Sophocles’ Oedipus, Plato’s ship owner, and Plato’s prisoner in the cave share a common theme of reluctance to learn from the truth, and show the role that others play in facing self-identity. All three, Oedipus, the ship owner, and the prisoner in the cave illustrate the theme of deliberation manifested by a society. Enlightened by others, Oedipus finally learns that he has committed murder and incest. Similarly, the ship owner is shown his limitations and thus understands that he is not qualified to navigate his vessel when the sailors quarrel over who would be next in command. Furthermore, the prisoner in the cave is dragged out by others (community of enlightened individuals) and given the opportunity to view the real world for the first time. Therefore, with the assistance of others (community), Oedipus, the ship owner, and the prisoner in the cave are able to acknowledge their identities and face the truth about their erroneous behavior. Through Sophocles and Plato, civic deliberation comes into these three approaches: (1) with the evidence given to him by the public, Oedipus learns the truth of his identity, and accepts the judgment and punishment he had imposed on the culprit before he knew; (2) through the violent actions of the sailors, the ship owner acknowledges his limitations; and (3) the prisoner is dragged from the cave into the world of sunlight, exposed to the truth and returns to the cave to deliberate with others to come out. Hence, all three cases show the process of civic deliberation is achieved through community.
Oedipus at first finds the implications of killing his father and sleeping with his mother difficult to tolerate as a factual manifestation of his past. He disputes the fact that he had caused suc...
... middle of paper ...
...liance with the truth. Socrates states, “The truth of the matter is that it makes no difference whether you’re rich or poor: if you fell ill, you’re bound to dance attendance on a doctor, and if you need to accept authority, you must dance attendance on someone in authority who is capable of providing it” (Plato 209-210), in order to convey that a individual requires a society or a third party to become enlightened. Oedipus ultimately becomes aware of his errors when the community shows them to him. The ship owner becomes aware of his incapability when the sailors threaten to overthrow him. The prisoner in the cave acknowledges the truth when others force him out of the cave. Thus Socrates serves as a model of civic deliberation when he illustrates their behavior and, questions through dialogue with his interlocutors, the ability to find truth and be enlightened.
Advancement from Enlightenment As the 1900's rolled around, many changes were to come. New leaders, government styles, and new ideas were just the start. The main focus of the Enlightenment era was based on reason, rationalism, and the idea of "Inevitable Progress. " Enlightenment was pushed forward by great people such as Kant, Bulgaria, Thomas Jefferson, Isaac Newton, Francois-Marie Ardouet de Voltaire, Thomas Hobbes, to name a few.
In “The Apology,” Socrates represents himself in his own trial. He boldly questions the morality of the people of court. In this report, I will be analyzing portions of “The Apology” in order to reveal the intellectuality of this text within this time frame. I will only discuss bits of “The Apology“ on account that it is a lengthy piece. However, before discussing the speech it is important to set the scene. Socrates was born in 469 B.C.E. and lived to 399 B.C.E. (Nails, 2014). What we do know about him is second-hand knowledge, or recounts from his former students, Plato and Xenophon (“Plato and Socrates”). Nevertheless, his legacy has influenced philosophy and continues to do so.
Similarly, the only way to beat a child on the verge of a temper tantrum at “Chutes and Ladders” is to forfeit. These similarities suggest that the world is an unwinnable game that can only be won by refusing to play. However, Sophocles’ message regarding life and the world requires a more in depth view of the forfeit. Each time a character refused to play, it is a voluntary action. Therefore, Sophocles suggests that in order to survive in the world, a person must be in charge of their own actions. Sophocles demonstrates the danger of succumbing to involuntary actions through Thebes’ subservience that correlates with its ignorance. As a result of the city’s societal conditions of ignorance and subservience, the reader views the the city as weak. Sophocles’ message about voluntary and deliberate actions aligns with his belief in democracy. Corresponding to the major motifs of the play, a democracy’s basis is deliberate actions by individuals who are neither subservient nor ignorant. Oedipus Rex is both a warning against tyrannies, like prophecies, that completely dictate lives and an advocate for democracies with which life is finally
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.
After the trial of the Socrates where he was found guilty and sentenced to death comes another great work of Plato, the Crito, where Socrates friend Crito has come to the prison cell to persuade him to run away and not drink the poison. In this dialogue Socrates provides two very good analogies on the relationship between the State and the citizens.
...epherd that "disposed of" the infant Oedipus under instructions from his natural parents were one and the same. His revelations concerning Oedipus' undeniable identity as a babe and as a man at a crossroad was finally thrown upon the sorrowful Oedipus. He is his father's killer and is his mother's husband. Each time Oedipus attempts to gain freedom from his true self, he draws increasing complications onto himself. King Oedipus at last clearly understands the hard truth that the past he had been running away from is the future he now must accept... or dare he deny its existence?
