Within two classical works of philosophical literature, notions of justice are presented plainly. Plato’s The Republic and Sophocles’ Antigone both address elements of death, tyranny and immorality, morality, and societal roles. These topics are important elements when addressing justice, whether in the societal representation or personal representation.
Antigone uses the concept of death in many ways when unfolding the tragic story of Antigone and her rebellion. The most obvious way is how death is used as a form of capital punishment and justice against state-dubbed criminals and wrongdoers. The play first exhibits this notion when Antigone states, “No passing humor, for the edict says who’er transgresses shall be stoned to death” (Sophocles, p. 3). The head of the state, Creon, uses death as a form of justice for the man or woman who is to disobey his law. Creon also emphasizes this by threatening a guard when he is notified that his edict has been violated. Creon states, “Go, quibble with thy reason. If thou fail’st to find these malefactors, thou shalt own the wages of ill-gotten gains is death” (Sophocles, p. 8). Death is once again used as a threat and form of justice for people sinning against the state laws. However, death is not only used as a form of state justice, it is also portrayed as a factor in personal justification and completion. The notion that people are not whole or justified until they die is emphasized by Antigone when she states, “A sinless sinner, banned awhile on earth, but by the dead commended; and with them I shall abide for ever” (Sophocles, p. 4). Antigone says that through death, human life is justified and made complete, and that death is essentially the final form of justice for any human l...
... middle of paper ...
...cause they lie about knowing the true nature of things, and are thus unneeded in a perfect, just society. All three of these points in the ideal society do not correlate with Sophocles’ notions of societal roles and structures in his just society. Sophocles seems to reject roles, especially pertaining to gender, while Plato clearly lays each role out in his just society.
In both Antigone and The Republic, elements of death, tyranny, morality, and societal roles are incorporated into each work’s definition of justice. Both works address the notions of justice in a societal form, and an individual form. However, these definitions of justice differ with some elements, they are closely tied with others.
Works Cited
1. Plato, and Allan David Bloom. The Republic. New York: Basic, 1968. Print.
2. Sophocles, and F. Storr. Antigone. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1912. Print.
A twenty-first century reading of the Iliad and the Odyssey will highlight a seeming lack of justice: hundreds of men die because of an adulteress, the most honorable characters are killed, the cowards survive, and everyone eventually goes to hell. Due to the difference in the time period, culture, prominent religions and values, the modern idea of justice is much different than that of Greece around 750 B.C. The idea of justice in Virgil’s the Aeneid is easier for us to recognize. As in our own culture, “justice” in the epic is based on a system of punishment for wrongs and rewards for honorable acts. Time and time again, Virgil provides his readers with examples of justice in the lives of his characters. Interestingly, the meaning of justice in the Aeneid transforms when applied to Fate and the actions of the gods. Unlike our modern (American) idea of blind, immutable Justice, the meanings and effects of justice shift, depending on whether its subject is mortal or immortal.
The belief and concept of dishonor in the Greek and Colombian culture of ‘Antigone,’ by Sophocles, and ‘Chronicle of a Death Foretold,’ by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, is a deciding aspect that blinds characters moral values. It is evident that in both societies Greek and Colombian, a family or an individual without honor is an outcast to the community. As honor plays a drastic role in outlining the culture of the society. Therefore the belief that a perpetrator has brought dishonor upon the family, or community foreshadows punishment for the individual, often conveyed through death.
Justice is generally thought to be part of one system; equally affecting all involved. We define justice as being fair or reasonable. The complications fall into the mix when an act of heroism occurs or morals are written or when fear becomes to great a force. These complications lead to the division of justice onto levels. In Aeschylus’ Oresteia and Plato’s Republic and Apology, both Plato and Aeschylus examine the views of justice and the morality of the justice system on two levels: in the city-state and the individual. However, Plato examines the justice system from the perfect society and Aeschylus starts at the curse on the House of Atreus and the blood spilled within the family of Agamemnon.
In Plato’s Republic, justice and the soul are examined in the views of the multiple characters as well as the Republic’s chief character, Socrates. As the arguments progress through the Republic, the effect of justice on the soul is analyzed, as the question of whether or not the unjust soul is happier than the just soul. Also, Plato’s theories of justice in the man, the state, and the philosopher king are clearly linked to the cardinal virtues, as Plato describes the structure of the ideal society and developing harmony between the social classes. Therefore, the statement “justice is the art which gives to each man what is good for his soul” has to be examined through the definitions of justice given in the Republic and the idea of the good
Plato’s Republic focuses on one particular question: is it better to be just or unjust? Thrasymachus introduces this question in book I by suggesting that justice is established as an advantage to the stronger, who may act unjustly, so that the weak will “act justly” by serving in their interests. Therefore, he claims that justice is “stronger, freer, and more masterly than justice” (Plato, Republic 344c). Plato begins to argue that injustice is never more profitable to a person than justice and Thrasymachus withdraws from the argument, granting Plato’s response. Glaucon, however, is not satisfied and proposes a challenge to Plato to prove that justice is intrinsically valuable and that living a just life is always superior. This paper will explain Glaucon’s challenge to Plato regarding the value of justice, followed by Plato’s response in which he argues that his theory of justice, explained by three parts of the soul, proves the intrinsic value of justice and that a just life is preeminent. Finally, it will be shown that Plato’s response succeeds in answering Glaucon’s challenge.
