How Did Socrates React To Civil Disobedience

Civil disobedience is referred to as the professed and active denial to follow some commands, demands, and laws of the government, or the inhibiting international authority (Brownlee). Civil disobedience has proved to be an effective act in changing the courses of law throughout the ages. When we look at philosophers like Socrates, Hobbes, Martin Luther King etc. we will see that their actions of denying popular laws of the government and the society have brought effective changes into their generations, both positively and negatively. In this paper, we will talk about how these philosophers responded to the term civil disobedience.
Many believe Socrates to be a rebel. But he was far from being provocative to any laws. Socrates displayed civil …show more content…
He saw the existing laws of Athens as a challenge to his own beliefs and to the society’s moral wellbeing. A very small example could be that Socrates was against prostitution. In general, talking money in exchange of physical pleasure was not harmful to the ancient Greek society, as it did not cause any chaos or notable crimes. But Socrates believed prostitution should not exist because it generated harmful diseases, harmed marriages, and often exposed children to immoral behaviors. So, Socrates' opinion against the society’s approval of prostitution was from both moral and logical point of views. During his time, Socrates had various chances to break the law. Even when he was in prison, he had easy opportunities to escape and avoid death. But he did not intend to break any law because he believed that breaking a law would harm all the laws and if it happened, no laws would be effective anymore and the government would fall into a state of chaos. So, his only way was to serve the punishment and die while holding his moral standards and views and trying to convince people through his sacrifice …show more content…
Mills thinks that justice is related to moral requirements. He believed that the idea of justice must change depending on social and individual happiness. Mill believed that civil disobedience should only come from a moral point of view and it should be presented to people’s thinking and beliefs rather than physical initiative. Martin Luther king, on the other hand, was a man of action when it came to civil disobedience. He would actively refuse to follow laws that were unjust and try to change them by direct actions and provocation. He believed that unjust laws were not laws at all and people should never follow them