Creon Debate Analysis

496 Words1 Page

Creon’s Ruling Should Remain- Debate 2 Creon’s ruling and application of his law in regards to Antigone should remain, because going back on his word would lead to anarchy, Antigone needs to be taught to obey law to preserve order, and the Creon is not disrespecting the gods as he is allowing them the final decision. To begin with, if Creon were to go back on his ruling and “bend” as his son, Haimon, recommends, then he would be endorsing the principle that laws have exceptions. Antigone went strictly against his predetermined wishes that no one was to bury Polynices; by absolving her, he would be saying that his laws are not final. Creon declares, “This [anarchy] is why cities tumble and great houses rain down… We keep laws then” (Sophocles …show more content…

The chaos and the destruction of social hierarchy would ruin all of Thebes, a much larger scale than the questionable fate of one criminal person. Equally important, Antigone needs to suffer consequences for her unwavering will, as she still has no qualms and does not consider the reasoning of the State. Antigone speaks, “You will remember what things I suffer, at what men’s hands, because I would not transgress the laws of heaven” (Sophocles 228). Even if she is considering morality on the overbearing religious scale of the gods, it does not excuse her thought process or sheer, impenetrable indignance. If she is freed from Creon’s ruling that she is to be placed in a vault, no one is to say that she will not bring her own will to challenger Creon again, threatening the hierarchy. Through Antigone may be morally driven on this specific issue, her insolence has to be attended to for the sake of the future of Thebes. Furthermore, Creon’s ruling is completely well-placed, as he is letting the gods have the final decision in the matter. By allowing the gods to choose, he respects that they have the more powerful and all encompassing say in the matter, and it shows that he is

Open Document