Sophocles’ play “Antigone” illustrates the conflict between obeying human
and divine law. The play opens after Oedipus’ two sons Eteocles and Polyneices
have killed each other in a civil war for the throne of Thebes. Oedipus’
brother in law Creon then assumes the throne. He dictates that Eteocles shall
receive a state funeral and honors, while Polyneices shall be left in the
streets to rot away. Creon believes that Polyneices’ body shall be condemned to
this because of his civil disobedience and treachery against the city.
Polyneices’ sister, Antigone, upon hearing this exclaims that an improper
burial for Polyneices would be an insult to the Gods. She vows that Polyneices’
body will be buried, and Creon declares that anyone who interferes with his
body shall be punished. This is where the conflict begins. Thus the theme of
this play becomes the priority of unwritten law. The question is whether duties
to the gods are more essential then obedience of the state and law. Creon calls
the rotting of Polyneices’ body an “obscenity” because he believes that burial
of the dead is a necessity of human law and not of a citizen. . There is no
compromise between the two – both believe in the absolute truth of their
obedience.
Antigone believes that the unwritten and natural law supercedes any form of
human written law. Honor and a principled responsibility to gods and family are
given equal weight in her self-defense. She says that she fears, not men\'s
condemnation, but penalties from the gods if she does not act The painful evils
that beset her life (the loss of mother, father, and brothers) make death a
gain in her eyes By contrast, if she had left her mother\'s son unburied, she
would have grieved She expects to win glory for her gesture to the gods.
Antigone displays the characteristic trait of pride in the way she justifies
and carries out her decisions. She is obstinate in her beliefs, and throughout
the play refuses to listen to advice. This poses a danger because it causes her
to overlook the limitations of her own powers. Antigone’s ethics derive from a
dual responsibility to the unwritten laws and the gods’ will and to family
relations and care for others. Even though Antigone exhibits a blamable pride
and hunger for glory, her vices are less serious than Creon’s. Antigone’s
mistakes only harm herself, where as Creon’s mistakes harm a whole city.
Creon’s refusal to bury Polyneices is a worse offense to human values than
refusing to heed his order.
Creon has no toleration for people who place personal beliefs over the common
good. He believes that government and law is the supreme authority, and civil
disobedience is worst form of sin. The problem with Creon’s argument is he
approaches He approaches every dilemma that requires judgement through
descriptive generalizations. In contrast to the morality defined by Aristotle
in his Nicomachaean Ethics, Creon shows that he is deaf to the knowledge of
particulars--of place, time, manner, and persons, which is essential for moral
reasoning. In short, he does not effectively bring together general principles
and specific situations Creon does not acknowledge that emotion, and perception
are as critical to proper moral consideration as reason. This explains why he
does not respond accordingly with the reasoning of the guard, Tiresias the
prophet, Antigone, her sister Ismene, or even his own son Haemon. Throughout
the whole play, Creon emphasizes the importance of practical judgement over a
sick, illogical mind, when in fact it is him who has the sick, illogical mind.
He too exhibits pride in his argument. To Antigone and most of the Athenians,
possessing a wise and logical mind means acknowledging human limitations and
behaving piously towards the gods. Humans must take a humble attitude towards
fate and the power of the gods, yet Creon mocks death throughout the play. He
doest not learn his lesson until the end of the play when he speaks
respectfully of the death that is continually hurting him. At the end of the
play, the Chorus, made up of Athenian elders, makes a speech that states all of
the learned lessons of the play: wisdom is good, respect for the gods’ is
necessary, and pride is bad. Creon learns all of these lessons through his
flaws.
Haemon, Antigone’s fiancé, becomes entangled in a similar issue, whether he
should obey his obligations to his parent, Creon, or his obligation to his
wife. When Creon questions him about his loyalties, Haemon replies that no
woman is important to him as his father, and that he will obey him. Creon
praises his son’s “wisdom.” Haemon then tells his father that the public does
not believe that Antigone deserves the punishment of death. He implores Creon
to rethink his decision. Creon is insulted by this and defends his absolute
authority. Haemon calls Creon stubborn and proud. His arguments are rational.
