People have many perceptions of what is right and wrong, perceived differently amongst time period and an individual 's own uprising. In the ancient greek play Oedipus Rex, Oedipus was convicted of a terrible sin. As bad as this sin was, he repented, putting his hubris to the side, and he did not know that he was acting out on his sins before acting out in his repentance, for the young king worked so hard, sometimes acting instinctively, to remove himself from his sinful fate. The main argument in defence of Oedipus’ innocence is his sheer lack of knowledge. People say ignorance is a curse while some say this is bliss. For Oedipus, his ignorance is sheer bliss. Oedipus says, “I had neither sight nor knowledge then, your father by the woman who was the source of his own life” (Sophocles, 78). Within the quote, Oedipus admits to his ignorance. While Oedipus is unaware of …show more content…
One can not forget about his marriage to his mother and murder of his father, however he was unaware. However, while he may of been unaware he was killing his father, he was not unaware of the fact he was killing someone. There is no fighting the fact that Oedipus committed murder for that is seen as a fact. Oedipus admits “I killed him. killed them all. Now if that stranger and Laios were” (Sophocles, 43). We are very quick to view things through our own eyes, but we often forget that many norms, things that are so ingrained in our heads, change with time. As bad as it could sound, Oedipus’ actions were not uncommon at the time. Men were constantly trying to prove themselves, something that still happens today but not in as physical of a way, so fighting, that could sometimes lead to death, was not that uncommon. Oedipus was unaware that the man was of royalty, and frankly, even if Oedipus did know, Oedipus was royal himself. He killed this man as a form of toxic masculinity, something all too common at the