Similarities Between Martin Luther King Jr And Socrates

In the article “Letter from Birmingham Jail” Martin Luther King Jr. responds to clergymen who described his civil rights activities as “unwise and untimely”. Dr. King argues that while just laws should be obeyed, unjust laws aren’t binding because they go against decent morality and they degrade human lives. He explains the three-hundred-year struggles by African Americans to gain their basic rights and responds to criticism of being an extremist for trying to force change on this matter. Ultimately his reasoning is that those attempting to find a resolution to the injustice and unequal laws of the land should not be punished if they are doing so nonviolently, even if they break some just laws. I argue in favor of this idea that unjust laws

Both Frederick Douglass and Socrates prioritize the True over their reputations. Willing to admit his weaknesses, Douglass’s main goal is to seek the True even if it means leaving his reputation undefended. He begins his speech by having a “distrust of [his] ability” and claims that when it comes to public speaking, he has “little experience” (Douglass). Douglass admits that topics concerning American history should be discussed with people who were educated through the school system instead of with a slave who has no educational background. He ultimately establishes trust with his audience by pursuing the True over maintaining his reputation.

In April 1963 Martin Luther King was arrested and jailed in Birmingham, Alabama, for organizing demonstrations against unjust segregation laws. While in jail, he read a letter written by eight clergymen who denounced his demonstrations. King answered the clergymen in a letter now known as "Letters from Birmingham Jail." A study of American history reveals that King was justified in leading demonstrations against unjust segregation (Jim Crow) laws. To begin, in April 12, 1966 several Alabama Clergymen wrote an open letter to Martin Luther King criticizing his actions during his demonstration in Birmingham, Alabama.

Both authors try to persuade their audience to oppose specific laws that are unjust. In doing so, King and Thoreau define what they believe is just and unjust. By King’s definition, a just law is moral or the law of god. An unjust law is out of harmony with the moral law, or degrades human personality (265). In regards to King essay, he believes, “Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws (265).

In today’s age, there are many laws in America that aren’t right. They demean another person’s rights, while some put people’s life in danger. It’s unsure why certain ones were created, but once the public realizes they aren’t necessarily helpful, they attempt to get rid of them. In “Letter from Birmingham Jail” a letter written to clergymen by Martin Luther King Jr. he addresses the laws in which he and many other people are oppressed. He makes many points and examples as of how the laws are unfair.

The general idea that Socrates and Crito seem to agree upon is that it is always right to follow all laws and always wrong to disobey all laws set for that state. If one makes this conclusion along with Socrates and Crito, it is easy to understand the their view on civil disobedience. Socrates has made a very strong argument as to why he must remain in jail and accepts his sentence of death, as a good citizen

In the eyes of Martin Luther King Jr., Justice within a society is achieved through the implementation of just laws. Furthermore, “just laws are regulations that have been created by man that follow the laws of God for man” (“Clergymen’s Letter”). Any law that does not correspond with the ideals of God and morality are considered to be unjust or a form of injustice. King identifies that injustice is clearly evident within the justice system. This injustice can truly be seen through the misconduct imposed toward the African American community.

From both these readings one can conclude that both of these men had great intentions. In my humble opinion one can’t contrast the conclusions, as the conclusion in both these scenarios is justice, there’s no denying that. But the reader can contrast the way both MLK and Socrates used just obedience to arrive at the conclusion of justice. Socrates seems to be more of an individualistic character, as he had no one group behind him that he was fighting for. He uses his words and his honesty to achieve his justice, he takes every advantage of this one true opportunity he has before the council to voice his opinion.

In Plato’s Crito, we see that he tries to point out the problem of political obligations of the citizen by using the relationship between Socrates and Crito and how they have different views on these obligations. As known, Plato portrays Socrates as a model citizen. Socrates has just been sentenced to death, but is sent to jail as he awaits his fatal fate. Socrates believes in the commitment to civic obligations and the rule of law and is willing to stand by his beliefs, even if he has to stay in jail and even if he will be in danger of being put to death. His friend Crito tries to talk him into attempting to escape the jail, by talking about voluntary injustice, talkina about how citizens regard the rule of law as just but they have the will to commit injustices.

Civil Disobedience Martin Luther King once stated in "The Letter from Birmingham Jail", "Any individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust and willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment to arouse the conscience of the community over it injustice is in reality, expressing the highest respect for the law" (King 411). King meant that, if anyone feels a law is unjust and needed to expose its injustice, should willingly accept any penalty that comes in their way to help arouse people 's conscience in changing that law. In “The Letter from Birmingham Jail”, Martin Luther King explains the four powerful steps of the nonviolent campaign he used to protest against racial injustice for African-Americans

Throughout time, people have been yearning to live in a society where all is morally correct. Every individual may have a different set of morals or varying definitions of what exactly is just and what is unjust, but almost all are willing to fight for what is right. As a matter of fact, it is the responsibility of the people to fight against injustices and search for order in a society led by rulers who impose unjust laws. However, Sophocles’ Antigone and Martin Luther King Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail both show how there are costs in this fight for moral preservation. These costs come in the form of civil disobedience and taking a stand among a conforming society, while also risking one’s self and possibly suffering in the process.

King makes the point that a law is just if it follows the Law of God and Unjust if it doesn’t. King goes on further to explain a just law is a law that a “power majority group” wants a minority group to follow and is willing to follow the same law itself. On the other end of the spectrum an unjust law would be if the Majority group isn’t willing to follow the same law they are requiring a minority group to follow. With all of Kings bashing of laws in the letter King takes a step back to clarify that he doesn’t want everyone to go out and break the law, he says this would lead to anarchy. He also says “One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty.”

Political activists and philosophers alike have a challenging task of determining the conditions under which citizens are morally entitled to go against the law. Socrates and Martin Luther King, Jr. had different opinions on the obligation of the citizens in a society to obey the law. Although they were willing to accept the legal punishment, King believed that there are clear and definable circumstances where it would be appropriate, and sometimes mandatory, to purposely disobey unjust laws. Socrates did not. Socrates obeyed what he considered to be an unjust verdict because he believed that it was his obligation, as a citizen of Athens, to persuade or obey its Laws, no matter how dire the consequences.

51). Socrates states that in his escape he would have to commit injustices, whether it be by bribing the prison guard, or by implicating his friends in his actions. Therefore if Socrates would have to commit any injustice to escape, he believes he is better off staying put. Committing acts of injustice would corrupt his life. “…one must never in any way do wrong willingly, or one do wrong one way and not in another?

King addresses the characteristics of unjust laws in 3 points. First point being that just laws are always harmonious with natural morale law. Second point being that a just law is one that uplifts human personality as opposed to degrading human personality. Lastly, a just law can only be created in the most democratic manner possible and if it is not, the minority automatically has the right to disobey the law because they had no say in the creation of the law. As for the first point, a natural morale law must be measured by our natural human sense.