In Plato's Apology and in Crito, Plato presents Socrates' arguments in a clear and precise manner. Socrates is a wise man with a different perspective on life, which presents us with a mass of contradictions. Socrates is an expressive man, but he never recorded any works. He who is ready to fight against his unjust execution is ignorant, but wrongly condemned. Behind these dilemmas lies a rarely explored opposition. Socrates is the most patriotic of philosophers, devoted to his State. Exploring this contradiction between Socrates the loyal citizen and Socrates the philosophical man will help position Plato's arguments. Although Socrates' approach to his defense, in my opinion, is not the best, and certainly does not constitute an apology. The argument in Plato's Apologies is that one should never betray one's values ​​for any reason, even if the reason is death. This statement is the basis of everything Socrates says during the trial. Values ​​are also his reasoning for himself and for the jury. Socrates promises the jury that he will never stop philosophizing, even if it means disobeying the court. This view emphasizes and emphasizes obedience. The people preceding Socrates are considered influential Athenians. These misdeeds that Socrates is accused of include not recognizing the gods, inventing new gods, and corrupting the youth of Athens. During Socrates' trial, the court addresses issues such as his views on death. Socrates proposed that death is ultimately a good thing. Socrates states that there were two outcomes of death. Or when dying, we are no longer conscious of anything. In the second outcome of Socrates' death, the soul undergoes a transformation and becomes this perfect being. Addressing the jury Socrates...... middle of paper ....... Then appeals to the jury in his sense of values ​​by comparing it to his own. Although I thought he did a great job defending, maybe it was that attitude that was his downfall. In the Crito, Socrates makes valid arguments, but comparing the Apologies to the Crito, there are some inconsistencies. In conclusion “It has been said that the true purpose of philosophy is not to answer questions but rather to question the answers that have been given”. This is exactly what Socrates does in his dialogues. In my opinion, he fully addresses the issue in some of the arguments made by Cirto to Socrates. In his apology, which isn't really an apology, I believe that no matter what he said in court, his fate was already decided. He was wrongly accused and unfairly judged. Additionally, I believe his arguments for escaping from prison were justified..