Platos Apology, Billy Budd by Melville, Levi's Survival in Auschwitz by Levi, Persepolis by Satrapi - Essay Example

Justice (Law, Morality, Ethics) al Affiliation Justice (Law, Morality, Ethics) Plato’s Apology and Republic, Billy Budd by Herman Melville, Levis Survival in Auschwitz by Primo Levi, Persepolis by Marjane Satrapi and Separation film are works that clearly bring out the theme of morality. Despite the fact that the texts and the film address different issues, they all bring out the theme of morality through different characters, the setting and the storyline that they develop. This paper will discuss the theme of morality as developed in the five written texts and the film. The Apology of Socrates by Plato presents itself as a speech by Socrates during his trial. Plato recounts Socrates defense where he does not intend to acquit himself from the accusations laid against him but to ensure that he is found guilty and sentenced to death (Plato & In Williamson, 1963). This text strongly emphasizes on the theme of morality in the sense that the reader believes that it would be moral for Socrates to accept the accusations that are true and deny those that he did not do. Failure to do this would be acting immoral because Socrates would be engaging in lies by convincing people that he is guilty just to be sentenced to death. In the text, the moral purpose that Socrates wants to fulfill is to achieve a philosophical justice, virtue and truth by examining life in its fullness (Plato & In Williamson, 1963). An important question that comes up from this is, if Socrates wanted to achieve philosophical justice, virtue and truth, why then does he decide to defend himself just to be sentenced to death? The answer to this question comes from Socrates himself. He states that if he does not do so, “Someone will say: And are you not ashamed, Socrates, of a course of life which is likely to bring you an untimely end? To him, I may fairly answer: There you are mistaken: a man who is good for anything ought not to calculate the chance of living or dying; he ought only to consider whether in doing anything he is doing right or wrong- acting the part of a good man or of a bad” (Apology 28b). From this statement, it is clear that Socrates’ wish is to act morally by doing what he considers good. Therefore, in the text, Plato seeks to show that morality is not an aspect that is decided by the consequence of an action but by the action itself. Socrates clearly shows this by showing that the chance of living or dying does not determine the reason why he is defending himself but the fact that by doing so he will be doing a good thing, and therefore a moral act. This forms the basis of the arguments that Socrates brings forward in his defense through the Apology (Plato & In Williamson, 1963). In Plato’s republic, Socrates emphasizes that properly trained rulers should lie when it is in the interest of the polis (citizens). The Republic’s advocacy for lying raises issues of morality that center on the question of whether lying is justified for any reason (Plato, 1960). How does lying become moral? Is it right or better for people to know the truth even when the interest does not suit them? In the Republic, Plato advocates for certain lies and deceptive practices especially when they are beneficial to the public. Plato’s Republic centers on an important question which asks whether it is better to be just than unjust and how this is tied to morality. The understanding of justice becomes profound when people insist on the character of a truly just person rather than following issues of external demands and conventional moral rules (Plato, 1960). The fundamental claim that Plato brings forth is that justice is so great that a person who embraces it completely is better off even when distress and pain of severe misfortune occur. Here, Plato asserts that people act against their own interests for the sake of justice and does not think that when one acts in a just manner, he or she does not do so for own happiness. The Republic emphasizes that when people make errors of judgment especially with respect to justice and collective good, they make errors with respect to how they relate to others. The manner in which people relate to others is essential in the sense that it forms the foundation of moral life (Plato, 1960). Making errors of judgment regarding justice means that moral judgments will be defective because such judgments are not founded on what can be considered as truly just. Plato states, “The philosopher whose dealings are with divine order himself acquires the characteristics of order and divinity” (Plato, 1960). This means that a person whose dealings are just and moral has the characteristics of justice and morality in him or her. Therefore, morality is attached to justice. When one acts in a just manner, then it is highly likely that he or she will act in a moral way. However, when one acts in an unjust manner then their moral judgments become impaired. Billy Budd by Herman Melville is a novella that tells a morality story that occurs on a ship belonging to the English Royal Navy. The story centers on John Claggart’s false accusation against Budd as a mutinous man. The captain of the ship has to take a moral and legal decision based on the accusations that Claggart lays against Budd. Despite the fact that accusations are leveled against him, Billy Budd symbolizes good and morality. The most striking characteristic about him is his innocence (Melville, 1986). Melville describes stating, “He was young; and despite his all but fully developed frame, in aspect looked even younger than he really was, owing to a lingering adolescent expression in the as yet smooth face all but feminine in purity of natural complexion but where, thanks to his seagoing, the lily was quite suppressed and the rose had some ado visibly to flush through the tan (Melville, 1986). Claggart who is the master-at-arms onboard disregards naval protocol because he is driven by a homosexual attraction to Billy. This makes him intervene in an incident that he should not because it is not his mandate. He ignores his duty to punish Billy for the mistake he did, but taps him playfully on the bottom with his stick (Melville, 1986). This is immoral of Claggart because he lets his homosexual attraction to Billy to control his thinking and decisions. As such, he does not observe his responsibilities that he should do while onboard the ship. In addition, tapping Billy on his bottom with the stick is immoral because Claggart does not have permission to do so even if Billy was homosexual. Until he is sure that Billy is gay or welcomes his advances, Claggart is expected to act professionally and avoid all actions that are immoral. In several occasions, Claggart finds himself torn between the sexual permissiveness that the sea allows and the restrictions put on men by the society regarding issues of sex (Melville 1986). Claggart