Sophocles Suggests - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 4 Words: 1066 Downloads: 9 Date added: 2019/05/28 Category Literature Essay Level High school Tags: Antigone Essay Did you like this example? All over the world, different cultures integrate the belief that everything on the plant, or if nothing else at least peoples lives, are predestined by natural or paranormal forces. That there are objective and enlightened beings which initiate everything that develops in nature, and that these beings are known as gods. The philosopher Sophocles to some extent believed that everything on the planet is fated and no one has control over what happens. Sophocles shows us that although every character has a different perspective on the same situation, and they react accordingly, they cannot change their destiny. By promoting the idea of fate and destiny, Sophocles suggests that everything in the world is predestined and no one has control over what happens. He hints at the idea that all events are predetermined and therefore inevitable. Your prayers are done. Man cannot flatter Fate, And punishments must come(251). Through this phrase, Sophocles provides insight on the idea that humans cannot flatter or change fate no matter how intensive our efforts are. He shows that we cannot fight against the relentless laws of fate. At best we may discover what our fate is, but even then, we can only surrender. Destiny directs the person who follows voluntarily, and those who resist are pulled along by force, and this is reiterated throughout the play. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Sophocles Suggests" essay for you Create order Each time a character obtains some knowledge concerning their future, they take steps to evade that destiny, and those same steps end up leading them right back to that destined path. Sophocles reveals, that the knowledge of our destiny affects the actions we take, and this, in turn, solidifies our fates even more. Another example of how Sophocles reveals that everything in the world is predestined is through Tiresias A corpse for a corpse the price, and flesh for flesh, one of your own begotten(239). With this, Tiresias essentially tells Creon that he will pay the price for Antigoners death with his own sonrs life. Ultimately this prophecy also ends up getting fulfilled. This further illuminates the idea that everything is predetermined. Sophocles is showing us just how powerful our destiny is and that no matter what we do avoid it, we will have to face it eventually. This idea that everything is predetermined and that our timeline is already set is quite a new concept for us in the modern era and brings up many questions. Does knowing our destiny give us purpose or does it limit and restrict us? People are not constrained by destiny, rather by the learning and understanding of their destiny. Sophocles shows that although fate was thought of as something baffling and absolutely perplexing, people desired to discern its intentions by turning to the oracles. Through these oracles, Sophocles brings in different prophecies, and the knowledge of these prophecies sparks the characters to take action in different ways. By showing Antigone the fate of her brothers, Sophocles ignites a spark that carries throughout the play. Antigone believes that she still needs to bury her brother because it is an offense to the Gods to leave a family member unburied. Antigoners fate was sealed as she decided to bury her brother and face the consequences. When Ismene realizes that Antigone is serious about burying Polyneices she says You frighten me Antigone simply replies Do not fear for me.(194) At this point Antigone makes it clear that she is doing what she must, to follow the fate that has been decided by the Gods. She is not going to fight this fate. She knows that following the fate and laws of the Gods is more important than following the laws of man. Because Antigone knew her fate and that it would ultimately lead to imprisonment or death, she gave in and let it consume her by committing suicide. After learning our destiny we tend to only see one path or course of action and this causes us to forget about the other paths in life. We then focus on how or how not to follow that one path. Once we know our fate, it is only human nature to either embrace it or try to avoid it, but sometimes our ego can prevent us from doing either or them. Sophocles shows us that human nature and ego are the reasons why we cannot change our destinies. At the point when Creon visits the prophet Tiresias, he comes to pass on a notice, not an unavoidable destiny. He expresses that Creon has settled on an awful decision, however that he can still recover. To err is human, true, and only he is damned who having sinned will not repent, will not repair(237). With this Sophocles gave Creon more of a choice for this situation and Creon is shown to have control over what occurs, while Oedipus never had a choice, his fate was sealed. Creon had a sizable ego, however, until he passed the point of no return and he was caught in the grasp of a horrible destiny that he could not escape. Sophocles shows us, that humans cannot change their destinies because of their nature as humans coupled with substantial egors. He also shows that Creonrs ego is so vast that even after Tiresias warned him, he thought that only he was right and went on to besmirch the reputation or Tiresias. He went as far as to call all prophets, a money-grubbing race and still a crook(238/239). This solidifies Sophocles point to a large extent and shows how egotistic people can be, and because of this, we cannot change our destinies. Sophocles suggests that the average human cannot get past his/her ego and this causes us to be prisoners of fate. Sophocles draws attention to the concept that people cannot alter their destinies because everything is already determined and because of human nature. It is of paramount importance that we understand why Sophocles brings in the concept of fate and destiny in his plays. Sophocles is a widely studied philosopher and his ideas are what shape our perception of Greek civilization, so if we understand what he believed in, then that in turn provides us with insight on what the Greek people as a whole believed. This use of fate as destiny to explain events in the play and in real life provide us with a better understanding of the play and the Ancient Greek civilization as well.

