Similarities Between Antigone And Socrates

Have you ever felt like you knew the honorable thing to do, but after doing it, you find that it just made things worse? In Sophocles’s play Antigone, both Antigone and Creon are great examples of a tragic hero who does exactly that. Both have similar weaknesses that lead to their own destruction. However, I believe that the best example of this role is Creon. He made a law to prevent Polyneices from having a burial because of his disloyalty to Thebes; consequently, this decree goes against the laws of the gods. This decision reveals Creon’s hamartia to be that he is too stubborn and narrow-minded for his own good. Moreover, due to this tragic flaw in his personality, he plants the seed that leads to his own downfall.

Justice in the soul is not an easily understood concept. The definition of justice according to Socrates builds upon itself throughout the first four books of the novel. In book one, Socrates explains that justice allows us to be happy. He says that being just is a part of becoming happy and asserts that it is even happiness itself. In book two, Glaucon adds more to the definition of justice and claims that justice is always the right choice, regardless of whatever benefits other choices might offer. The final piece to this definition comes in book four where Socrates shows us that justice allows people to be excellent which in turn creates happiness. All of these exchanges come together to create one complete definition of justice in the soul. Based upon these three assertions, I believe that justice in the soul is essentially like our health. Our happiness is created when things

Despite his emphasis of justice as a function of the perfect state, Socrates also deals with justice as a personal virtue. He finds that there is a parallel between the organization of the state and the individual. Just as there are three virtues other than justice, Socrates finds three parts in the individual soul: Sensation, emotion, and intelligence. The just person then must have balance between these aspects. Each must function in moderation to contribute to the health of the whole. Appetite and sensation are matters of desire. Desire must be subordinate to reason, or else they will throw the

Answer: For Socrates, justice in the individual is harmony among the three principles of the soul, achieved by rationality, or reason ‹the wisest faculty (in terms of the State, the guardians).

“What is justice?” This is a question that men have struggled with answering for centuries. Justice should be defined for the sake of all people, especially by rulers who attempt to make fair laws so that their society functions in an orderly fashion. In Book 1 of The Republic, Plato attempts to define exactly what justice is. To help determine this definition, he speaks through the philosopher protagonist of Socrates. Justice is first brought up in The Republic during Socrates’ trip to Piraeus. While traveling Socrates ends up gathering with his interlocutors and together, they talk about justice and how one would define it. Socrates debates with the men about the definition of justice and is presented with a definition of

Book II of The Republic by Plato showcases the two very different views of Socrates and Glaucon in regards to the account of nature and origin of justice. Socrates and Glaucon discuss the theory presented by Glaucon that states that injustice is something that is intrinsically desired by all humans. Glaucon presents this argument to Socrates in order to understand and defend justice for its own sake. Glaucon seeks reassurance from Socrates that justice is not just only good for the positive consequences that it produces, so he asks Socrates to explain that justice is desirable for its own sake and, additionally, the consequences that it provides. In the defense of justice, Socrates begins to explain that justice is a virtue that needs to be found in the individual as well as the state. Socrates believes that true happiness can only exist with a true set of virtues that are justice and respectable morals. Socrates’ assumption is on the fact that a man committing unjust actions will never be able to have complete satisfaction with his life if he has achieved everything through unjust actions because he cannot fully claim his accomplishments. Through examination of the assumptions of both arguments presented, Glaucon’s opinion on justice is superior to the views of Socrates. Glaucon’s presumptuous claim that humans are innately greedy is able to provide an understanding that justice is only a social contract for the weaker people of society by handicapping the strength of the

In the plays Antigone and the Crito the two lead characters, Antigone and Socrates, showed completely different ideas regarding their responsibilities to the State. Antigone believes in divine law and does what she thinks that the Gods would want her to do. Socrates, on the other hand, believes that he owes it to the State to follow their laws whether he thinks they are right or not.

“The good life” can have various interpretations to different people. Sophocles’ Antigone and Socrates in the Apology represent similar principles that guide the way in which the characters live their life. In Sophocles’ play, Antigone goes against the wishes of her uncle, Creon, to do what she believes is morally right and just. Similarly, in the Apology, Socrates defends himself against the accusations of Meletus, who claims that Socrates does not acknowledge the gods of the city and corrupts others by teaching philosophy (Apology, 28). Both Antigone and Socrates believed that “the good life” was rooted in following the wishes of the gods and doing what was right in accordance with the divine. Additionally, Socrates held the idea that

Cephalus is the first to give his opinion of justice as simply "speaking the truth and giving back what one takes." In even simpler terms, it is to do the right thing. (Republic 331) Socrates argues that to give a

Although, refusal to sacrifice rational thought wasn’t the only reason that Socrates wasn’t willing to accept the plea. Again, when confronting his own mortality Socrates announced to the jury that no man with a spark of decency “ought to consider life or death, the only thing he ought to consider... is whether he does right or wrong” (Apology, 515). For Socrates this idea of doing what is right is classified under the idea of justice, however; even Socrates has difficulty defining what justice is. Socrates attempts to define justice

Both Creon of Sophocles’ Antigone and Achilles of Homer’s The Iliad end up allowing the body of their enemy a proper burial. During the time following the death of Hector, Achilles is in a position very similar to that which Creon deals with in Antigone. Both men show similar flaws, and face similar struggles. The difference between the two men is only subtly discernible until the telling moment when each man is faced with pressure to change his stance on the fate of the fallen warrior. Each man’s initial reaction is quite telling of his character, and the motives behind each man’s decision (although the motives are debatable) also help to expose his true nature. In the end, there seems to be a quality within each man which lies above

The ancient Greek societies had a strong corrective method to maintain order. Authorities had to maintain a self-survival attitude, which consisted of putting away those few that could challenge their power and create chaos. Both Antigone of Sophocles and Socrates of Plato are examples of threat to the socio-political order or their respective societies.

Reading through three related stories, we discover different motifs denoting author’s thought in different time. Without any doubt, the tragic essence goes through the Three Theban Plays. As Sophocles meditates the philosophy of tragedy all along his life, the tragic essence expands from individuals to a society. The conflict in each play becomes increasingly complicated. In Antigone, we can clearly distinguish the conflict between Antigone and Creon, family and politics.

Platonic Socrates is returning from a festival and is hosted by Cephalus to stay the night. An argument arises and they began to scrutinize justice. They set forth to first answer what is justice and later on to question whether justice is something which is worth pursuing even if the consequences of practicing justice are thrown off the table. At first, everyone except Socrates tries to give their definitions of justice and tells why it should or should not be pursued. Socrates tries to negate most of their arguments and tries to answer the question of what is justice?

On this part of the meaning of justice Socrates offers a completely different view. He contradicted Thrasymachus’ views by stating that what is in the interest of the strong may not be that obvious after all, and that by making mistakes, the justice of the powerful has worked against his interest. Socrates also later offers a view on the definition of justice that states justice is “the right condition of the human soul”.