Socrates was sentenced to death for allegedly corrupting the youth in Athens, but was offered an opportunity to escape by Crito. Socrates refused to escape because he respected the laws and social contract of Athens, which had protected him and allowed him to live freely. Escaping would have contradicted his beliefs and been an immoral act that corrupted his soul. The nature of the social contract was that citizens received benefits like freedom of speech and protection from invaders in exchange for following the laws, even unjust ones.

1. Post and reply(w8) | Philosophy homework help
Answer This Question 250 Words MinDiscuss and evaluate the reasons Socrates gives for
not escaping jail even though he had ample opportunity to do so. What is the nature of the
“social contract” here that Socrates is following? Reply to these post 100 Words Min
Each1. Socrates, as we know in our previous lesson of this class, was sentenced to death for
allegedly corrupting the youth and refusing to acknowledge the Gods recognized by Athens.
Socrates was not an expert in legal practice, but he represented himself as his own defense
which was documented by Plato. Crito, a friend and wealthy Athenian, offered Socrates an
opportunity to escape his punishment by bribing the jailors and providing a means of
escape.To understand the nature of the “social contract” that Socrates was following, you
have to understand that even though Socrates was very outspoken and questioned those of
the Athenian elite, he still respected the laws of the Athenian government. Some of the
benefits of being an Athenian citizen, was that they had freedom of speech, which explains
why Socrates was able conduct himself the way that he did with other Athenians. Another
was that they were protected by the city of Athens from other invaders. As a result, Socrates
understood that because of these benefits and being able to live to an advanced age, he
respected the law and was comfortable with the result of his trial.He felt that escaping his
convictions would have also been contradictory to his beliefs. Socrates was dedicated to his
city and believed that it was his duty, to contribute to the Society with his Socratic Method.
He also believed that such an act would have been an immoral, which would been bad for
his soul. He believed that it was better to suffer an injustice, than to commit one because
injustice corrupts the soul.2. This week I am choosing to write about John Rawls idea of the
“Veil of Ignorance”, I chose this because like all the other topics I have written about I find it
very interesting. The purpose behind this idea is to explore life in a structural manner. So
you and your personality can be hidden behind this “veil” and you find more or less the
truth about things like justice and social status (there are others but these are the two that
stuck out the most to me). As far as the idea and wealth, everyone needs money, people
don’t need to be rich just have enough to live. In this sense if someone is in a bad spot then
they would get money from people who are considered “rich” and that would put them in a
better situation and it would not put the “rich” person in a bad situation so making it fair for
everyone. The purpose of the veil is so that the person doesn’t have to show who they
actually are. We can look at it like doing things online, you don’t actually know the person
on the other side of the screen. They can hide their actual identity and thats the same for the
veil. This is so ( in my opinion) you aren’t judge based on who you are. I think this is actually

2. a good idea to a point but there are always negatives when things like this are brought up.
Like how is it fair that we give to people in need, even though its not technically hurting the
person giving but making someone else’s life better.