ipl-logo

Martin Luther King Jr. Vs Socrates Essay

732 Words3 Pages

The contrasting beliefs voiced by Martin Luther King Jr. and Socrates emphasize the logical flaws in following established principles and opposing unjust laws in the pursuit of justice. King believed that it is our responsibility as individuals to interpret the law in a manner that takes into account its moral justness (King 94). Conversely, Socrates thought that as members of society, the norms and regulations we had lived by our entire lives should not be disobeyed under any circumstances (Plato 49b). In this paper, I side with King's point of view and reinforce his reasoning by arguing that any law or principle can be broken provided the individual can morally justify their actions. Ultimately, rules provide stability in our society, however …show more content…

was a courageous man who inspired people to fight the harsh injustices faced by people of colour. He committed to consciously battle these unfair rules in a way that recognized the fundamental principles of a legal system. According to King’s conditions, he outlined our moral obligation to oppose unjust laws and similarly the responsibility of upholding laws that are just and reasonable (King 93). However, if an individual did make the choice to break an unjust law, they are required to willfully accept the consequences of their actions (King 95). Socrates, on the other hand, believed that no law, whether right or unjust, should ever be broken. He believed that the principle of an effective legal system is closely tied to a properly functioning society. The act of breaking the law was equivalent to destroying it, and in so destroying the individual, since it was the very thing that gave them existence in the first place (Plato 50d). The crucial thing to remember in each of these cases is that every human has a different perspective on whether or not it is ethically acceptable to disobey a law. The fundamental concepts of law and justice are essential to the stability of our society; without them, there would undoubtedly be chaos and dysfunction. But I believe that there should be an exemption for certain …show more content…

I agree with King that we have a moral obligation to resist unjust laws (King 93). However, I also believe that any law may be broken to the point that a person can justify their actions ethically. For example, in civilized nations, there are already laws in place acknowledging situations in which some illicit activity can be accepted. Both murder in self-defence and speeding in a car to bring a person with a life-threatening injury to a hospital are justified. But there are scenarios when the law is not so willing to accept them. For example, stealing for one's own gain. Every person follows a set of ethical standards that guide their behaviour, and although some find stealing reasonable, others find it unjustifiable. Laws in society are made to restrict the behaviour of those who are already committing crimes. These regulations, however, cannot prevent such people from committing crimes since they have already rationalized their behaviour as moral. As a result, any law, not just unjust ones, can be broken since individuals have different ideologies and it is impossible to establish laws that address

Show More
Related
554 Words | 3 Pages

The struggle for justice has been the motivating factor for various movements across time. From fictional characters like Antigone to famous figures like Martin Luther King, it is possible to see various differences between their approaches to the law and how to change it. In Antigone's dialogue with Creon and Martin Luther King’s Letter from Birmingham Jail, the two characters share a variety of differences in their stances. Antigone’s dialogue with Creon focuses on religious law and how it is above mortal law while King’s letter focuses on changing mortal law without relying on religious law to dictate it.

Read More
1569 Words | 7 Pages

I would agree with St. Augustine that ‘an unjust law is no law at all’” (King 3). King often appeals to authority – he does so here with St. Augustine. This credible source seems to be enough for him to believe that one should break unjust laws. Antigone sees Kreon’s law against burying her brother as unjust because it goes against what the gods want, meaning it is her obligation to disobey the law.

Read More
1464 Words | 6 Pages

King makes it clear that there are specific circumstances that advocate towards civil disobedience. Keeping this in mind, it is essential that citizens are given the opportunity to be involved in legal matters, such as laws and defying the law in an effort to improve the state. However, in the event that civil disobedience is necessary King emphasizes that citizens must comprehend the difference between just and unjust laws, as well as partake in disobedience through civil means. On the other hand, Socrates believes no laws that are worth breaking. His reasonings support his overall idea that an unjust law or act, does not defend retaliating through unjustly means.

Read More
648 Words | 3 Pages

He held that upright life is the only life worth living. To him, justice was a matter of knowledge and hence, a truth aspect. Meanwhile, he honored and acknowledged his duty to obey the Laws of the state. From Socrates' perspective, Laws are absolute.

Read More
1118 Words | 5 Pages

In this paper I will argue that Socrates’s argument at 50a-b of the Crito would be not harming his fellow citizens by breaking the laws. Based on the readings from Plato’s The Five Dialogues, I will go over the reasoning of Socrates’ view on the good life. I will then discuss the three arguments Crito has for Socrates regarding his evasion of the death sentence including the selfish, the practicality, and the moral arguments. I will deliberate an objection to the argument and reply to the objections made in the paper and conclude with final thoughts. Socrates argues in the Crito that he should not escape or disobey the law because it is unethical.

