Socrates And Antigone: The Problem Of Law

When it comes to the topic of laws, most of us will readily agree that breaking the laws is unjust. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of if there is ever a time when a law can acceptably be broken. Whereas some are convinced that laws should never be broken, others maintain that there are some instances where laws should be broken. Socrates and Antigone would agree with the statement that disobeying laws is never the answer. Likewise, I have always believed that breaking the laws should be punishable and should never be done. When I was younger, my mother told me that if I ever broke a law, she would disown me. This, along with my morals, was enough to keep me on the right side of the law. Although some people think that there are “bad” laws that could be broken without consequence, I claim that laws should never be broken because disobeying laws undermines the safety that laws are intended to maintain.
Socrates insists that a life well lived is what really counts at the end of a life by saying, “‘At the same time I should like you to consider whether we are still satisfied on this point: that the really important thing is not to live, but to live well’” …show more content…
When the laws are broken, what of his city then” (Sophocles 295). Laws unite cities and keep people safe, but breaking them can destroy the “law and order.” Antigone is not breaking the law, but she is going against the King’s orders. Laws should not be broken because that undermines the purpose of them. Laws habitually broken give no meaning to the law. Antigone is not breaking the law, but she is going against the King’s orders. Laws must be in place to keep cities safe and democratic. The idea of laws are brought up several times. Both works express that laws must be obeyed, and if not, this could be very dangerous. Similarly, a person that constantly tells lies will never have your trust