He says that reason is the gift of the gods, and he cautions Creon not to be
single-minded and self-involved, noting that there is no such thing as a
one-man city. Yet it needs to be noted that from Haemon’s rage, his hints at
suicide, and from the Chorus’ comments on eros, erotic love, that he is in the
grip of passion, a vice. Creon argues that since Haemon’s will should be
subject to his, there should be no conflict of loyalty. He says that Haemon
shouldn’t even be attracted to Antigone since she is an enemy of the state, and
is disgusted with the thought of his son marrying a traitor. Creon denies that
there are any ethical problems or decisions that should be deliberated. In
consistency with his pride, he insists on staying with his views, so that he
would not be called a liar.
Antigone’s predicament coincides in many ways with Socrates’ ethical dilemma in
Plato’s “Apology” and the “Crito.” Socrates has argued that one must obey
one\'s superior, someone who is relevantly wiser than oneself, the god in
ethical matters, in any situation in which one\'s only reason not to obey is
that obedience puts one at risk of death. He has not said at all that one must
obey anyone in authority, no matter what they command. Socrates has been
ordered to philosophize by Apollo, his superior in ethical matters. He knows
himself that doing philosophy every day is the greatest good. Hence he knows
that not to philosophize would be wrong. Then the court orders him to abandon
philosophy on pain of death. But the court is not his superior in ethical
matters or in wisdom.It is his inferior, as his many examinations of the jurors
or their peers have shown. Moreover, he knows that what the court has ordered
him to do is wrong. Even though he has received conflicting orders, then, the
principles defended in his argument require him to obey only the god\'s
command. They positively forbid him to obey the court. In the Crito, Socrates
must choose between obedience of the state and obedience to his family and
goodness of the gods. Antigone shares this same dilemma. She realizes that she
must choose between obedience of her father and the edict of the government and
obedience of the gods, which eventually proves to be the higher good.
In contrast, the basic elements of their arguments are different. Antigone
believes and upholds her belief in the gods and disobeys the order of the
state. Socrates, instead, feels that disobeying the order of the state would in
fact disobey the gods. He believes that because he has been raised by the
state, civil disobedience would impede his path to goodness, which is what the
gods ultimately want their subjects to strive for.
Both Antigone’s and Socrates’ argument discuss and uphold moral goodness in the
eyes of the gods. However, while Socrates’ takes in account both sides of the
argument in the “Crito” and “Apology,” Antigone’s argument has some flaws. From
the Greek point of view both Creon’s and Antigone’s views are flawed because
they both over-simplify ethical life by recognizing only one “good” or duty. By
oversimplifying, each denies that fact that there should be any deliberation at
all, and this is a factor in Antigone’s failure to convince Creon. Antigone’s
pride causes her to be blind in considering both truths. Antigone’s argument is
also hypocritical. Antigone attacks Creon’s edicts on the grounds that his
interpretation of justice and the will of the gods are wrong. She may be
correct in this assessment, but in saying so she assumes the power that she can
interpret justice and Zeus’ will, just as Creon did. Her accusations are wild
and reckless, and she seems to be trying to seize the glory in her “heroic”
actions. Socrates, on the other hand, concedes both sides of the argument, but
explains his reasoning well for choosing to obey the will of the state. As was
argued, since the god commands the practice of philosophy and the pursuit of
justice, to obey the god is to obey one\'s own reasoned conclusion about the
just. To obey a human superior, by contrast, is to follow the orders of the
expert. Socrates does not, despite appearances, advocate \"following
orders\" -- even when the orders are legal; he believes one ought to
follow orders only if they are in one\'s judgment, just. He therefore declares
that throughout his life he had been the sort of man who never conceded
anything to anyone contrary to the just. He will not obey Crito, instead he
obeys nothing of his own but the logos that seems best to him upon reasoning.
Yet he insists, in the Crito as in the Apology, that when there is an expert,
the expert must be obeyed. Thus Socrates in the Crito recognizes the validity
of, exercising one\'s own moral judgment when it results from careful reasoning
from philosophy -- as well as following the opinion of the expert or
government, if there is one. Socrates will not, therefore, obey Crito unless
Crito produces a principle superior to his. If Crito does not have a superior
principle, as Creon does not deliver a superior argument than Antigone, Crito
has no claim to be obeyed: on moral questions, only the best logos and the
moral expert deserve his obedience. Thus Socrates delivers the better logical
argument.