Antigone - TOK Journal 1 PDF

Preview

Summary

creative thinking and critical thinking analysis...

Description

Journal entry 1

“To what extent can we use reason to evaluate two competing ethical systems?”

RLS: the context of the play “ the name and wisdom of Antigone.” As Nussbaum rightfully asserts, Antigone is a play about phronesis. From examining its storyline we can denote that in essence, phronesis seems to be the only way out of certain ethical dilemmas as well as the sorrow that often accompanies our destiny. Consistent with the characters familiar to Homeric society, Antigone’s life is dominated by the principle that “nothing can happen that is not in my lot.” Her ethical life is guided by choices that reflect her inner moral principles, which revolve around being faithful to religious customs and indigenous ways of life. She is an ethical and religious character because she acts according to her own nature and is committed to following what her personal fate requires her to do. The play’s primary characters, Creon, Ismene and Antigone are trapped in a system of obligations that seems almost written into their natures. Despite the love that they may feel for each other, they are ever controlled by a sense of necessity from which there’s no escape. All three characters seem to be motivated by good intentions and to abide by the values their society raised them with: good judgement, autonomy, and responsibility. Tragically, though, each character is trapped by an absolute belief in only one of these values and in this way are isolated in an absolute moral space. In the play, Creon advocates for a civic sentiment of friendship, Ismene for a docile sentiment of familiar love toward the city and the family to which they belong and Antigone for a pious defense of religious versus political laws. The ethical dilemma Antigone faces is whether to bury her brother or abide by the laws established by her uncle Creon, the new head of state. She finally decides to defy Creon’s decree, despite the almost certain consequences, in order to honor her deceased brother which further encompasses how certain scopes can shape our reasoning behind moral judgements. This real life situation elicits obvious links to ethics because its all about the ways in which the considerations of facts and values affect the production of knowledge and our ability to form coherent reasoned, moral judgements. It also explores indigenous knowledge systems through highlighting the interesting paradox between what is deemed socially and religiously and culturally acceptable. Different People have different opinions on what makes a subject unethical, depending on the scope and perspectives that is intuitive in each individuals own way of knowing, inherent in their nature. The play prompts me to ask, “ to what extent can we use reason to evaluate two competing ethical systems?” Antigone’s perspective- both a women, and as the play states “ an outspoken, passionate and confident person who acts as per the religious law” – have made her very different from other characters in the play, as she is the most strong willed and grounded to her beliefs. We can also see how her age might affect her views since she grew up in a different era, before political implications were forced onto communities, and unlike her uncle creon who

mingled with many people outside of his cultural roots to find work, was deeply immersed in her beliefs. Creon and ismene are shown to be more submissive to the modern political ethics system imposed upon them whereas Antigone is firm in her religious rights and makes it clear that the acceptance of her brother by the gods is important to her. Despite creon, and ismenes shared indigenous backgrounds their age, gender and the influence of modern education systems all play a part in their views and shows how, ethics can be viewed differently according to your own personality, gender, level of education, age and cultural background. Antigone s obviously more exposed to her heritage and so holds more firmly and undoubtedly to her beliefs and its ethics system, whereas her relatives are shown to waver in the foreground of the two scopes.

There is no greater reason behind moral judgements that are formed as reasoning within itself is subjective. The way people form opinions and arrive at conclusions is different, however this doesn’t necessarily make them wrong. The factors aforementioned in the above paragraph, will always resonate with a certain individual which more or less effects how and why they reason with an ethical system over another. It is also important to note here how there are multiple truths- never just one, and the validity of one specific to an ethical system does not invalidate the others. In the end, it truly comes down to how we perceive, according to our backgrounds, perspectives and scopes that allows us to find reasoning in something. There is always going to be a conflict of opinion in what is morally right or wrong especially from the perspectives of individuals so different in ways of life, especially in the ways of knowing....