Gay Marriage Should Be Legal - 1019 Words

In Defense of Gay Marriage Right now our country is still dealing with one of the bigger social issues that plagues our society. People will argue for and against it in many different ways, whether it be right or wrong. The issue at hand is whether gay marriage should be legal or illegal. There are arguments on both sides of the spectrum, but at the end of the day gay marriage should be legal in all 50 states. Marriage is a right and freedom that should not be denied to any one person because of sexual orientation. In the last 3 years, the legalization of gay marriage has spiked. As of right now, according to gaymarriage.procon.org, there are currently 37 states that have legalized gay marriage. Since 2012, 31 states have legalized it. The first one to do it, though, was Massachusetts way back in 2003. I then took five more years before Connecticut would become the second state to legalize. But of the 13 states that have yet to legalize it, eight of those states legalized it, then ha d it overturned and now face an appeals process to sort out the matter. The other 5 states have ceased to do anything to change the law. As time progresses, more and more people are supporting gay marriage. According to the Pew Research Center, over 54% of Americans are in support of gay marriage. If you look even as far back as 1996, only 27% of people supported it. If you break it down into how each generation views it, 68% of Millennials are in favor of it. Compare that to the SilentShow MoreRelatedGay Marriage Should Be Legal1205 Words   |  5 PagesHoward Sociology 1301-93431 Gay Marriage Getting married is something that most people do when they find love, which it is an important event in their life. The GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender) community now get the legal right of same-sex marriage, which they have fought for throughout the years; on the other hand, some opponents of same-sex marriage have called for a constitutional change towards it. Although there w ere some countries that allowed gay marriage before the United StatesRead MoreGay Marriage Should Be Legal1159 Words   |  5 PagesAmendment, which puts a ban on gay marriage. This amendment entitles to equal rights to the gay community, ending toleration of discrimination in jobs, rights protecting gays from hate crimes,rights allowing advancement in government. However, the concept of gay marriage is still not considered a right the American people should extend to homosexuals. II. The vast majority of opponents believe marriage should be between one woman and one man, meaning marriage should be between members of the oppositeRead MoreGay Marriage Should Be Legal1574 Words   |  7 Pagesequal rights. Gays and lesbians are consistently denied rights that are typically taken for granted by the average American. Specifically, gay and lesbian couples are denied the right to marry even if they are outstanding citizens. They are held at an unfair disadvantage solely because of their sexual orientation. This discrimination must stop, because gay and lesbian couples are law-abiding citizens too, who should be afforded the same rights as heterosexual couples. Marriage is about love andRead MoreGay Marriage Should Be Legal1564 Words   |  7 PagesWhat is marriage? Recently, people argue with respect to the definition of marriage. What happened to marriage? To get married is a very important event for almost everyone. Especially for women, marriage and giv ing a birth could be the two biggest events of their lives. Many people believe that getting married to the one whom he or she loves is natural. However, what do you think if you cannot get married to him or her because it is socially unacceptable? 100 years ago different colored peopleRead MoreShould Gay Marriage Be Legal?778 Words   |  3 PagesShould Gay Marriage Be Legal? â€Å"†¦I now pronounce you husband and wife†¦Ã¢â‚¬  One would normally hear this when attending a wedding. In tradition marriage has been between one male and one female who love each other. But how would one feel if they heard â€Å"I now pronounce you groom and groom† or how about â€Å"†¦bride and bride...†? In the last 50 years the number of same-sex couples has increased. The on-going argument between the government and the people is â€Å"Should gay marriage be legal?† Although some sayRead MoreGay Marriage Should Be Legal1126 Words   |  5 PagesJune 26, 2015 for gay marriage to be legal in all fifty states, thirty seven out of the fifty and Washington D.C already legalized gay marriage. Many support gay marriage and many do not, with widespread values and reasons for and against it. Due to religion and rights people across the nation have differing views and opinions of it.In a five to four vote in the Supreme Court gay marriage becam e legalized in all fifty states. Shortly after that a few marriage officiators and marriage licenses peopleRead MoreGay Marriage Should Be Legal1179 Words   |  5 PagesGAY MARRIAGES Some states such as Iowa legalized gay marriage through the action of judicial interpretation based on the state’s constitutional stipulations while other states such as Vermont legalized gay marriage through legislation initiatives. These cases demonstrate the government is the sole body that can dictate the validity of whatever is to be regarded as a marriage, and in this case gay marriage. The power to validate