Socrates's Social Contract with the LawsThe recurring theme in Plato’s “Crito” would be the obedience or agreement to the Laws. As Socrates lies in jail, Crito makes compelling arguments to convince Socrates to attempt an escape. Socrates allows him to make arguments to hear him out. In this paper, I will discuss the arguments made between Crito and Socrates. I will then evaluate both arguments based off of Socrates’ agreement with the Laws and discuss whether or not I agree with the social contract that the citizens and Socrates have made with the Laws of Athens. By evaluating their agreement, I will also discuss how Socrates argument is built on a premise that conducting unjust actions will harm the health of one’s psyche(soul)/body.Crito begins with a weak argument; stating that if he were to allow Socrates to die in the cell alone, it would be a shame for his reputation. Crito points out that he would be considered as a person who values money over friendship because of his inability to get Socrates out of jail by spending money. This argument does not hold a strong point because it merely refers to what might be consequential to Crito if Socrates does not decide to escape. Then, Crito attempts to makes another argument. He questions the reasons of Socrates’s refusal to escape. Crito wonders if Socrates would worry about the fact that his escape would get his friends into trouble with the law. However, it was very blatant that this was not one of Socrates’ reasons for avoiding death. In Crito’s third argument, he brings up Socrates's children and the responsibility he has for them as a father. Crito states that a good man like Socrates, who leads a just life, should not abandon his sons. However, in order to follow this action through, he would have to break the law and escape. If he were to do that, he would no longer be a just man. Although Crito does prove a point, Socrates then suggest the possibility that his good friends would not let his sons grow up without care. Although Crito’s arguments are based off of the idea of friendship and relationships, it does not consider the morality of it all. Whereas, Socrates is the opposite.