The two papers: “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” by Dr. Martin Luther King and “Self-Reliance” by Ralph Waldo Emerson are the two most prominent and inspiring American essays in the history. Even though the two authors address different issues, they both show their great wisdom and personalities as well as their strong and objective perspectives through the important ideas presented persuasively and clearly throughout their papers. As in the essay “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” King presents the justification of his demonstrations against the injustice in Birmingham. On the other hand, Emerson, in “Self-Reliance,” explains the significance of self-reliance in reality. The paper “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” is written in a cell by King after …show more content…
As King defines, “A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law” (par.13). Law is created to prevent the community from chaos and protect rights of an individual. Nonetheless, not every law appears to be fair for all when it only serves for certain groups in the society. As in the South before 1960’s, the segregation law, which forces separation between white communities and people of color on several aspects on a daily basis, blatantly “distorts the soul and damages the personality” (King par.13). Hence, it is not a rule that a human should respect. King effectively builds a strong foundation for this argument by vividly demonstrating the ugly reality that segregation causes to the Negro community in the prior paragraph to this; he tells stories of colored children and how helplessly they have to live in a segregated community. When a nation’s law hurts its people personality, that law is unjust and meaningless. Breaking such unjust laws shows the respect to other just laws and the moral law lying within every human being. And, “One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty,” King writes (par. 16). Moreover, King successfully indicates the comparison between the people, who bravely break law for the sake of their brothers and sisters …show more content…
Emerson promotes the ideal concept of self-reliance throughout his article to persuade his readers to have faith in their ability and nature; as he writes, “The power which resides in him is new in nature, and none but he knows what that is which he can do, nor does he know until he has tried” (par.2). Even though being independent in action and thought is critical, there are numerous factors hindering its existence and progression in each person. They are society, conformity, consistency, fear of judgments, religion, arts, or property. By unwisely learning and imitating others’ works and opinions, a man loses his identity and self-confidence to the hands of norms. A man starts to lose his stand and tend to find a place where he can live under stable conditions; he is afraid of change; he is afraid of being different. Of all the thoughts that Emerson expresses in his paper, the most valuable point is how he promotes individualism and convinces people not to be afraid of being
Today, “Letter to Birmingham Jail,” is known for its articulate and powerful use of ethos, pathos, and logos. The first thing King establishes in his letter is by using ethos to show the reader his role as a religious leader. He states, “I have the honor of
The Letter from Birmingham Jail was written in 1963 by Martin Luther King, Jr. During this period, the African Americans were involved in a battle for white and black equality. This is evident from the vocabulary used by King including “Negro” which was common during that period but not used commonly afterwards. Moreover, the letter’s context tells it argues that King wanted was African Americans to have freedom. The letter’s purpose is that King wants to persuade the clergymen what he together with his people were demonstrating since it was extremely necessary during that period. In achieving this, King utilizes persuasive and condemnatory tones so that the reader can consent with him. King Luther King, the author of Letter from Birmingham Jail, presents a valid argument through the use of ethos, pathos, and logos in the entire piece with the intention of explaining his actions and changing the audience’s opinions.
In "Self-Reliance," philosopher Ralph Waldo Emerson argues that people shouldn't be reliant on what others in society think. The main point of this essay is for people in society to realize that the only way to be comfortable is to be uncomfortable first. Throughout the essay it can be complicating to understand what Emerson is trying to accomplish. In the first paragraph Emerson states," The soul always hears an admonition in such lines." He also writes," Watch that gleam of light which flashes across his mind." Lastly Emerson claims," we shall be forced to take with shame our own opinions from another."
For some, finding the good life requires them to rise above their subjugation, regardless of their consequences. This struggle is illustrated in Letter from Birmingham Jail by Martin Luther King Jr, who argues the necessity of peaceful protest to find a future of equality free from persecution, and in Hobson’s Choice by Harold Brighouse, where a woman must rise above her father’s tyrannical will to find a good life.
