Medea And Creon Ethical Analysis

1063 Words3 Pages

In Euripedes’ Medea, Medea and her family were abandoned by her pompous husband, Jason. Then Creon ostracized Medea and her children from the city in the case that she might plot revenge. Even with his prudence, Creon’s efforts were fruitless because Medea feigned her understanding of Jason’s decision to leave her and actually connived her revenge on everyone. Medea was responsible for Glauce, Creon, and her two children’s deaths. Although Jason was haughty and not a very considerate husband to her, this is by no means an excuse for her crimes. Medea’s actions are considered unethical by three types of ethical theories: virtue ethics, deontology, and utilitarianism.
Under the virtue ethics category, Plato, Aristotle, and St. Thomas Aquinas’ theories will be used to analyze Medea’s deeds. Medea sought “justice” for Jason’s wrongdoing. She wanted revenge by harming Jason and Glauce. However, Plato in the Republic rebuked the idea that is is right to “do good to a friend, provided he is good, and to harm an enemy, provided he is bad.” (Plato, p. 14) Plato’s counterargument was that it is possible to misinterpret who is a friend or is an enemy, and that bringing harm is against the nature of a …show more content…

She knew the difference between right and wrong and still chose to harm her innocent children. Also, Medea violated Aquinas’ natural law from the Summa Theologica. The natural law is a universal moral law that pertains to human nature. According to the natural law, all people are inclined to do good and avoid evil. All people have particular inclinations such as: preservation of life, family, sex, education of offspring, knowing truth, and living in a society. Medea egregiously violated the natural law. She murdered Glauce, Creon, and her two children; obviously violating the preservation of life inclination of human nature. She did not get to educate her children and murdered

Open Document