Martin Luther King And Socrates Similarities

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.

Atticus Finch and Martin Luther King Jr. are very similar in they way that they argue through the use of Logos, Pathos, and Ethos. Atticus may be a fictional character, but he is an extremely influential person in both the fictional world and the real one. Martin Luther King Jr. was a civil rights activist who wanted equal rights for black and white people alike. Both attempted to get equal rights.

The civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. had strong beliefs that influenced how he approached activism and enacting social change. King advocated peaceful resistance, equality, justice, and the power of love, which were all inspired by his Christian faith and the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi (King 15). He battled against racial inequity and prejudice because he sincerely felt that every person, regardless of race, has intrinsic worth and dignity. Although the beliefs of Martin Luther King Jr. and the Transcendentalists are similar, they also diverge significantly. King and the Transcendentalists had a respect for people's autonomy and capacity to have a constructive impact on society.

Humans are terrified of change Jealousy is the key emotion that results in violent human behaviors. Everybody is jealous of everybody. And because of jealousy we, humans, create the worst possible hell. That being said, humans are full of jealousy. Julius Caesar and Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK Jr.) were both assassinated; however, the assassinations specifically were quite different.

My Personal Response to the Letter from Birmingham Jail A letter excoriating Dr. King and praising the city’s prejudiced police force was issued by a group of Clergymen. While currently in jail at Birmingham as a victim of racism King addresses everybody with intend to bring injustice and aim to stop it for the good of all mankind. Dr. King wrote “Letter from Birmingham Jail” a focus on ethic discrimination as a response to follow clergy men. Dr. King compared Socrates as an important thinker which he created tension to inspire mankind to grow with this current tension that everybody is facing but, encourages nonviolence.

Is it better to follow laws that are unjust but right, or do the thing that is fair but are against the law? Socrates in Plato’s “The Crito” and Martin Luther King, Jr. in his “Letter from Birmingham Jail” answer this question from conflicting perspectives. According to Plato (427-423 BCE), Socrates believed that it is his duty to obey the law of his city, Athens, on all occasions, whereas King (1963) made the argument first put forth by St. Thomas Aquinas that “an unjust law is no law at all” (p. 69). One of these reasons for the differing opinions on this subject is due to the times and places in which these two men existed and came to their views on Civil disobedience.

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.

As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. states, "it is rather strange and paradoxical to find us consciously breaking laws;" this statement corresponds with Dr. King Jr.  agreeing with St. Augustine’s statement that "an unjust law is no law at all." In 1954 during the

Socrates should remain in prison after evaluating Critos arguments although Socrates’s were stronger. I’ll begin with Crito’s argument and what makes them strong, and what doesn’t. Next, I’ll focus on Socrates arguments and what makes them good and what makes them weak, mainly his focus that living with a bad soul isn’t worth living when you have a bad soul. Crito gives Socrates three arguments.

There is a resonating difference between a just and unjust act. A just act stays true to the moral principles of a civilization, while an unjust act is frowned upon by society. However, is it possible for this difference to sometimes seem vague?

Martin Luther King was a very charismatic person who lead the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and civil rights movement. He fought against racial inequality, injustice with Negros, and the “white power” structures built in the 1920s. In Birmingham where he was put in a jail cell, Martin Luther king decided to write a letter describing the concerns and issues of the involved in his movement, against the state and government. These values and concerns fall in the same line with Mill and Descartes when it came to the demands of a society that is unjust, but it’s the opposite for Rousseau. Descartes raised suspicion and doubt in the westernized philosophy world during his time.

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.

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

Martin Luther King Jr. writes, "I can urge them to disobey segregation ordinances because they are morally wrong." When King writes "they are morally wrong," he is contending that the segregation ordinances are in opposition to eternal and natural law. In fact, natural and eternal law being a 'higher law' is the basis of King's philosophy of 'non-violent civil disobedience.' King views the segregation laws, a human law, to be in disagreement with natural and eternal law; therefore, he believes that these laws should not be followed. King writes, "Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.

- Detail the distinction between just and unjust laws. Why is it important Dr. King make this distinction? - One has a legal and moral responsibility to obey “just” laws because they are a “ man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God.” Any “just” law uplifts human personality. One has a moral responsibility to disobey “unjust” laws because they are “ a code that is out of harmony with the moral law.”