1.)Crito argues that Socrates is violating the bonds of friendship. He says that Socrates is refusing his help (not letting him do good to his friend), hurting his friends (by dying) and helping his enemies (by lending credence to an unjust verdict). In doing so Crito is appealing to 2 concepts of justice that Socrates challenges in Republic. How does Socrates respond to these arguments? Does he have an obligation to his friends and family that he is foresaking by accepting the death sentence?2.)Why is Socrates now willing to go quietly to his death when he was unwilling to accept the authority of the law in Apology?3.)What do the situations of Mandela and King tell us about Socrates’ argument that justice requires the rule of law and thus the authority of the laws must be accepted even if the political order it creates is not just at all? Do Mandela and King agree? Do their actions support Socrates’ position? What do you think about Socrates’ argument about the rule of law?4.)Mandela justifies taking up violence after his efforts at nonviolence failed. Were his actions just? Is there a point where the justice of one’s actions is irrelevant? If Socrates were offering advice to either King or Mandela what do you think he would say?5.)What do the situations of Mandela and King show us about the argument in Apology and Crito that bad things cannot happen to good people? Is Socrates simply wrong about this, or is there a way that we can understand his view in terms of contemporary struggles against injustice?