marriage is still observed among the private citizens, religious institutionsRead MoreThe Gay Marriage Should Be Legal947 Words   |  4 PagesDefending Gay Marriage During the last few years, homosexuality has become an important issue for debate. Moreover, homosexuals have taken their case further by claiming their right to marry. Same-sex marriage, usually known as â€Å"gay marriage†, is the marriage between two people from the same biological sex (Doskow1). Since 2000, eleven countries have approved the legalization of gay marriage worldwide: Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Canada, South Africa, Norway, Sweden, Portugal, Iceland, ArgentinaRead MoreGay Marriage Should Be Legal1480 Words   |  6 PagesNew World Dictionary defines the word married as being husband and wife, yet there are millions of gay activists who are fighting for a new meaning. They believe marriage is more than a piece of paper and a set of rings. The hope is that marriage could be defined as a â€Å"public recognition of a private commitment† or â€Å"emotional, financial, and psychological bond† between two people (Sullivan 53). Gay activists belie ve that taking away the ability to have a publicly recognized relationship or an acceptedRead MoreGay Marriage Should Be Legal1351 Words   |  6 Pageshappened for United States, gay marriage became legal in all 50 states. In most states it already was but the remaining 13 became legal this year. There are many concerns regarding gay marriage, and the effects of them involve many legislative, cultural, religious and family issues. Gay marriage is controversial because a lot of people do not approve of it, they think it is immoral, unnatural, and not what the traditional concept of â€Å"marriage† really means. Opponents of gay marriage say it is only meant

How Valid Is the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis free essay sample

The debate on whether ‘language is the dress of thought’ originates in ancient Greece when Aristotle discussed the possibility that the thinking pattern influences to a certain degree the evolution of language (He, 2011: 1). The concept that language is ‘merely a reflection of thought and the objective world’ (He, 2011: 1) was re-examined several times throughout history; the conclusions drawn give us a new interpretation of language determinism. This essay will examine the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis of language relativity and it will attempt to define the concept as well as to establish whether it was a turning point for reconsidering the correlation between culture, thought and language. While taking into consideration the contribution of Sapir and Whorf in highlighting the significance of the language in the process of understanding one’s ‘kaleidoscopic diversity of different worldviews ’(He, 2011: 1), the essay will also question the validity of the theory examining different tests and experiments conducted in this field. Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis conceptualizes the idea that one’s thoughts and behaviour are dictated by his language. This theory can be broken down into two associated principles (The Linguist List, n. y) The first principle, linguistic determinism, sustains that way we see and think about the world is influenced by our language (â€Å"‘Human beings do not live in the objective world alone, nor alone in the world of social activity as ordinarily understood, but are very much at the mercy of the particular language which has become the medium of expression for their society) (Sapir cited in Chandler, 1994: 1). This theory can be divided into two contrasting ideas: strong determinism and â€Å"weak’ determinism. According to the first, language and thought are identical. Moreover, the language’s structure is said to influence or determine the individual’s sense of existence and to provide a framework for acquiring knowledge throughout life. This theory is nowadays generally rejected because it is hard to prove, and it suggests that bilingualism and translation are not possible. Many linguists have, however, accepted the †weaker† version of determinism, which says that language merely affects or influences the way we think but does not determine the way we act (University Of Virginia, 2006: 1 – 2) . Additionally, this is thought to be a ‘two-way process’; the type of language one uses is also affected by one’s â€Å"world view†. The social context of the language is also emphasised (example: the pressure of using a certain kind of language in specific contexts) (Chandler, 1994: 3). The second principle, linguistic relativity, shapes the idea that people brought up in different cultures, therefore speaking different languages, will not think or see the world in a similar way (â€Å"‘We dissect nature along lines laid down by our native languages( )We cut nature up, organize it into concepts, and ascribe significances as we do, largely because we are parties to an agreement to organize it in this way an agreement that holds throughout our speech community and is codified in the patterns of our language†. ) (Whorf, 1940 cited in Chandler, 1994:1). Various languages carve up and sketch the world in various ways. This not only underlies that the language one speaks will affect the way in which he thinks about the world but that it will also influence one’s way of reasoning in different circumstances (University