The evidence presented lead to death sentence through a poisoned drink. During the proceedings, Socrates did not deny any accusations fronted by the court. The Athenian Court was guided by codes of Cleisthenes, Solon, and Draco (D’Amato, 2010). Although the crime was regarded as law offense, there were no precedents that supported the claim that engagement in philosophical discussions amounted to corrupting the young. The process of Socrates’ trial presented an ethical dilemma as to the conduct of the Athenian jurisprudence. The arguments offered by Socrates were addressed to the law itself (Garver, 2012). According to Socrates, the assertion that his teachings corrupted the young was void. Thus, he was a victim of the injustice that was shaped by men rather than the law. The Apology sheds light on the defense presented by Socrates in the Athenian Court. From the proceedings, it is clear that Socrates is accustomed to directness and honesty (D’Amato, 2010). Most of his arguments are based on the Oracle of Delphi’s prophecy that asserted he was the wisest of all men (Garver, 2012). Socrates considered that his duty was to question and exposed false wisdom because it is ignorance. As a result, he was able to gain a lot of admiration from the Athens’ youth. However, the assertions did not go well with the people who subscribed with the wise gods.
On the other hand, the dialogue with Crito in the prison cells shows other perspectives of the citizenship and obligations to the law. Crito, an old friend of Socrates, is determined to smuggle Socrates out of prison to exile (D’Amato, 2010). Socrates is willing to escape but for logical reasons. As a result, Crito states that the public opinion would not allow them to suffer because they will judge them for not helping Socrates (Garver, 2012). Apart from the public opinion, Crito argues that dying is a misfortune, the enemies of Socrates will win, the orphans will be vulnerable, and escaping is termed as manly courage (Garver, 2012). The nature of citizenship is centered on their behavior. Similarly, the Athenian society sought to protect their youths from unwanted behaviors propagated by Socrates. The dialogue with Crito portrays the dilemma faced by Socrates when he stated that Crito should concern himself with behaving well (D’Amato, 2010). The obeying of law is one aspect of fine behavior. The teachings of Socrates sought to persuade people to probe their logic and weaknesses before accepting the situation at hand (D’Amato, 2010). Citizenship is the ability to observe loyalty to given set of laws. However, there are cases where the law fails to protect the citizens from harm. For instance, Socrates suffered from the law he holds much gratitude.
In The Apology, Socrates was accused of teaching bad behaviors to the Athens’ youth. However, the law relied on the interpretation of men rather than itself. There was no tangible proof of the harm to the youth. During the trial, the law should have ensured that youth affected by the Socrates’ teaching was presented before the court for examination by both parties. Since the instructions did not affect the youth, they did not go well with the political class. There is a relation between the duty of political obligation and law. The politics of Athens through the Jury ensured that Socrates faced a death sentence. The political class has the power to bend the laws such that it conforms to their expectations or needs. Socrates argued and reasoned that the youth used his teachings to cross-examine others in the society (Garver, 2012). However, the ruling or political faction found the assertion frustrating and were embarrassed that the youth were knowledgeable and would question their activities. As a result, they had to eliminate the source of their teachings by ensuring that Socrates was sentenced (D’Amato, 2010). The consequences would serve to intimidate the youth and others who prescribed to Socrates’ teachings of their actions to the state. There was a contradiction in the two texts because of Socrates advocates for living rightly yet the state sentenced him to death for his behaviors (Garver, 2012). It is not wrong to break the law if its implementers failed to observe the rule when employing their actions. Additionally, Socrates argues that there should be reason and argument when determining a right and wrong opinion (D’Amato, 2010). The appealing to the opinion of the public does not make a decision right. The jury failed to adopt reason and arguments when making their decisions.
Socrates advocated for free thinking in the city. In the Athenian State, obeying the law is measured on the ability of the citizens not questioning certain premises such as gods. A nation is established under certain lifestyle, duties, and beliefs. However, the distancing of self from the cornerstones amounts to breaking the laws that govern the state. Socrates had devoted his life to teaching people on philosophical attributes (D’Amato, 2010). Hence, he was perceived as a threat to the nation rather as a vessel for enlightening some of the positive aspects of the state. Although people or youth prescribed to his ideals, his duty for political obligations was non-acceptable. Thus, the prosecution was not accidental though it can be categorized as petty vindictiveness by the ruling or political class (D’Amato, 2010). There was a compromise on the part of Athenian Court on the prosecution offered to Socrates. For example, there was an offer for acquittal if he would no longer participate in his philosophical teachings in the state (Garver, 2012). From this aspects, it is clear that Socrates was practicing good citizenship be enlightening the other citizens on their rights. The situation that happened to Socrates can be likened to modern day dictatorship or totalitarian rule where people who are perceived as a threat to the state are silenced for revealing the actual affairs of the political system.
References
D'Amato, A. (2010). Obligation to Obey the Law: A Study of the Death of Socrates. S. Cal. L. Rev., 49, 1079. http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1110&context=facultyworkingpapers
Garver, E. (2012). Plato's Crito on the Nature of Persuasion and Obedience. Polis: The Journal of the Society for Greek Political Thought, 29(1), 1-20.
We will email this sample to you with pleasure!
Type your email