Miroslav Ivanovic's "Socrates' Last Error"

Again, however, Socrates is doing more than than simply presenting a logical motive, and that is why Ivanovic's critique is non persuasive. After all, in his final dialogues, Socrates speaks of all manner of things that are not shrewd in terms of being accessible to the calculating mind, much(prenominal) as all things spiritual.

Ivanovic writes that Socrates argues that "Disrespect of judicial decisions produces the destruction of legalitys" (Ivanovic 2). This is all right as far as it goes, but it fails to distinguish betwixt defiance of judicial decisions, disrespect of judicial decision, disagreement with judicial decisions, and critical commentary on judicial decisions.

Socrates' entire life sentence story of dialogue was a life of disagreement, or critical commentary, regular(a) of defiance of the basic looks that "respectable" men lived their lives. Those lives to Socrates were oft lived in defiance an disrespect of laws themselves!

The quality of critique which Socrates utilise most effectively, and which won him fame and glory through the centuries was the quality of respect. He invariably disagreed with the men with whom he argued, obviously, but he everlastingly did so "respectfully." This overriding respect for the men with whom he argued allowed them, in the end, to agree with Socrates and admit that they had been wrong about whatever give-and-take or idea or principle they had been arguing about.

Nevertheless, he makes these statements gently and respectfully, showing that as yettide in criticizing others he does so with love in his heart.

Ivanovic's argument is too strictly bound by the "law" to cover and appreciate what Socrates is doing. It is almost as if Socrates is doing with philosophy what deliverer did with religion. Jesus claimed to be fulfilling the law and transcending it at the same time.

Socrates in Crito is at the same time fulfilling and transcending philosophy and law and even rationality. It is no coincidence that both(prenominal) men accepted their condemnation instead of fleeing, although Jesus remained unsounded while Socrates put up a lengthy argument. In this context, Ivanovic is kin to those who urged Jesus to flee, not understanding that something far more profound than the strictness of logic and law, or even death, was at stake.

Ivanovic, Miroslav. "Socrates' Last Error." 1-7.

rtant to note the difference in Crito between Socrates' disagreeing with the law and/or with the judicial decision and disrespecting it. Obviously, Socrates disagrees with the judicial decision. He even gives somewhat of a warning to those who have condemned him that they will not fare well in their lives or in write up because of that decision, while he sees himself as faring quite well, both in the afterlife and in the eyes of history.

There is no way to make such arguments and live such a life and die according to such beliefs and not be snarly in contradiction and irony. It is almost as if a just man needs an unjust law in orde
Ordercustompaper.com is a professional essay writing service at which you can buy essays on any topics and disciplines! All custom essays are written by professional writers!