King clears up any idea that he’s just someone who has broken the law for no reason. He does this by saying; “I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” (Para 15) This statement tells us that Dr. King is simply adhering to his moral responsibility by doing as he’s supposed to. He knows that following a one-sided makes no sense, and it would be submitting to evil. He even goes on to quote St. Augustine, declaring that, “an unjust law is no law at all.” (Para 15) Therefore, the segregation laws that were implemented in Birmingham at the time were by St. Augustine’s logic, no law at
Dr. King notices that the clergymen are anxious over the black man’s “willingness to break laws” (King pg.218). He understands their anxiety over that issue. King then refers to the “Supreme Court’s decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools," praising it for its civil rights initiative (King pg.218). By mentioning the Supreme Court decision, he is reminding the reader that even a credible source such as the Supreme Court supports racial equality. Since most citizens are law abiding, the addition of the Supreme Court decision might convince the reader adopt the belief of racial equality. King then streamlines into a rhetorical question and answers the question. King writes, “One may well ask: ‘How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying other laws” (King 218). This question is King admitting that his intention seems paradoxical since he urges people to follow “the Supreme Court’s decision of 1954 outlawing segregation," while he is apparently willing to break laws (King pg.218). He insists that it is not a paradox, but rather an acknowledgement of the distinction between “just and unjust” laws (King pg.218). He insists that everyone has a “legal” and “moral responsibility” to follow just laws, but one equally “has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws” (King pg.218). In order to further provide evidence for his claims, King alludes to St.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was the leader of a peaceful movement to end segregation in the United States this mission led him in 1963 to Birmingham, Alabama where officials and leaders in the community actively fought against desegregation. While performing sit-ins, marches and other nonviolent protests, King was imprisoned by authorities for violating the strict segregation laws. While imprisoned King wrote a letter entitled “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, in which he expresses his disappointment in the clergy, officials, and people of Birmingham. This letter employed pathos to argue that the leaders and ‘heroes’ in Birmingham during the struggle were at fault or went against their beliefs.
inform the clergymen about what he and his people are dealing with as a whole
Letter from a Birmingham Jail Is an individual morally justified in breaking a law? The answer to this question is yes,. There are several reasons that have made me believe that it is morally justifiable in breaking the law; however, the most convincing comes from Dr. Martin Luther King in his letter from the Birmingham Jail. " We can never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal." (Classic Arguments 668 -.
In addressing and confronting the problem of injustices among the black Americans in the American society, particularly the violence that had happened in Birmingham, and generally, the inequality and racial prejudice happening in his American society, King argues his position by using both moral, social, and political references and logic for his arguments to be considered valid and agreeable.
In “Self Reliance” by Ralph Waldo Emerson, he promotes the importance of self reliance as an individual, and in society. Individuality to Emerson Opposed the traditional ideas of society, and to him it meant to oppose the conformity and consistency in society. He believes that the majority of people have given up their self reliance because of their fear of judgement by society. To be an individual, Emerson stresses that one has to be a risk taker, and disregard all things external.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. wrote his famous “A Letter from the Birmingham Jail” on April 16, 1963 while he was imprisoned in the Birmingham Jail for being involved in nonviolent protests against segregation. The letter is directed at eight white clergymen from Alabama who were very cynical and critical towards African Americans in one of their statements. Throughout the letter, King maintains an understanding yet persistent tone by arguing the points of the clergymen and providing answers to any counterarguments they may have. In the letter, King outlines the goals of his movement and says that he will fight racial inequality wherever it may be. Dr. King uses the appeal three main rhetorical devices – ethos, logos, and pathos – in order to firmly, yet politely, argue the clergymen on the injustices spoken of in their statement.
Although Thoreau and King both correspondingly address these topics of morality and justice throughout their essays, their essays are in no way similar in writing styles, tones, and/or goals. King speaks to his readers about the injustice that is being served to African Americans specifically. He uses an emotional appeal as he pleads his readers to take action to end segregation. This emotional appeal combined with his optimism for freedom sets him and his writing different from that of Thoreau’s. Thoreau’s essay on the other hand, is largely critical of the unfair American Government. Unlike King, Thoreau worriedly speaks to his readers in a distressed, aggravated tone as he reprimands them for following unjust laws. Thoreau’s essay is also different from King’s because he presents more than one goal. Not only does he describe the government’s unfair laws, but he also teaches his readers how and why to revolt, and tells them to bring an end to the ongoing M...
Firstly, Self-Reliance was one of the vital keys of writings that represented the ethic of American individualism. In Self Reliance, Emerson urged his readers to stand out when it comes to their individual thoughts witho...
Emerson begins his major work on individualism by asserting the importance of thinking for oneself rather than meekly accepting other people’s ideas. As in almost all of his work, he promotes individual experience over the knowledge gained from books: “To believe that what is true in your private heart is true for all men—that is genius.” The person who scorns personal intuition and, instead, chooses to rely on others’ opinions lacks the creative power necessary for robust, bold individualism. This absence of conviction results not in different ideas, as this person expects, but in the acceptance of the same ideas—now secondhand thoughts—that this person initially intuited.