knows very well the sexual restrictions that the society has placed on men and especially those people who hold the position such as the one he has. However, this does not restrict him from engaging in such behaviors. His position makes it difficult for someone like Billy to be against it especially because of the fact that Billy had done a mistake, which required a punishment. Therefore, it is immoral for Claggart to ignore the punishment, which Billy deserves, only to satisfy his sexual attractiveness to him. The text shows the evilness of Claggart and differentiates people like him from innocent individuals such as Billy. Through this, the author clearly brings out the theme of morality. Because he is unobserved, Claggart indulges in his own private desires, which show his immoral side. Despite his intellectual might, his sexual feelings weaken his thinking as the author states, “the master-at-arms was perhaps the only man in the ship intellectually capable of adequately appreciating the moral phenomenon presented in Billy Budd” (Melville 1986). This clearly shows that Claggart is an immoral individual, thereby contributing to the theme of morality in the text. Persepolis is a text by Marjane Satrapi that presents graphic information that could easily be put off as literary fluff (Satrapi, 2008). The book combines literary content with simplified artwork. It is a memoir of a young woman who grew up in the decimating national conflicts that occurred in Iran during the 1970s. The book addresses issues of moral ambiguities of the Iranian revolution and the process of growing up during political mayhem. The political turmoil in the country as expressed in the book help brings out the theme of morality. The leaders in Iran at this point in time have decided to rule though dictatorship, forcing people to do what they desire and humiliating them when they refuse to do so. There are several instances where the book shows the leaders as immoral people. For example, Marjane’s grandfather was often jailed just because he had different political beliefs unlike the leadership. Her mother tells her, “sometimes they put him in a cell filled with water for hours” (Satrapi, 2008). This shows the level of immorality that the Iranian government had to the extent that it could bring suffering to its own people. Her parents engage in demonstrations that oppose the king and when they come home, they are always injured and in paid. As the book explains, the police shoot at the demonstrating mob as they also respond by throwing stones at them. The book also describes a scene where Iranian citizens were burned as they were trapped in a movie theatre (Satrapi, 2008). These events show that Reza Shah who is the king of Iran, his government and the police are immoral because of the oppression that they have caused to the people. The level of immorality in the royal family has been significant as explained by Marjane’s grandmother who states that Reza Shah was very harsh but his son was ten times worse than he was. Instead of fulfilling the wishes of the people, the Shahs had taken their time to oppress people and throw celebrations of the past dynasties of Persia, something that was less helpful to the people. This shows the level of immorality in them and helps develop the theme of morality in the book (Satrapi, 2008). A Separation is a 2011 Iranian drama film by Asghar Farhadi who is both the writer and director. This films centers on a middle-class couple that separates and the conflict that ensue after the husband employs a caregiver from the lower class to take care of his ailing father (Farhadi, 2011). The couple divorce because the wife wants to go abroad to find a better life for their children. However, this is not the only reason for the divorce. Nader, the husband is a decent man but very stubborn. He has also neglected his wife and child and is also too proud to beg his wife not to leave. This pride makes him let his wife to go back to her mother’s house. Instead, he hires a poor woman to help him take care of his father who is ailing with Alzheimer’s disease. A few days later, Nader fires the woman and pushes her over the stairs leading to her miscarriage. What follows is a suit from the woman’ husband who decided to sue Nader for manslaughter. Throughout the film, the moral perspective is clearly brought out. Nader is depicted as a decent, but immoral person. He married Simin but does not take good care of her and their child (Farhadi, 2011). When his wife decides to go, he does not care to stop her. He decides to hire a poor woman to help him take care of his father when he could do this comfortably with the help of his wife. When he does not agree with the caregiver, he pushes her down the stair causing a miscarriage. All these are immoral acts from Nader. An ethical character is introduced in the film called Termeh. She is an ethical person but learns that she has to lower her principles to fit in a society where everyone functions through lying. Issues of immorality are constant within the society contributing to the overall theme of morality in the film (Farhadi, 2011). The separation film also depicts the separation of morality and reality. It is clearly shown that reality is different from morality. It is easier for a person to state what morality should be or what moral actions entail rather than doing the act of morality. For example, at first, the film shows the audience that Nader is a decent man and for that matter a moral person. He teaches his daughter that one should always choose the right way of doing things even when this is against her own benefits. However, Nader does not act in this manner. For instance, when handling the caregiver, Nader does not do right by her. He fires her and pushes her down the stairs. In addition, his handling of his wife does not show a person with moral standards because he neglects her, yet he knows that it is his responsibility to care for her. As such, reality and morality are differentiated as two distinct aspects. In reality, it is difficult to live a moral life because of the hardships that life presents. In conclusion, Plato’s Apology and Republic, Billy Budd by Herman Melville, Levis Survival in Auschwitz by Primo Levi, Persepolis by Marjane Satrapi and Separation film are works that clearly bring out the theme of morality. As discussed above, the texts and film address different issues in different settings. However, they all emphasize on the theme of morality through the activities that go on and also through the actions of the characters in them. References Farhadi, A. (Director). (2011). A Separation [Motion picture]. Iran: Sony Pictures Classics. Melville, H. (1986). Billy Budd and Other Stories. New York: Penguin Books, 1986. Plato (1960). The Republic. New York: Plain Label Books Plato & In Williamson, H. (1963). Platos apology of Socrates. London: Macmillan. Satrapi, M. (2008). Persepolis. London: Vintage. Read More