In Plato’s The Republic, we, the readers, are presented with two characters that have opposing views on a simple, yet elusive question: what is justice? In this paper, I will explain Thrasymachus’ definition of justice, as well as Socrates’s rebuttals and differences in opinion. In addition, I will comment on the different arguments made by both Socrates and Thrasymachus, and offer critical commentary and examples to illustrate my agreement or disagreement with the particular argument at hand.
Antigone risks her own life to bury her brother, therefore, she goes against Kreon’s edict that Polyneices should be left unburied; she believes Polyneices deserves to reach the afterlife. Antigone tells Ismene, “I will bury him myself. If I die for doing that, good: I will stay with him, my brother; and my crime will be devotion” (Sophocles 23). Antigone is willing to risk her own life by disobeying the king’s authority; She stands up for her religious belief that Polyneices should be buried. Kreon tells Antigone before she takes her own life, “I won’t encourage you. You’ve been condemned” (Sophocles 57). Kreon believes that Antigone’s crime is severe, and righteousness should be used to justify her crime. At this point of the play, Antigone realizes she will be put to death, but she does not regret her act of loyalty. In Antigone’s last speech before she takes her own life, she exclaims, “Land of Thebes, city of my fathers… see what I suffer at my mother’s brother’s hand for an act of loyalty and devotion” (Sophocles 57). Here, Antigone addresses the nation’s leaders and declares that they should notice th...
Justice. What is justice? In this world where many people look out only for themselves, justice can be considered the happiness of oneself. But because selfish men do not always decide our standards in society, to find a definition, society should look at the opinions of many. Just as in the modern society to which we live, where everyone feels justice has a different meaning, the society of Plato also struggled with the same problem. In this paper, I will look into the Republic, one of the books of Plato that resides heavily on defining an answer to the meaning of Justice, and try to find an absolute definition. I will also give my opinion on what I personally think justice is.
Book 1 of Plato's Republic raises the question what is justice? Four views of justice are examined. The first is that justice is speaking the truth and paying one's debt. The second is that justice is helping one's friends and harming one's enemies. The third view of justice is that it is to the advantage of the stronger. The last view is that injustice is more profitable than justice.
Woodard, Thomas. Introduction. In Sophocles: A Collection of Critical Essays, edited by Thomas Woodard. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1966.
In Sophocles' Greek tragedy, Antigone, two characters undergo character changes. During the play the audience sees these two characters' attitudes change from close-minded to open-minded. It is their close-minded, stubborn attitudes, which lead to their decline in the play, and ultimately to a series of deaths. In the beginning Antigone is a close minded character who later becomes open minded. After the death of her brothers, Eteocles and Polyneices, Creon becomes the ruler of Thebes. He decides that Eteocles will receive a funeral with military honors because he fought for his country. However, Polyneices, who broke his exile to " spill the blood of his father and sell his own people into slavery", will have no burial. Antigone disagrees with Creon's unjust actions and says, " Creon is not strong enough to stand in my way." She vows to bury her brother so that his soul may gain the peace of the underworld. Antigone is torn between the law placed against burying her brother and her own thoughts of doing what she feels should be done for her family. Her intent is simply to give her brother, Polyneices, a proper burial so that she will follow "the laws of the gods." Antigone knows that she is in danger of being killed for her actions and she says, "I say that this crime is holy: I shall lie down with him in death, and I shall be as dear to him as he to me." Her own laws, or morals, drive her to break Creon's law placed against Polyneices burial. Even after she realizes that she will have to bury Polyneices without the help of her sister, Ismene, she says: Go away, Ismene: I shall be hating you soon, and the dead will too, For your words are hateful. Leave me my foolish plan: I am not afraid of the danger; if it means death, It will not be the worst of deaths-death without honor. Here Ismene is trying to reason with Antigone by saying that she cannot disobey the law because of the consequences. Antigone is close-minded when she immediately tells her to go away and refuses to listen to her. Later in the play, Antigone is sorrowful for her actions and the consequences yet she is not regretful for her crime. She says her crime is just, yet she does regret being forced to commit it.
Antigone’s two purposes for giving this speech are centered on her two main audiences, Creon and the citizens of Thebes. In reference to Creon, Antigone’s purpose is to convey that even after being caught, she does not fear his power, or her punishment. She desires to show him that she stands by the justness of her actions and the injustice of her conviction. To display this, she refers to her death as unimportant because it is the direct result of what she thinks to be just actions.... ...
The subject matter of the “Republic” is the nature of justice and its relation to human existence. Book I of the “republic” contains a critical examination of the nature and virtue of justice. Socrates engages in a dialectic with Thrasymachus, Polemarchus, and Cephalus, a method which leads to the asking and answering of questions which directs to a logical refutation and thus leading to a convincing argument of the true nature of justice. And that is the main function of Book I, to clear the ground of mistaken or inadequate accounts of justice in order to make room for the new theory. Socrates attempts to show that certain beliefs and attitudes of justice and its nature are inadequate or inconsistent, and present a way in which those views about justice are to be overcome.
Many citizens break the law created by the government for a specific reason you would never expect. People either break the law because they find it unnecessary or unjust. People should break the law if one is the agent of injustice. They should follow their morals. Although others might say that you should always obey the law and not risk breaking it and paying the consequences. Others also say that going against the law and the government could lead to corruption and rebellion. Henry David Thoreau’s claim makes sense that one should break the law if one is the agent of injustice as demonstrated in Antigone, Civil Disobedience, and Hero or Traitor.