Comparing Socrates And King : On Civil Disobedience

There were many circumstances in the life of Socrates and Marin Luther King which reveals their approach towards changing the world. They took several measures to improve the lives of people but the worst thing is that there end was not good. They both died in the hands of injustice. Socrates said that people should believe on their own caliber and follow the truth rather than following the majority. MLK on the other hand elaborates the topic of just and unjust law and how it is related to the unjust law. Their approaches were not similar but their intentions were same. Now the main question is ‘Is there any way we can response to those various instances of social injustice? What are unjust law and application of unjust law and how should we

To further support his analysis of the law, King states a third definition of “an unjust law is a code inflicted upon a minority which that minority had no part in enacting or creating because they did not have the unhampered right to vote” (PAR 14). This definition is given to show that there are unjust laws occurring. This implies that the white people are devaluing democracy and what it stands for. He states after that, clearly, Negroes are not allowed to vote in the state of Alabama regardless if they are the minority or not. He is stating that it is unjust for Negroes not to be able to vote. Although these statements do not directly answer the charges of the clergymen, King is building up to that answer. While defining the laws, King is focusing on what he believe is wrong and its relationship with unjust laws. King uses this technique to support breaking unjust laws to obey just laws.

Furthermore, King connects with his audience when he criticizes the unjust segregation laws. When accused of having a desire to break laws, King immediately disproves that theory by agreeing with their concern, and then discusses the difference between just and unjust laws. He quotes St. Thomas Aquinas faultlessly when he states his thoughts on law: "Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality" (222). He continues to say that a person has a "moral responsibility" (221) to refuse to comply with unjust laws, as well as having an obligation to obey just laws. His statement forces his readers to put themselves in his shoes and think of their moral responsibility to stand up against unjust laws regardless of

Disobeying a law naturally seems counter-intuitive to fixing a problem. This idea is very Socratic in nature. Socrates believed that it was a great disservice to the state to follow laws that were unjust. “I was attached to this city by the god . . . as upon a great and noble horse (the state in this case) which was sluggish because of its size and needed to be stirred up by a kind of gadfly” (Apology, 30e, Plato). According to Socrates, “pursing virtue and truth in the name of the state” (Apology, 42a Plato) is necessary and actions such as civil disobedience are also necessary in order to find that virtue and truth at times. Both King and Socrates were “gadflies” in the sense that they were willing to question and bring tension to laws that were unjust and needed to be changed. This tension brings along the willingness to fix the laws and make them just. Settling for a “negative

To begin, it is important to first reflect on the childhood experiences and the culture that King was raised. In his book, God and Human Dignity, Burrow poignantly notes, “Martin Luther King was a human being, no more or less so than any member of his family tree, or any other human being.” This is to say that the significance of King should not be entirely placed upon King as an individual, but on the context that King was raised. Therefore, it is important to briefly illustrate the racial landscape that King inherited as well as touch on major influential experiences that contributed to King’s ethical and theological development.

While reading “The Crito” By Plato and Martin Luther King’s “Letters from a Birmingham Jail” I will use these two pieces of literature as a spring board to answer whether it is moral to break a law that you consider unjust. I will start first by analyzing Plato’s dialogue “The Crito”. The conversation takes place in a prison; this is where Socrates is awaiting his execution, and will be serving out the last days of his life. Socrates is visited by a long time follower and student, Crito. His reason for visiting is as simple as persuading Socrates to escape. He throws argument after argument at Socrates, and hoping that he will be able to convince his friend that he should flee the city. Socrates could not break the law just because he believed

Martin Luther King Jr. has been influential in multiple ways that have caused positive impacts in American society, and has gotten the attention of foreign countries to change their policies. When Martin was a child, he tried to kill himself by jumping out of his bedroom window when he had received the news of his grandmother's death. MLK’s speeches and writings guided the journey to breaking racial boundaries, desegregation and the decline of racism, enjoyed by modern generations.

The “Letter from Birmingham Jail” is the letter written by Martin Luther King Jr. to the clergymen of Birmingham, in which he speaks up against the nonviolence demonstration criticisms by white modernists. In it King suggests that Socrates is civilly disobedient, despite Socrates’ assertions of breaking the law in the Crito, the prison conversation between Socrates and his friend Crito days before his death. Socrates repeatedly states that it would be morally wrong for him to escape prison and go against the laws, however, King believes that he is civilly disobedient. I, too, believe that Socrates was in some form rebellious to the law, and that he was misunderstood and rejected by society. The Apology and Crito are two dialogues that discuss the intent of Socrates’ “crimes;” and the “Letter from Birmingham Jail” goes along the reasoning behind King’s claim against Socrates.

