Pols 2310 Fourth Exam

Crito goes to public opinion to get information about what specific things he should do and not do to be a good person. Public opinion refers to the collective beliefs and attitudes of the general public, and seeking guidance from it can help Crito understand the societal expectations and norms that define being a good person. By considering public opinion, Crito can align his actions with the values and principles upheld by the community, thereby ensuring his moral conduct and reputation.

According to the argument of the Crito, people should want to obey the law because it benefits other people and breaking it makes society less secure. The argument suggests that laws are in place to maintain order and protect the well-being of society as a whole. By obeying the law, individuals contribute to the stability and security of their community.

Socrates explains the small margin of the vote against him for conviction by stating that he was not convicted by Meletus. This suggests that Meletus, one of the accusers, did not have enough evidence or persuasive arguments to convince the jury of Socrates' guilt. Therefore, despite the close vote, Socrates was able to avoid conviction by Meletus.

Socrates makes the claim that the jury has not heard him discussing such things in the marketplace in order to argue that they should not be prejudiced against him. By highlighting that the jury has not been exposed to his ideas and discussions in a public setting, Socrates suggests that their prejudice is unwarranted and based on ignorance. He implies that if they had heard him speak in the marketplace, they would have a more informed and fair judgment of him.

The given statement suggests that Socrates is willing to go against public opinion if he has proof that justice requires it. However, when it comes to the law, he will only go against it if he has proof that justice requires it. This implies that Socrates believes there is a possibility that the law is based on a genuine understanding of good and bad. If the law is indeed based on such understanding, it would make sense for Socrates to require proof before going against it. Therefore, the statement "It might be that the law is based on some genuine understanding of good and bad" must be true for the given scenario to make sense.

In the Crito, Socrates argues that disobeying the law is always unjust. He believes that as a citizen, one has an obligation to respect and abide by the laws of the state, regardless of personal opinions or disagreements. Socrates emphasizes the importance of the social contract and the need to uphold the laws for the stability and well-being of society as a whole. He argues that if an individual disagrees with a law, they should seek to change it through legal means rather than resorting to disobedience. Therefore, Socrates concludes that disobeying the law is always unjust.

Socrates claims to be the best citizen of Athens because he helps his fellow Athenians to think about whether they are living their lives well. This suggests that Socrates believes that the role of a citizen is not just to blindly follow the political leaders or engage in wars for conquest, but to actively engage in self-reflection and critical thinking. By encouraging others to question their own lives and choices, Socrates believes he is fulfilling his duty as a citizen and contributing to the betterment of Athens.

Crito responds by saying that he does not understand Socrates' statement about the meaning of justice and its application. This suggests that Crito is confused or unable to grasp the concept that Socrates is explaining. It implies that Crito may not fully comprehend the argument being made by Socrates regarding justice and its implications in their particular situation.

The correct answer is "disobedience of the law tends to destroy the law." This answer aligns with the argument made by Socrates and the laws. According to their argument, disobedience of the law undermines the authority and effectiveness of the law itself. When individuals disobey the law, it weakens the social order and can lead to a breakdown of the legal system. Therefore, the argument suggests that obedience to the law is crucial for maintaining its integrity and ensuring its proper functioning.

Socrates evaluates the source that Crito uses as not being based on knowledge, but rather acting randomly. This suggests that Socrates does not consider the source to be reliable or trustworthy in providing information about what one should do to be a good person.

Socrates explains that it is never morally acceptable to act unjustly, even towards someone who has treated you unjustly. This implies that justice is a universal principle that should be upheld regardless of the actions of others. Socrates emphasizes the importance of acting justly and not seeking revenge or retaliation. This statement reflects Socrates' commitment to the principles of justice and moral integrity.

The correct answer is "Neither Socrates nor the laws argue that the laws are always good or just in what they require." This answer is correct because it accurately reflects the statement made in the question. The statement states that neither Socrates nor the laws argue that the laws are always good or just in what they require, indicating that both Socrates and the laws acknowledge that there may be instances where the laws are not good or just.