Read More
727 Words | 3 Pages

Laws are what uphold the order in a community. Once individuals cease to comply with the laws set in their society, it threatens the integrity of that society. Socrates agrees with Creon’s argument that individuals have a duty to obey the law, but their reasoning and logic behind this claim is different. Despite his advisors and family telling him not to do so, Creon stuck with his decision to not bury Polyneices.

Read More
1111 Words | 5 Pages

In the Crito by Plato, Socrates argues against civil disobedience, seeing it as an unjust act. Contrasting this view, Martin Luther King argues for civil disobedience against unjust laws, and seeing it as a responsibility of citizens. Civil disobedience is the active refusal to obey certain law, commands or requests of the government. I will argue that the view of Socrates is superior to the view of Martin Luther King on the justness of civil disobedience. Using the argument against harm, I will show that even if a law is viewed as unjust, you must not repay an evil with another evil, as evident in the Crito while contrary to ideas presented by MLK.

Read More
1882 Words | 8 Pages

Contextualizing Socrates's Views on Obeying the Law in Crito In Crito, by Plato, Socrates argues that individuals should obey their country's laws, not because all governments are just, but because citizens are obligated to comply with their state's laws, even when they are unjust. Socrates argues that adherence to the government is a moral duty as individuals agree to abide by said laws in exchange for living in said government. I will argue, however, that Socrates’ views are too specific to his own life and fail to consider the legitimacy of the government’s actions and the context of individual circumstances to be applied universally. In the story, the author Plato details a conversation between his teacher, Socrates, and Socrates’ old friend

Read More
714 Words | 3 Pages

In fact it can be argued that it is necessary to go against the law when the law is truly unjust. An example would be our own democracy and the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s, the laws were wrong, and those who were wronged by it fought back by not obeying the law and protesting it in order to enact change. Since Socrates was imprisoned on wrongful grounds and his accusers were not even serious, this certainly applies to his case, he should have at the very least been able to escape prison without remorse or feeling that he had committed any unjust

Read More
1382 Words | 6 Pages

Socrates bases this view of justice on the worth of living a good life. “And is life worth living for us with that part of us corrupted by unjust actions” (47e) If we corrupt our soul with injustice, our life would not be worth living, therefore one must never commit an injustice. “When one has come to an agreement that is just with someone, one should fulfill it.”(49e) It is this agreement with the Laws that Socrates would be violating, if he were to

Read More
1087 Words | 5 Pages

Socrates is portrayed as a religious man who for the better part of his life has been obeying the divine command. The question that is asked however is whether one is under an obligation to obey the laws even when they are not just. According to his Crito and his friends, Socrates would have been justified to break the laws and run out of prison because justice had been denied to him, to begin with. However, Socrates is accustomed to doing what he believes is right. He cannot forsake this course to save his life.

Read More
726 Words | 3 Pages

Michael Kosina Professor Davis Philosphy 1000C 3/10/16 Midterm Essay Protesting an unjust law is a courageous act. When protesting an unjust law there are three main directions that a person or group can take. The first path is the one that Socrates takes which is by voicing his opinion and using persuasion but yet following the unjust laws and being civilly obedient. The next possibility is by actively protesting through the use of nonviolent resistance.

Read More
609 Words | 3 Pages

King distinguishes between just and unjust laws by explaining the difference between them; he explains the moral affect each one has, the unfair way the majority used unjust laws, and the reason breaking unjust laws is okay. Now then, King uses morality to help explain the difference between just and unjust laws. King says “A just law is a man-made law that squares with the moral law or the law of God.” (356) He goes on to say “Unjust…….

Read More
1666 Words | 7 Pages

Because in a true democracy, it is the responsibility of the citizens to disobey the laws that aren’t truly aiding in the progressive nature of society. A democracy can’t be effective without active participation. With that, Martin Luther King Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail is a cornerstone in how we should approach the discussion of whether it is or isn’t reasonable to disobey a law. King agrees with St. Augustine in that “an unjust law is no law at all.” This enforces the idea that an unjust law is virtually not present because it is inevitably meant to be broken.

Read More
870 Words | 4 Pages

States have laws to maintain peace and safety among people and provide ways to resolve issues that arise among individuals. As a citizen of a state you are expected to obey all laws. An environment without laws will cause the typical exercises of life to be affected by the chaos. In Plato’s book, Crito, Socrates believes you should always obey the law. You are obligated to obey unjust laws because you tacitly agree to obey the laws, people have different opinions what is just or unjust, and there are many consequences when disobeying a law.

Read More

More about Martin Luther King Jr. Vs Socrates Essay

Related Topics

Open Document