Laws are made to express the will that aims at the common good. “One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws; however, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws, says Martin Luther King's Jr. His words absolutely tell us what to do in face of these two types of laws. Law and order exists for the purpose of establishing structure that allows social progress to happen. According to King, “a just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law
to respond to the Birmingham Clergymen, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. points out the differences between just and unjust laws while responding to the question “Why direct action?” (King, p.2). By examining his letter and evaluating my own thoughts I have come to both an agreement and disagreement with Dr. King. Though I concede that there is truly a difference between just and unjust laws, I still insist that taking direct action was not the most appropriate way for Dr. King to approach his situation
political act contrary to law usually done with the aim of bringing about a change in the law or policies of the government” (364). Since civil disobedience involves breaking the law, usually with the intention to bring a change to society by defying an unjust law, it is difficult for a
Is there a such thing of unjust, and just laws? If these unjust laws actual exist, should one disobey these laws if unjust. These questions can be applied to Socrates, a wise philosopher, who is on death row, for disobeying the law in the novel “Five Dialogues”. revised by John M. Cooper. Socrates believes that if he broke an unjust law, then one should still be penalized for these action, even the law that is being broken is considered unjust. Socrates would rather die than to actually escape from
presented with an opportunity to escape from prison just when he has an upcoming execution, Socrates gives an argument that such acts are unjust because they only serve to dishonor the city’s laws. Plato brings out Socrates as speaking hypothetically for the voice of the law. Socrates said that one’s country is supposed to be honored more than parents and all the ancestors. He said that the country should be moiré revered and taken to be more sacred and that it is more honorable among the gods and
“Shower what sufferings you like upon us, we will calmly endure all and not hurt a hair of your body. We will gladly die and will not so much as touch you. But so long as there is yet life in these our bones, we will never comply with your arbitrary laws” (Gandhi). This quote from On Civil Disobedience shows the consensus in concepts between Henry David Thoreau, Martin Luther King Jr, and Mohandas K. Gandhi because the primary concept of Thoreau’s writing, Civil Disobedience, is that if the government
the year is 399 BC or 1849, there is always going to be an underlying concern of the justice, or in this case injustice, practiced by governments and societies. Civil disobedience is the active refusal to obey laws and commands of a government. It is more of a symbolic violation of the the law, rather than a physically aggressive one. It is disobedience by nonviolent resistance to whomever might be holding the central power. The two philosophers Henry David Thoreau and Socrates, both grealy renowned
In Book 1 of ‘The Republic’ by Plato, Thrasymachus puts forth a new definition of what justice is after both Cephalus’ and Polemarchus’ definitions were successively countered by Socrates. Socrates, as is expected, counters Thrasymachus’ argument. While Thrasymachus argues the traditional sophist view to do away with justice seeing as it hinders one’s opportunities, Socrates poses as the opposition and counters all of his opponent’s arguments. According to Thrasymachus, justice is “the advantage
influence. Political figures should uphold political justice by protecting personal liberties, free speech, and ensuring equality, such as distributing just punishments for unlawful acts and ensuring no laws infringe on anyone’s personal liberties. In Earl Lovelace’s novel, The Wine of Astonishment, an unjust law bans only the Baptist religion from being practiced, thus infringing on the villager’s personal liberties of freedom of religion. Another example of justice comes from Martin Luther King Jr.’s Letter
never valid to knowingly commit an unjust action, as it does more harm than good. In other words, the most important thing in life is a good life that maintains the health of the body and psyche. Therefore, after failing to be acquitted from his trial, he must now determine whether it is just or unjust to escape without the approval of fellow Athenians. In his examination of possible liberation, Socrates rationalizes with Crito as to why he believes escaping does no justice for his psyche, or the