Martin Luther King Jr. 's Letter From Birmingham Jail

Civil Disobedience is defined as refusal to obey civil laws or decrees, which usually takes the form of direct action (Grolier’s Encyclopedia Online 2). Thoreau wrote that people practicing civil disobedience, break a law because they consider the law unjust. People want to call attention to its injustice. Thoreau voiced civil disobedience as, “An expression of the individual’s liberty to create change” (Thoreau 530). Years later Martin Luther King Jr. took the same idea of direct action to protest the injustices brought upon black Americans in the United States. One major example was the Birmingham bus boycott. Blacks where treated unjust and often had to give up their seats to whites, and had to listen to racial slurs made by the bus driver. King like Thoreau, did not take a violent approach, he often used sit-ins and rallies to unite the black community (Encarta

Martin Luther King, Jr. defines “civil disobedience” as a way to show others what to do when a law is unjust and unreasonable. As King stated in the letter from Birmingham, “Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.” When Negros were being treated unfairly, Martin Luther King, Jr. stepped in to show people how to peacefully protest and not be violent. The dictionary definition of civil disobedience is the refusal to comply with certain laws or to pay taxes and fines, as a peaceful form of political protest (Webster Dictionary). That is what Martin Luther King, Jr. did when nothing was changing in the town after the law for public school to be non-segregated. In

Martin Luther King Jr. discusses the advantages and purposes for his theory of nonviolent direct action in his Letter From Birmingham City Jail. He shows four basic steps that must be taken to achieve nonviolent action. They include 1) collection of facts to determine whether injustices are alive; 2) negotiation; 3) self-purification; and 4) direct action. Each of these steps will be explained as part of King's argument later in this essay. The main purpose of a nonviolent campaign is to force any community to confront a problem rather than refuse to negotiate or face a specific issue. In the letter, King discusses his group's reasons for coming to Birmingham.

Although Socrates was wrongly imprisoned and waiting the death penalty, which he acknowledges, he, according to his argument, is not permitted to act unjustly in return, or break the law. Pertaining to justice, the laws to Socrates are the most important and in order to keep the city functioning as he states in the dialogue, “in comparison with [one’s] mother and father and all [one’s] forebears, [the] fatherland is more precious and venerable, more sacred and held in higher esteem among gods, as well as among human beings who have any sense” (Plato 39). Again, Martin Luther King Jr. departs from Socrates’ view in that he argues that those laws that are unjust need to be broken in a civil way, in order to direct consideration of their shortcomings. According to King, “one has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws [and] one has a

In the Dialogue Crito, Socrates employs his Elenchus to examine the notion of justice and one’s obligation to justice. In the setting of the dialogue, Socrates has been condemned to die, and Crito comes with both the hopes and the means for Socrates to escape from prison. When Socrates insists that they should examine whether he should escape or not, the central question turns into whether if it is unjust to disobey laws. Socrates’ ultimate answer is that it is unjust; he makes his argument by first showing that it’s wrong to revenge injustice, then arguing that he has made an agreement with the city’s law for its benefits, and finally reasoning that he

“Civil Disobedience” is an essay written by Henry David Thoreau in 1848. Thoreau protested many issues at the time such as slavery, the Mexican war, and taxes; he stood for peaceful protests or civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is the act of publicly, peacefully, and conscientiously breaching any corrupt and or unequal law(s) in order to bring about a change in said law or policy. Almost one hundred years later, on April 16th, 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr wrote the “Letter from a Birmingham Jail;” a response to a public statement of concern and caution issued by eight white religious leaders of the South. King, in the “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” conveys to his readers that the laws set against the African American are unjust and

In the Crito, Socrates explains that one’s moral duty to obey the law has many reasoning. An interesting explanation he had given that one has the responsibility to their city even if they think that the city is treating them unfairly. Socrates explains to Crito, that him being born in the city (Athens) and living there until he is seventy he has taken on an agreement to be a citizen and follow their rules and regulations even if he disagrees with it. Socrates asks Crito

The main idea of civil disobedience is that citizens have the right and the obligation to challenge the laws of the state when they feel that the laws opposes certain superior ideals. Martin Luther King Jr. and Socrates have different opinions towards civil disobedience and how they should react toward laws that are unfair. I agree with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s tactic for civil disobedience just as I agree that steps must be taken to reform the laws that we find unjust. However, I do agree with Socrates on why we should follow the law but if no one ever challenged the laws then some old unjust laws would still be set in place today.

