Enrique Sarabia Sánchez - personal identifier: G6533073
A222 - TMA 06 - Word limit: 1500/2000 words
Part 1 - What is ‘the problem of political obligation’?
In this essay, I’m going to present political obligation as a philosophical idea that refers
to whether or not subjects have a moral obligation to obey laws. This idea has been
raised by numerous philosophers over time, one of the most important ideas in this
regard is that raised by Plato in his dialogue known as Crito. In this dialogue Plato's
teacher Socrates' motives for not escaping from the city of Athens after being accused
of corrupting the morals of the young Athenians and after this accusation he was
condemned to death. Through this dialogue, the philosophical ideas about the origin of
political obligations and the duty to obey the laws of the state are established.
Socrates chooses to carry out his sentence instead of fleeing, and to this end, he puts
forward a number of arguments explaining why he accepts the punishment.
First, is presented “The parental analogy argument”, Socrates argued that his prolonged
life in Athens is evidence that he has reached consent to the laws of the city and has
taken responsibility for their observance. This is sustained as the state could be as your
parents so you should respect and obey your parents.
Secondly, Socrates appeals to the notion of “The fair-play argument”. He argued that if
he disobeyed the laws, this would be to belittle his fellow citizens since he would
benefit from their efforts to preserve the legal order.
Thirdly, Socrates claimed that he owed much to the law of Athens, for it was thanks to
these laws, and to respect for them, that he had obtained his education and upbringing.
So it would be unjust to disregard these laws when they do not benefit him. This
argument is known as “The agreement argument”.
We could even highlight a fourth argument that the author (Pike J. 2011) teaches us,
called "The argument from dire consequences". If we as individuals cheat the law or
break it when it does not benefit us, we are endangering the continuity of the law and
even more seriously the state itself.
Part 2 - How far can any of the accounts of political obligation
discussed in Book 6 go towards solving it?
Political obligation" is a very broad concept that implies many issues. For example, that
the citizen is obliged or has a duty to vote or that citizens have an obligation to
contribute to their country and even to fight to defend it. But usually, when we talk
about political obligation, we refer to the duty of citizens to obey laws and rules.
We can take a position in which it looks logical to follow the orders and to obey the law
to avoid the punishment if we get caught, known by philosophers as “hard treatment”,
but there is also the completely opposite position in which the obligation of obeying the
law doesn’t exist, this position is known as the “philosophical anarchism” (Pike J.
2011).
A characteristic of Socrates' discourse (in the Crito) is to pose the dilemma in the realm
of justice or ethics. In the political tradition, there is an approach similar to the Socratic
one, which stresses not precisely the question of the ethics of respect for the dealings,
A222 - TMA 06 - Word limit: 1500/2000 words
Part 1 - What is ‘the problem of political obligation’?
In this essay, I’m going to present political obligation as a philosophical idea that refers
to whether or not subjects have a moral obligation to obey laws. This idea has been
raised by numerous philosophers over time, one of the most important ideas in this
regard is that raised by Plato in his dialogue known as Crito. In this dialogue Plato's
teacher Socrates' motives for not escaping from the city of Athens after being accused
of corrupting the morals of the young Athenians and after this accusation he was
condemned to death. Through this dialogue, the philosophical ideas about the origin of
political obligations and the duty to obey the laws of the state are established.
Socrates chooses to carry out his sentence instead of fleeing, and to this end, he puts
forward a number of arguments explaining why he accepts the punishment.
First, is presented “The parental analogy argument”, Socrates argued that his prolonged
life in Athens is evidence that he has reached consent to the laws of the city and has
taken responsibility for their observance. This is sustained as the state could be as your
parents so you should respect and obey your parents.
Secondly, Socrates appeals to the notion of “The fair-play argument”. He argued that if
he disobeyed the laws, this would be to belittle his fellow citizens since he would
benefit from their efforts to preserve the legal order.
Thirdly, Socrates claimed that he owed much to the law of Athens, for it was thanks to
these laws, and to respect for them, that he had obtained his education and upbringing.
So it would be unjust to disregard these laws when they do not benefit him. This
argument is known as “The agreement argument”.
We could even highlight a fourth argument that the author (Pike J. 2011) teaches us,
called "The argument from dire consequences". If we as individuals cheat the law or
break it when it does not benefit us, we are endangering the continuity of the law and
even more seriously the state itself.
Part 2 - How far can any of the accounts of political obligation
discussed in Book 6 go towards solving it?
Political obligation" is a very broad concept that implies many issues. For example, that
the citizen is obliged or has a duty to vote or that citizens have an obligation to
contribute to their country and even to fight to defend it. But usually, when we talk
about political obligation, we refer to the duty of citizens to obey laws and rules.
We can take a position in which it looks logical to follow the orders and to obey the law
to avoid the punishment if we get caught, known by philosophers as “hard treatment”,
but there is also the completely opposite position in which the obligation of obeying the
law doesn’t exist, this position is known as the “philosophical anarchism” (Pike J.
2011).
A characteristic of Socrates' discourse (in the Crito) is to pose the dilemma in the realm
of justice or ethics. In the political tradition, there is an approach similar to the Socratic
one, which stresses not precisely the question of the ethics of respect for the dealings,
