Gdansk added that the only thing to do in contemporary literature is to make socrates understand his readers, rather than presenting and justifying philosophical principles.  Olof Gigon saw dialogue as an easy work that welcomes emerging philosophers.  Yet, according to the philosopher Reginald E, the work applied. All as a central Western parallel with legalism.  Hellmut Flashar argued that, despite his early appearances, Critos`s depth was visible through dialogue and that it could be unmasked as a difficult text.  Several researchers have claimed that there is an intentional rhetorical incongruity between the apologist and Crito of Plato`s presentation of the Socrates dialogues.  In his apology, Socrates stated that he would not obey a hypothetical court decision that required him to renounce the public philosophy on the pain of death, for such a requirement would be an injustice to him.  The absolute nature of this rule in the ethical system of Socrates has led to the notion of “agreement”. There are two types of agreements: voluntary and involuntary. Socrates was not responsible for the second type. He had no fear of putting his life at risk to prove it. In court, where he was accused of corrupting young people in Athens, he strongly defended himself. He refused the offer to abandon the teaching of philosophy because it was a just act, and he rejected the opinion of the majority.
It was there that he emphasized his self-centered and narcissistic character. He was convicted and sentenced to death. It`s shocking that he accepted the verdict. The jury meeting was fair; the city was just, and Socrates committed himself to the tacit agreement between him and the city, because he had grown up there and enjoyed the security, food and all the other services that the city could offer him. However, the same city wanted him to be dead on the basis of the protection of the fabric of the same society to protect its laws. “When the oligarchy was founded, the Thirty and four others called me into the room and ordered us to go and get Leon of Salamis to be executed… Death is something I could not worry about less, but I am quite anxious not to do anything unjust or indecently. What is justice for Socrates? The preliminary answer is that this is not a pious act. The gods can support opposite actions as pious. The definition of pious and pious acts as the basis of justice is at the heart of the Euthyphro. After Euthyphro, the gods love all pious deeds, but no pious acts. What are the possibilities of considering legal action against a criminal? We must take these points into account: (1) Are prosecutions an act of justice, since the gods tolerate it in the Greek polytheistic system? (2) Socrates, in his own right, defies Euthyphro to define a pious act that is at the heart of the dialogue.