From the monarchs of the ancient era to the democracy of today, order has been maintained by means of rules and regulations known as laws. Compliance with these laws is enforced through punishments ranging in severity according to the crimes committed to reduce violence and misconduct from individuals within a society. However, just as citizens consent to abide by the laws of the state in which they reside, one is compelled to preserve justice and condemn the unjust decisions of man when the social contract contradicts the laws sanctioned by God. Approaching this conflict between natural and manmade laws in a non-violent manner is called “civil disobedience”.

Every point that Dr. King had to make was related back to the Bible or the church. He drew symmetrical lines between his letter and St. Paul's writing. He was also able to draw parallels between him and Socrates as advocates of change and open dissent of public opinion and both of their connection to the Bible. "Just as the prophets of the eighth century…my own home town". (King, 174) His open disagreement with unjust laws was also in accordance with the Bible. He mentioned that just laws were laws that went along with the natural moral laws. Anything that went against that natural law or morality was unjust. He pointed out that following an unjust law would go against one's own morality, and for whoever had any religious morality, they would not want to partake in an unjust law. Dr. King clearly identified that, not

Exploration of Civil Disobedience in Sophocles' Antigone, King's Letter from Birmingham Jail, and Plato's From Crito

Martin Luther King Jr., was a civil rights activist who spoke freely about civil disobedience in the Letter from Birmingham Jail while he was locked up for civilly disobeying the law. He was writing to eight white clergymen that also felt that many of the laws were unjust, however they showed agreement with Socrates by stating that he should not disobey the laws. Martin Luther King Jr. said, “one has a moral responsibility to disobey just laws because if we did not disobey them then unjust acts would continue to occur, causing our country to be harmed”. He also stated that “an unjust law is no law at all”. Martin Luther King Jr. did believe that laws were setup and enforced to assist and support the residents of the state however, if a law was unfair or unconstitutional, then the law would

“A very few—as heroes, patriots, martyrs, reformers in the great sense, and men—serve the state with their consciences also, and so necessarily resist it for the most part; and they are commonly treated as enemies by it,” Henry Thoreau claimed in his essay, “Civil Disobedience.” Martin Luther King Jr. indisputably served the people of the state by his own conscience and was definitely treated as an enemy. “We want to be free!” King cried out during his “I've Been to the Mountaintop” speech. It didn't matter that it was seen as an evil act against the men in charge to him. “Civil disobedience” immensely impacted Martin Luther King and supported his views and drive that lead to the Civil Rights Movement.

Imagine the feeling of sitting in room isolated from the rest of the world, left alone with your thoughts and kept guarded away from freedom. What would one with their spare time? Would one contemplate escape? Would one sit alone with their thoughts and fixate on what has led to such a lonely end? Would one compose a letter to those who detained them? Perhaps these are the same thoughts that inspired the words of Socrates, in Plato’s Crito or the emotional words that were spewed on paper by Dr. Martin Luther King while detained in Birmingham Jail. The philosophy of Socrates and Dr. Martin Luther King are grounded in peace. Both philosophers are faced with conflict from the laws put in place by the society that they are in. The purpose of this essay is to compare how each philosopher discusses the concept of law. The fictional tales of Socrates was inspiration to the belated Dr. King as he strived to challenge the status quo set for society. Throughout Plato’s poems Socrates constantly stretched the mental capabilities of those who conversed, and at times even challenged him. Dr. King was not fearful of “Causing tension to the mind” of those around him. In particular Dr. King challenged his ideals of those who opposed his approach of nonviolent protesting. In “The letter from a Birmingham Jail” Dr. King response to a clergyman in form of a letter. This letter expresses the many obstacles put in front of Dr. King as he strives to create an equal society for African-American or

Socrates would rather be punished or die before he breaks the laws that were set forth by his state, and this he says later in the same passage, “I should run any risk on the side of law and justice rather than join you. (Cahn pg. 38 Apology b10-c2).”