In the Crito by Plato, Socrates argues against civil disobedience, seeing it as an unjust act. Contrasting this view, Martin Luther King argues for civil disobedience against unjust laws, and seeing it as a responsibility of citizens. Civil disobedience is the active refusal to obey certain law, commands or requests of the government. I will argue that the view of Socrates is superior to the view of Martin Luther King on the justness of civil disobedience. Using the argument against harm, I will show that even if a law is viewed as unjust, you must not repay an evil with another evil, as evident in the Crito while contrary to ideas presented by MLK.
The laws are suppose to protect the society and its people, yet when the order of the government turns corrupt, then the validity of everything is at stake. As one can see, the corrupt laws placed Socrates in prison and he chose to abide by the impartial laws in order to be consistent and loyal to the
According to Gloria Steinem, “Law and justice are not always the same”. This quote means that following the law may not always mean justice is being served. Laws are rules and guidelines that are set up to govern behavior. Laws set out standards, procedures
What I will explain to you in this article will, how we are connected with the law and I hope, make you see sense in the importance of our laws in the society we live in. To be against the importance of laws in our society would show one to be ignorant and naïve. I encounter the law on a daily basis when I am driving. I have to follow the speed limit of each road, I have to signal before changing lanes, my vehicle must be in good condition in order to safely drive and I must obey all road signs as they are set in place to ensure the safety of everybody.
In this paper I will argue that Socrates’s argument at 50a-b of the Crito would be not harming his fellow citizens by breaking the laws. Based on the readings from Plato’s The Five Dialogues, I will go over the reasoning of Socrates’ view on the good life. I will then discuss the three arguments Crito has for Socrates regarding his evasion of the death sentence including the selfish, the practicality, and the moral arguments. I will deliberate an objection to the argument and reply to the objections made in the paper and conclude with final thoughts. Socrates argues in the Crito that he should not escape or disobey the law because it is unethical.
In some case there are some facts which work against law. So does it imply that law is wrong? There are some arguments related to this theory: The Gratitude Argument: We have to obey the law because we are obligated to be grateful to the government because of the good things it does for us, and obeying the law is the best way of showing our gratitude.
An unjust law would be considered the opposite, and go against any morals while also giving people in power the ability not to obey the law. “An unjust law is a code that a numerical or power majority group compels a minority group to obey but does not make binding on itself” (King, 1963, p.
Men make laws to instill order in a society and prevent chaos in any shape or form. Naturally, laws will always be somewhat unjust because it is impossible to consistently construct laws that directly and equally benefit all members of a society. There will always be a majority that makes the laws and a minority that has to obey the laws. Although laws are usually the standard of morality by which we live by, they must be disobeyed in certain situations. These situations are, but not limited to, an undemocratic formation of aforementioned laws, laws that are inherently unjust according to human law which can be synonymous with God’s law. However, laws should get their legitimacy from religious backing, but the legitimacy should come from either the inherent goodness or
In other words, society resides in justice to distribute good; justice is always seen as virtuous no matter how fairness is dispersed or obtained, society will always believe it is just. Whether certain laws may seem unreasonable or questionable, law abiding citizens would still follow the regulations because it is the appropriate thing to do. To society, justice is a significant social structure where people are given equal rights and liberty as a construct of fairness. In some manner, justice has a way of keeping order and limit people from carrying out unacceptable behavior that could negatively impact citizens and their safety. However, justice is not always just, as mentioned before; some forms of justices/regulations are extreme and
Socrates bases this view of justice on the worth of living a good life. “And is life worth living for us with that part of us corrupted by unjust actions” (47e) If we corrupt our soul with injustice, our life would not be worth living, therefore one must never commit an injustice. “When one has come to an agreement that is just with someone, one should fulfill it.”(49e) It is this agreement with the Laws that Socrates would be violating, if he were to
Laws are for the good of people for not doing a crime and getting punishment for doing a crime. One of the main laws was the feudal law. It was an agreement with a lord and his vassals. A vassal had to do military and political service while a lord had to give the vassal a grant of land. The decline of feudalism happened when vassals would team up with other vassals and override the power of the king.
The law is an intriguing concept, evolving from society’s originalities and moral perspectives. By participating in the legal system, we may endeavour to formulate a link between our own unique beliefs and the world in which we live. Evidently, a just sense of legality is a potent prerequisite for change, enabling society to continue its quest for universal equality and justice. Aristotle once stated that "even when laws have been written down, they ought not to remain unaltered".
‘The Rule of Law’ came into popularity under the hands of A.V. Dicey in the 19th Century. Aristotle, another renowned philosopher once said more than two thousand years ago, "The rule of law is better than that of any individual. "  The Rule of Law is ultimately, the foundation of democracy that every country should acquire for the better of their own legal systems, regardless of whether it is criminal law, civil law or public law. It is a major source of legitimation for governments in the modern world. A government that abides by the rule of law is seen as good and worthy of respect.
DEFINITION OF LAW: Law is outlined as the principles and regulations set by the governing authority, and have binding legal forces. It must be endorsed and obeyed by the citizens, subject to penalties or legal consequences. It depicts the will of the supreme power of the state. The basic purpose of law is to regulate the society, to safeguard and shield the rights of people and to resolve conflicts. It acts as barrier is preventing people from behaving in a negative manner that affects the rights and quality of life other people, hence violation of law implies the punishment of lawbreakers Dysfunction of Law: Dysfunction of law means failed to abide by the law.