Introduction

Moral justice and human made law has been a topic of discussion for some time now. A good number of people assume that the two concepts have the same meaning which is not the case.  The modern society is of the idea that to be morally upright requires one to obey the letter of the law and that all that is not against the law is morally acceptable. However, this is not the case as explained by the work of Socrates trial defense and the Martin Luther king’s letter. From their philosophical wok, it is clear that there is great difference between moral justice and human made law.

Discussion

In order to understand the concept of moral justice and manmade law, it is imperative that we understand the Martin Luther King junior letter from a Birmingham jail and trial and death of Socrates. From their work, the theme of ethics and justice is clearly demonstrated. The issue of freedom was critical if the society was to uphold expected moral standards. According to the Socrates and the martin Luther, injustices were only based on violent civic disobedience.   They are both of the opinion that creating an oppressor and an oppressed group of in the society is against the natural justice.[1] The two argues that a society must have the freedom to practice what is morally right without coercion.

Unlike in matters of justice, manmade law is made for the betterment of mankind and provides the roadmap for better society. Nevertheless, it is paramount to understand that these laws are made by human and therefore are prone to human interference through amendment or permanent deletion. For instance, from the passage by the Sophocles, there is clear indication of maneuvering of the law. ‘’ What laws? I never heard it was Zeus who made that announcement.’’ From this passage, it is clear that Antigone is taking advantage of the manmade law to suit his purpose. He goes further to claim that it is injustice and that the gods did not put in place such laws for human being to follow. Issue of beliefs such as Christianity plays a great role as far as justice is concerned.

From the Socrates and the Kings letter it is important that we distinguish between the true and false conception of justice. It is evident that the two were being wrongfully accuse and they turned their accusations to their accusers[2].  From the Socrates point of view, it is wrong for the society to assume that politicians and other likeminded people are to the best interest of the society. The Socrates takes a contemptuous position on those who feel that they are wise enough and have nothing to learn from others. He has the perception that by adoring the gods he does not mean an atheist perspective. Socrates argues that he never influenced the youth negatively and if he corrupted them unwillingly there is no provision of the law to bring such cases in court. According to the Socrates and the King, it is important that freedom must be guaranteed if justice is to prevail.

From the king’s letter, it is evident that there is a revolutionary reasoning behind civic disobedience.  Though there is similarity with the Socrates thinking, he explains that what he did is what h felt was right. He influenced his followers in such a way that they believed that there was segregation and discrimination in the ways justice is served. “Justice too long delayed is justice denied’’ this was his assertion describing the time they waited to get their constitutional rights.  “Many wonders, many terrors, But none more wonderful than the human race or more dangerous” this explains why human race is continuously committing more crimes and justify themselves. The Socrates thought that they were wiser than most men and that he respected his feelings in total disregard of the law. That is how he supported his immoral influence on the youths but despite his tireless efforts to defend himself he still had to get a death penalty.

The Socrates and the king were viewed as very conservative which resulted in mixed reactions from Meletus, euythypro and moderate Christians who viewed them as a limitation. The two feared losing the identity and change needed to serve justice[3]. To realize justice, it s important to be decisive since justice requires one to acknowledge various possibilities. Justice and morality should be conversely agreed in a society set up. Unlike in the case of the king where he believed that what he does must please the gods.

Conclusion

In conclusion,  it is clear from the Socrates and the kings letter that inclusion and equality has to be incorporated with justice as a priority in order for there to be cohesive and development in society.  It is also essential that the society must distinguish between the manmade law and justice which are very distinct factors. The issues of justice and morality should also be dealt with as they arise.

Bibliography

Colaiaco, James A. Socrates against Athens Philosophy on Trial. New York: Routledge, 2001.

Stone, I.F. The Trial of Socrates. New York: Head of Zeus, 2015.

[1] Colaiaco, James A. Socrates against Athens Philosophy on Trial. New York: Routledge, 2001.

[2] Stone, I.F. The Trial of Socrates. New York: Head of Zeus, 2015.

[3] Colaiaco, James A. Socrates against Athens Philosophy on Trial. New York: Routledge, 2001

Do you need an Original High Quality Academic Custom Essay?