Plato In The Crito Analysis

Words: 468
Pages: 2

Socrates argues that he must evade the law; he would unjustly be doing harm to the law of the city, gaining their force through public agreement. Therefore, he rejects all lawbreaking as inherently immoral and advocates unconditional obedience to the laws of the city. Martin Luther King clarion calls for civil disobedience as a tool of the American Civil Rights Movement. Using Socrates as a model of civil disobedience, recognizing the commonalities in law, justice, and citizenship. In the Crito, Socrates, the birthplace of democracy, based on the social contract, where laws and courts access their power from recognition and agreement from citizens. Plato’s Socrates and King agreed that the role of a good citizen is to provoke communities to bring civil law into moral …show more content…
Instead, one does choose to break the law and must accept the consequences. However, Socrates does not rule out civil disobedience as a method of teaching the community it endorses. Having a legal and moral responsibility to obey laws, one who breaks an unjust law willingly faces a penalty. Accepting the consequences is the element that makes civil disobedience activism. Civil disobedience is useful for public persuasion and willingness to accept punishment. Plato’s Crito is obedience to law, laws that attach criminal and civil penalties to certain actions, are laws which make it difficult for people to continue their plans and also justify paternalistic grounds. Some examples are laws deciding which contracts will be upheld in court, not allowing assumption of risk to defend an action based on violation of safety statute. Pure paternalism of a person whose freedom is restricted is the same as a person whose benefits are promoted by such restrictions. Impure paternalism protects the welfare class of a person, restricting the freedom of other people besides people who are