Of Virginia, 2006: 2). Challenges: Having explained the basic principles behind the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, it is, however, important to note it’s limitations as well. To what extent the Sapir-Whorf theory can be used has been a high subject of debate for several decades. (Thompson, 1997: 85-86) One point often highlighted is that, whilst the hypothesis indicates certain correlations between one’s language and one’s culture, it does not prove clearly that the individual’s view of the world is somehow changed (Thompson, 1997: 86). If people of Zimbabwe who speak Shona have only three main terms for naming colours, that does not mean that the way they see the world is different from a French speaker’s. They see the world in a similar way; their eyes are not biologically different. It simply means that for them is more difficult to describe colours. â€Å"Their ‘code’ is not so handy; the colours’ codability is lower† (Thompson, 1997: 86). Specialists argue that all humans see the same reality; the only distinction is in the way the language is constructed: different words and phrases to express that reality (Thompson, 1997: 87). The Inuit population might have more words for snow than Americans do, and Americans might have more terms for cars that Eskimos; however, that does not signify that one or another are unable to understand the things described with a different vocabulary (He, 2011: 3). Furthermore, given the current high  profile  debate  of this subject, other limitations can be added as well. For example, it also suggests that people speaking the same language share the same ‘believes and social practices’ and they all look at and interpret the world in the same way (He, 2011: 3). In fact, even if they share the same language, members of the same community might develop their own understanding of life and see the world in a ‘unique light’. This is mostly determined by various other factors, social or psychological experiences. Moreover, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis does not give a concrete explanation of the fact that we sometimes think about things that are hard to express in our native tongue but easier in others. That does not stop us from thinking about them or understanding them (He, 2011: 3-4). A third possible critique of extreme Whorfianism is the notion of translatability and the possibility of learning additional languages, both deemed to be impossible if we are to believe the language’s predetermining role on cognition and thought (HE, 2011: 3). If we agree that one’s language determines one’s way of thinking, then it could also be said that some ideas and concepts would only make sense in the language that they were first ‘born’ in. As an example, the poet Pablo Neruda stated that when his poems are translated into other languages, the words do not correspond in terms of â€Å"vocalization, or in the placement, or the colour, or the weight† (Neruda cited in Parr-Davies, 2001: 2). Nevertheless, he admitted that the general meaning of what he was trying to transmit was well captured (Parr-Davies, 2001: 3). Evidence: It can be seen from the above analysis that many linguists disagreed to a certain extent with the Whorfianism view, and continued to deny some of its principles. However, evidence to support or to deny the existence of a connection between language and behavioural patterns was proved hard to find; one cannot ask random people whether their language determines their conduct and thinking; it would be fruitless, for the language is so deeply ‘stamped’ into their subconscious that it would be impossible for them to think of another way of understanding the world (Thompson, 1997: 84). While such failures must not be discounted, there are some theories and experiments that tend to confirm to a certain extent the validity of moderate Whorfism. Vocabulary differences have behavioural effects. One example supporting this theory is the fact that the way in which the grammatical structure is constructed can have a certain impact over one’s behaviour. The structure of Navajo verb forms suggests the shape and the flexibility of certain objects (University Of Colorado, 2007: 2). Carroll and Casagrande conducted an experiment to see how Navajo children group certain objects. They were given a blue stick and were asked which one goes better with it: a yellow stick or a blue rope? English children chose the blue rope (colour) while, unsurprisingly, the Navajo children chose the yellow stick (shape) (University Of Colorado, 2007: 3). Further proof for linguistic relativity can be found in the experiment conducted by Carmichael, Hogan amp; Waller (cited in Parr-Davies, 2001: 4). The subject was shown different shapes with a description underneath. To exemplify, one would see this image: This was either given the label the letter C either the crescent moon. The subject was then asked to redraw from memory what he had seen; invariably, the drawing was changed to look more similar to the label given, therefore proving that language can affect thought (Parr-Davies, 2001: 4). Conclusion: Whilst this does perhaps partially prove the theory, there is evidence for the contrary. The fact that there are up to 7,000 different languages spoken around the globe (BBC, 2007), each with its own culture, is to a certain extent a supporting evidence for Whorf’s theory (Thompson, 1997: 86).