Laws are made by people and between people making mistakes and corrupt or immoral people there are bound to be laws that should not be followed. There have been many instances where corrupt people have enacted laws that were wrong, for instance Hitler, and according to Socrates one must just follow behind these corrupt leaders and follow their rules just because they decided that they were going to live where this corrupt person was in charge. This seams unbelievable when it comes to Socrates because he was a man who spoke of justice and that one must be just. Yet even he decides to follow the law when he is put to death and to not fight against this punishment even though it is entirely

Socrates thinks that it is never permissible to break the law. He firstly thinks that destroying the law means destroying the whole State, and he explains deeply by saying that the law can’t be broken just because a person can do so, if this is the case, the law will not be important and effective in a nation. He also resembles the law to a parent and his son. A son can’t and shouldn’t harm his father in order to protect or benefit himself, so the law. As Socrates simplifies, the law should be accepted entirely, no matter if it is just or unjust, it is not worth it to destroy the law, which leads to destroying the whole State to protect and save only you. Socrates talks about how the law formed his life firstly when his parents got married by law, the education, and other training he acquired during his life. Finally, Socrates thinks that dying unjust is better than breaking the law, escaping which is immoral action, and then being unwelcome by

Civil disobedience is not about breaking the law, but breaking laws you cannot morally approve of or consider to be laws. It can be seen as rejecting the status quo through openly breaking an unjust law and accepting the consequences for one’s actions while having an action attached to your goal, and all the while being respectful to the society and rule of law. King’s justification for civil disobedience was through his morals in accordance with a higher power, acted out by breaking down oppressive structures that makes difference legal and distort personalities and senses of self worth (King 39), but Socrates did not have a similar distinct motive against the laws for his philosophical debates. King related, “Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind… we must see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice…” (King 37). His parallel between the work of the Civil Rights Movement and the work of Socrates illustrates how essential civil disobedience was to him for opening the

The active and professed disobedience of some laws is what is referred to as the Civil disobedience in the present past. However, Socrates in the Crito was categorical that it is still breaking the law. Civil disobedience has been linked with non-violent demands by the majority of the people against any form of oppression or denial of what the majority feel is their right. Civil disobedience is a classic symbol of violation of the law and not objection f the system in its entirety but rather by certain laws. It is an issue that Socrates in the Crito refuses to submit to since he believes that one should never break the laws regardless whether the law is right or bad. It is an issue that also presented increased controversy with other philosophers

Socrates argues that it’s unjust to break the law even if people think the law is wrong because those are merely opinions. He believes that one should never harm others and breaking the law is going against the government and compared it to a child disobeying his parents. He will never go against the foundation of the state and government. He provides three reasons to defend the state: “the state is responsible for the very existence of the individual, parents wouldn’t have met and children would never have been bored”, the state nurtures and aids in building one’s character by providing no education, books, writing or culture, the state establishes law and order and without it, there would be no justice”.

If the Ancient Athenian democracy upheld John Rawls’ conception of justice, Socrates would most likely face a similar plight because Rawls’ notion of justice states that rules put forth should not be twisted or “discarded” to one’s own advantage. Socrates’ beliefs concur with the idea that if there is a consensus among rational people on a decision and everyone has made in advance a firm commitment to facilitate the law, then no one can “tailor the canons of a legitimate complaint” to a certain condition. These ideas bear resemblance to that of Socrates because he believed while people have some basic rights as to what they can do, he feels that he is obligated to do as his city government commands him to do due to the fact he thought Athenian

King was arrested on several occasions for being civilly disobedient in order to abolish racial segregation. In “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, King faces the consequences of breaking the law by parading without a permit. He commits this nonviolent act to abolish an unjust law that was out of harmony with his moral truth.