According to Crito, the best available source for help in deciding what things to do and not do to be a good person is the laws. This is because the laws are designed to guide behavior that will lead to a better life. Crito believes that following the laws is essential for maintaining social order and harmony, and that they provide a framework for individuals to make moral decisions. By adhering to the laws, Crito believes that one can fulfill their obligations as a citizen and contribute to the well-being of society.

Socrates explains that the formal accusers, who have brought him into court, are less dangerous to him than the ones who have created prejudice against him. This suggests that Socrates believes that the negative opinions and biases formed by the public are more detrimental to his case than the actual charges brought against him in court. He implies that the formal accusers may not have strong evidence or arguments, but the prejudice created by the old accusers may influence the jury's decision. Therefore, Socrates views the prejudice as a greater threat to his defense than the formal charges.

The given answer implies that the laws claim to have provided Socrates and every other Athenian with all the good things that were available to them. This suggests that the laws believe they have fulfilled their responsibility towards the citizens by providing them with their fair share of benefits and opportunities.

The Crito suggests the value of laws for the benefit of people by stating that laws are introduced as a character to help explain the meaning of justice, Socrates requires an argument about the meaning of justice before he will violate law, and the laws argue that people would be harmed by being deprived of certain benefits if the laws were to be destroyed. However, the Crito does not suggest that the laws point to a democratic origin as evidence that they do not make mistakes.

The argument in the Crito states that disobeying the laws is unjust, but it does not assume that the laws do not make mistakes. This means that even if the laws are flawed or make errors, it is still considered unjust to disobey them. The argument focuses on the importance of abiding by the laws of a political community, regardless of their infallibility.

Crito offers several reasons to convince Socrates to escape from jail, including his concern for Socrates' life, the fear of being seen as unwilling to spend money for his friend, and the worry that people will think they lack courage if Socrates does not escape. However, avenging the injustice against Socrates is not one of the reasons Crito presents. This suggests that Crito's main motivation is based on personal concerns for Socrates' well-being and reputation, rather than seeking justice or revenge.

The correct answer is "Because it sometimes takes a long time for one to drive from the outskirts of town to downtown, it would be a good idea to destroy the freeway system and start over." This reasoning is similar to the argument in the Crito because both arguments acknowledge the imperfections or drawbacks of a system (laws and community in Crito, freeway system in the answer), but argue against destroying or completely abandoning the system because it still serves a purpose or has some value.

Socrates claims that if he had tried to be more involved in politics in Athens, he would have been killed a long time ago. This suggests that Socrates believed that his involvement in politics would have threatened the established order and power structures in Athens, leading to his demise. By making this claim, Socrates implies that his philosophical teachings and questioning of authority were seen as a threat by those in power, and they would have taken measures to silence him if he had become more politically active.

The chorus's expectation in Antigone about what will motivate human beings to action or inaction is best exemplified by the guard explaining why he came to give Creon the bad news. This is because the guard's explanation highlights the fear of consequences and personal self-interest as the main factors that drive human behavior. The chorus, throughout the play, emphasizes the power of fear and self-interest in shaping human actions, and the guard's explanation aligns with this expectation.

The correct answer is "Socrates corrupts the youth." This is a part of the formal charge that brought Socrates into court because it was believed that his teachings and influence on the youth of Athens were corrupting their minds and leading them astray from traditional values and beliefs.

Lycurgus's laws aimed to promote public spiritedness, temperance, and justice. However, prosperity was not among the principal goals of his laws. This suggests that the focus of Lycurgus's laws was more on creating a just and harmonious society rather than solely emphasizing economic growth and material wealth.

Socrates believes in new divinities is not among the things that Socrates says the old accusers teach people to believe. The other statements, such as Socrates studying the things under the earth and in the sky, as well as making the worse argument appear stronger, are mentioned as the teachings of the old accusers.

The answer suggests that the main reason why the people voted to convict Socrates was because they perceived him as a significant threat to the political stability in Athens. This implies that the jury believed that Socrates' actions or ideas posed a danger to the established order and governance of the city-state. The answer dismisses the possibility that the conviction was primarily driven by prejudice against Socrates or that he did nothing that could be seen as a threat to political stability.