The selfishness that Oedipus possesses causes him to have abundance of ignorance. This combination is what leads to his father’s death. After fleeing Corinth and his foster family, Oedipus gets into a skirmish with an older man. The reason for the fight was because, “The groom leading the horses forced me off the road at his lord’s command” (1336). Oedipus is filled with a rage after being insulted by the lord and feels the need to act. The two men fight, but Oedipus ends up being too much for the older man, and he kills him. What Oedipus is unaware of is that the man was actually his birth father and by killing him, Oedipus has started on the path of his own destruction. Not only does Oedipus kill his father, but also everyone else, “I killed them all” (1336). The other men had no part in the scuffle, but in his rage, he did not care who he was killing.
For these two articles that we read in Crito and Apology by Plato, we could know Socrates is an enduring person with imagination, because he presents us with a mass of contradictions: Most eloquent men, yet he never wrote a word; ugliest yet most profoundly attractive; ignorant yet wise; wrongfully convicted, yet unwilling to avoid his unjust execution. Behind these conundrums is a contradiction less often explored: Socrates is at once the most Athenian, most local, citizenly, and patriotic of philosophers; and yet the most self-regarding of Athenians. Exploring that contradiction, between Socrates the loyal Athenian citizen and Socrates the philosophical critic of Athenian society, will help to position Plato's Socrates in an Athenian legal and historical context; it allows us to reunite Socrates the literary character and Athens the democratic city that tried and executed him. Moreover, those help us to understand Plato¡¦s presentation of the strange legal and ethical drama.
Thesis: The completion and substance of Oedipus Rex allows Oedipus to live grief-stricken throughout his successful search for justice.
In Sophocles’ play, Oedipus, the King, there are various instances where Oedipus tries to escape his destiny—enlightenment—only to discover the truth that he cannot. Similarly, in Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” the prisoner travails to understand and adjust to his newly visited environment. In both works, the men first had to realize their ignorance before they could begin to acquire knowledge and true understanding of the complexities of the human condition. Specifically, in Oedipus, the King, it was Oedipus’ illusion of himself as a man unequaled in leadership whereas in “Allegory of the Cave” it was the prisoner’s initial refutations of enlightenment being shown him until he realizes its intellectual, spiritual, and social significance.
During this essay the trail of Socrates found in the Apology of Plato will be reviewed. What will be looked at during this review is how well Socrates rebuts the charges made against him. We will also talk about if Socrates made the right decision to not escape prison with Crito. Socrates was a very intelligent man; this is why this review is so critical.
A vital subject in the play Oedipus the King is the relation between the characters action and fate. Oedipus had the choice to either let destiny play its course, but as seen in the play Oedipus’s chooses his own downfall, he choose free will. His persistence to uncover the truth about his past and his identity are substantial. Fate on the other hand is accountable for many other important and disturbing events in the play one being responsible for Oedipus marring his own mother. Sophocles clearly suggests that both fate and one’s action works hand on hand, it is clear and becomes difficult to judge Oedipus for incest given his unawareness.
If we give ourselves up to a full sympathy with the hero, there is no question that the Oedipus Rex fulfills the function of a tragedy, and arouses fear and pity in the highest degree. But the modern reader, coming to the classic drama not entirely for the purpose of enjoyment, will not always surrender himself to the emotional effect. He is apt to worry about Greek fatalism and the justice of the downfall of Oedipus, and, finding no satisfactory solution for these intellectual difficulties, loses half the pleasure that the drama was intended to produce. Perhaps we trouble ourselves too much concerning the Greek notions of fate in human life. We are inclined to regard them with a lively antiquarian interest, as if they were something remote and peculiar; yet in reality the essential difference between these notions and the more familiar ideas of a later time is so slight that it need not concern the naive and sympathetic reader. After all, the fundamental aim of the poet is not to teach us about these matters. but to construct a tragedy which shall completely fulfill its proper function. Nevertheless, for the student of literature who feels bound to solve the twofold problem, How is the tragedy of Oedipus to be reconciled with a rational conception of life? and How does Oedipus himself comply with the Aristotelian requirements for a tragic hero? there is a simple answer in the ethical teaching of the great philosopher in whose eyes the Oedipus Rex appears to have been well-nigh a perfect tragedy. In other words, let us compare the ideal of the Ethics with the ideal of the Poetics.
As a reader that is using the Reader-Response Criticism, the production of different responses of the text of Oedipus Rex is always different for each reader. The reader needs to examine the words thoroughly in their mind to come to an arguable conclusion. Oedipus has no fault in the actions that he did because he did not know at the moment, but how he tried to resolve things was not the way to go. The feeling I felt while reading the play is pure shock and hatred because of his actions, but he wouldn’t have done those things if he had known the truth. Although Oedipus was trying with all his power to find the culprit of his father, but while doing so, he showed weakness by his attributes, that led to his destiny.
In conclusion, accepting what we just read, we can determine that setting out to find the truth may not always be your best option, because although it may answer questions we have and satisfy our urge, it does not always yield the outcome in which we were searching. Nonetheless, once Oedipus discovered the truth, I find his decision to stand by the punishment set forth by his own orders to be a noble and heroic one, just as all the citizens of Thebes had always seen him as. Therefore, even though we may or may not understand Oedipus’ persistence to seek the truth, we have gained an understanding as to why persistency to find truth can be harmful to an individual or even to an entire group, some things are just better left unsaid or unknown.