Socrates had ample time and opportunity to escape prison and execution as well as a battalion of friends willing to do whatever it takes to help him. Socrates however declines this very enticing opportunity to regain his freedom. His first reason is that his trial followed the correct judicial procedures. He had the opportunity to defend himself and a vote was cast fairly by the public, which found him guilty.
In his instance, Socrates is bringing about the concept of content justice versus procedural justice3.content justice involves ensuring that justice is served. Procedural justice ensures that the right procedures are followed during a judicial process. Socrates argues that the latter is more significant than the prior. This means that even if a person is innocent if the right judicial procedure finds the person guilty then that person is by default guilty. Socrates had his facts mixed up. The main aim of a judicial process is to arrive at justice. If a process does not arrive at justice then it should be rejected irrespective of its correctness in terms of procedure.
The second reason that Socrates gives for not escaping prison is that the social place of the law is by all means more important than the life of any individual. This means that the life of an individual can be sacrificed as a means to preserve the social placing of the law. Once again, Socrates was wrong. The purpose of the law is to protect the lives of all individuals. This therefore means that the lives of people take prominence in comparison to the law. If the law fails to protect the life of an individual then this means that this law fails to serve its primary purpose and thus this law has no place in society. Socrates is applying the social contract of voluntarism.
Works Cited
Taylor, C. C. W.. Socrates. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Print
