In both The Last Days of Socrates and Antigone, the protagonists and antagonists act with determination to achieve what they believe is just. Both parties inflict harm to others or even to themselves, but this does not discourage them because they claim it is for a greater cause. Many of the characters in both works have just and righteous intentions, but they allow emotions cloud their judgment. If more time had been taken to think clearly and impartially, much of the strife that happened could have been avoided. Socrates, Antigone, and Creon made their decisions with the ideal goal of justice in mind, but they allowed emotion to corrupt the good intent behind their actions. In The Last Days of Socrates, Socrates extensively uses logical arguments and Socratic questioning on Athenians to bring out what he believes to be the truth and the right path. Socrates explains that by …show more content…
She does not appear to consider approaches other than directly burying her brother. Antigone could have either directly appealed to Creon (which, admittedly, probably would not have worked) or asked Haemon to approach his father on the basis that his action was impious and against the will of the people (which may have worked.) Instead, Antigone forced Creon’s hand by making the issue public. She furthered the damage by openly calling Creon a fool in his own court. Creon responds to Antigone, “If I excuse your crime without just punishment, you would be king not I” (Antigone 18.) At this point, Creon clearly feels threatened by the defiance Antigone displays to his newly-minted reign and responds to her insults in kind. Creon sentences Antigone to death. The unjust scorn for the laws of Thebes by Antigone could have been avoided had she not been driven by anger and love for her brother, but instead removed herself from the situation considered other