The Use Of Executive Discretionession In SophoclesAntigone

The Crito and the Republic were both works of Plato. Plato’s works were divided into early, middle and late dialogues. The Crito falls into the category of the formal while the Republic falls into the category of the latter. In his early dialogues, Plato was influenced by Socratic philosophy but as he ages, he starts to develop his distinct and independent philosophy. Justice is the fundamental concept that will be discussed in this paper. The scope of discussion will mainly revolve around the Crito, the Apology and the Republic. In Socrates’ submission and acceptance of his sentence lies the implication that Socrates agrees with democracy as a political system. Plato, on the other hand,

Family is very important, and is shown many ways in society. Family will often be more important than authority or law. Within the play antigone, Sophocles shows many situations where the characters choose between law and family.Characters must choose what's important family or authority. Throughout the play, there presents an option to choose between family or authority, and what is important to a certain character.

The Republic by Plato examines many aspects of the human condition. In this piece of writing Plato reveals the sentiments of Socrates as they define how humans function and interact with one another. He even more closely Socrates looks at morality and the values individuals hold most important. One value looked at by Socrates and his colleagues is the principle of justice. Multiple definitions of justice are given and Socrates analyzes the merit of each. As the group defines justice they show how self-interest shapes the progression of their arguments and contributes to the definition of justice.

Law, principles, and regulations are established in a community in order to create peace and order for the people. But is every law placed- morally correct? Is there anytime when breaking an unjust law is acceptable? Through Sophocles novel, Antigone, he illustrates to his audience regarding to breaking an unjust law and that no matter how high a ruler might see himself as, the Gods will always be stronger and higher than the mortals. He designs one of the first examples of a conscientious objector, Antigone, one who breaks a law that is, to her, unjust. Defying Creon’s law with her beliefs that god's law overrules man's law, she goes against him by burying the body of her deceased brother, Polynices. In spite of the fact that Antigone knew the consequences that had the power to threaten her life, she still decided to honor her brother’s memory and satisfy the gods. When being captured by the guards she had not deny the fact that she was indeed burying Polynices, in fact she stated that she did and took the consequence, even though her life was at risk. To her burying her brothers body meant more than her own life, restoring moral balance and satisfying the gods led her to disregard a law created by man. Many should consider that breaking an unjust law is not wrong, a law that is morally unjust. The law was created to protect the people and their beliefs, yet as we see through the three Theban plays we learn that one's beliefs and morals go against the law, but it's not the

In the story of Antigone several characters made major and, definitive decisions based on their subjective morals and emotions. In almost every scenario a specific character was given the ultimatum of life or death. To the reader’s surprise, the characters chose death in order to remain consistent to their personal beliefs. I concluded that Sophocles intended for this element to convey that, people who are dogmatic in their beliefs often act solely on their emotions and are prone to make unintelligent decisions. This analysis will explore the morals of certain characters in Antigone, in an effort to determine whether remaining steadfast in those morals was worth their respective repercussions.

The old Greek and Roman realms are two cases of where insubordinate activities now give a premise to advanced law. From the Greeks, we have come to know the narrative of Socrates by Plato, and the Roman age was the season of St. Perpetua, an early Christian lady. The destiny of those people is comparable – a capital punishment passed on by the general public they lived in. In spite of the fact that the closure of their lives is comparable, the distinctions that lie in the reasoning of their demise are more unpredictable, with key variables influencing their individual pre-predetermined future. In this, we will see, these elements influence their connections to the states and time periods in which they existed.

In August 2015, the case Miller V Davis brought to light the complicated relationship between law and morality. Indeed, Mrs Davis a county clerk in Rowan county (Kentucky), is being sued for not delivering marriage licences to same sex couples as she believes that homosexuality is morally wrong. Thus, despite the fact that same-sex marriage has been made legal by the U.S Supreme Court since June 2015. Ought individuals to apply the law though it is in inadequacy with their moral beliefs? Do the law should be totally free from any moral influence? Many legal scholars have argued on these questions, as well as trying to define the terms “law” and “morality”. While no one has agreed to a universal definition, law can be defined as a “body of rules, whether proceeding from formal enactment or from custom, which a particular state or community recognizes as binding on its members or subjects”. On the other hand, morality is referred to as an “ethical wisdom” , the set of common values unifying a society. This essay will discuss the role of morality in the law, while analysing different legal school of thoughts arguing on the topic. First of all, positivists such as Bentham, Austin and Hart, argued that morality should not interfere with the law as it is created by a legitimate authority. On the other hand, naturalist theorists, such as Aristotle, Fuller and Dworkin, believed in the existence of a “higher law”, highly influenced by morals, has to be integrated in a legal system

The play “Antigone” by Sophocles present different aspects of conflicts such as … Social vs. moral laws in the ancient cultures. The ability to follow the desired moral law brings various results and different reactions from the society. Going against the law of Creon in the play brings consequences such as being branded the name the “traitor” and facing punishment by the state. Similarly, in today’s world going against the law leads to serious effects and punishment by the state law. A good example is the imprisonment of a couple in Florida for helping the homeless. Despite the state law however, I believe that moral law should not be neglected especially if it serves humanity and only brings economic and social benefits to a country.

The prevailing message throughout Sophocles’ Antigone and King’s Letter from Birmingham Jail is that civil disobedience serves the purpose of fighting and correcting injustice in situations where systemic breaks in adherence to natural law occurs. Injustice here as used here is not to be synonymous with things that are simply unlawful or unfair, but instead takes on a deeper and more specific definition pertaining to the natural moral codes that all laws, as argued by King and Antigone, ought to be based upon. It is by this definition that both Antigone and King find reasoning; that civil disobedience is absolutely necessary as the final option one must take when dealing with systemic, top-down injustice. Where there is dissonance between

In Plato’s Crito, Socrates talks about his obligations to follow the law. Although Socrates understands that the Athenian democracy has committed an unjust action by sentencing him to death, he is unwilling to escape with Crito. He understands that an injustice should not be answered with injustice, but there are times when one should question the law. In Socrates’ Defense and the Crito, Plato discusses when one ought to follow the law and when ought to not follow the law. One not only has the obligations to follow the law, but they are also obliged to break the law if it is unjust because it will then improve The Law.

​The legitimacy of a state or political leader has often been questioned in many different countries throughout the years. In Antigone one can question the legitimacy to rule of Creon. In different instances throughout Antigone, it is evident that many of Creon’s subjects obey his laws and demands because of fear, not because they believe his orders and laws are justified. For example, Antigone’s sister Isemene refused to help Antigone with the burial in fear of being captured and killed by Creon (Sophocles, p. 3). In another instance, the Sentry obeys Creon’s order to find and capture the one who disobeyed him, Antigone, in order to save himself from the wrath of Creon (Sophocles, p. 13). Creon instills fear in his subjects in order to obtain

In Plato’s The Republic and The Apology, the topic of justice is examined from multiple angles in an attempt to discover what justice is, as well as why living a just life is desirable. Plato, writing through Socrates, identifies in The Republic what he thought justice was through the creation of an ideal city and an ideal soul. Both the ideal city and the ideal soul have three components which, when all are acting harmoniously, create what Socrates considers to be justice. Before he outlines this city and soul, he listens to the arguments of three men who hold popular ideas of the period. These men act to legitimize Socrates’ arguments because he finds logical errors in all of their opinions. In The Apology, a different, more down-to-Earth, Socrates is presented who, through his self-defense in court, reveals a different, even contradictory, view of the justice presented in The Republic. In this paper, the full argument of justice from The Republic will be examined, as well as the possible inconsistencies between The Republic and The Apology.

St. Thomas Aquinas argues that an “an unjust law is no law at all.” (Aquinas in Dimock, ed., 2002, p.19) However, Aquinas also acknowledges that a human lawgiver may promulgate a command that has the form of law, and is enforced like a law, yet is unjust. This observation leads to the realization that these are two inconsistent claims. Yet Aquinas believes that these inconstancies can be reconciled. In Aquinas’ view an unjust law is not a law but yet is also able to be issued as law and imposed as law.

In the opening two books of the Republic, Thrasymachus, along with Glaucon and Adeimantus, proposes fascinating arguments against the definition of justice. According to Thraysmachus, Justice, by its nature, is nothing other than the advantage of the stronger. Despite Socrates’s strong disagreement, many just and unjust incidents in Amazing Grace serve as great examples to support Thrasymachus’s view. In the following paragraphs, I am going to first summarize the arguments from Thrasymachus and Glaucon, and then analyze how the examples from Amazing Grace validate the traditional definition of justice.

In The Trial and Death of Socrates, the question is posed to the philosopher whether it is right to act in one's own best interest or to obey the State. Crito argues that the State's punishment of Socrates is unjust, but Socrates argues rather that authority comes from God and that to flee the State's decision would be like fleeing God, which would neither be good nor in one's best interest. According to the teaching of Confucius, Socrates would have been following the principle of "Jên," which can be translated to mean "goodness." This paper will show why Socrates was right to obey the State and drink the poison; it will also show how the teaching of Confucius on goodness supports this decision and how Confucius' teachings, on account of their appeal to Goodness, are suppressed in a system of tyranny, where Goodness is essentially outlawed.