Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Civil disobedience by Thoreau
Summary of civil disobedience by Thoreau
Dr. Martin Luther King and civil disobedience
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In Martin Luther King Jr’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” he cites conscience as a guide to obeying just laws and disobeying unjust laws. In the same way, Henry David Thoreau wrote in his famous essay, “Civil Disobedience,” that people should do what their conscience tells them and refuse to follow unjust laws. The positions of the two writers are very close; they both use a common theme of conscience, and they use a similar rhetorical appeal to ethos.
Henry David Thoreau in his essay “Civil Disobedience” Thoreau asserts that men should react from their conscience. Thoreau believed it was the duty of a person to defy the law if his conscience says that the law is unjust. He believed this even if the law was made by a democratic action. Thoreau
…show more content…
and Henry David Thoreau have similar ideas, but different views. Martin Luther King Jr. wants to eventually raise awareness and unlock doors for the better of a group. Thoreau wants more individual rights for people. Martin Luther King Jr. expresses his view of conscience in his letter: “An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law” (King 384). This quote is addressing Martin Luther King Jr’s opinion on going to jail. King knows that he was unjustly put into jail. He accepts going to jail even though he was wrongly jailed. The community then knows of the injustice and should pressure the …show more content…
Upon spending his night in jail for refusing to pay his poll taxes, Thoreau said that he felt “As if he alone of all his townsmen had paid his tax” (Thoreau 319). Thoreau is trying to say that he is feeling as if he was the only one who really served his time in prison and paid his justice more than those who object and claim they haven’t. King went to jail due to a program of sit-ins at luncheon counters. While King was in jail he wrote a letter which was formally intended for the eight white clergymen. As I mention before, King believes that he has been unjustly put in jail and he is being a responsible citizen although he knows he has been put in jail wrongfully. By Both being in jail they agree that injustice exists. Thoreau thinks of injustice as pressure that can wear the machine down. King thinks that injustice just exists and tension must be created with direct action to negotiate with the machine. I also agree with King here, how he thinks that injustice still exist because up to this day there is injustice in our country and others as well. As a matter of fact, the black community today is facing injustice by law enforcement. A few black men have been killed by police and the government is not doing much about the issue and letting the police get away with it. This is an example of injustice to all blacks because police seem to be murdering these innocent people only because of their race. This
The idea of challenging an unreasonable law is central to both King, Jr.'s and Thoreau's plights, though each have very distinct characteristics unique to themselves. In King, Jr.'s case, he saw segregation and racial discrimination as mistakes on the part of the government and he set out to make substantial changes to the status quo. In doing so, he acted upon Thoreau's concept that every person retains the right to judge civil laws for decency and credibility. "One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws," (Birmingham Jail 82). Should one find the law to be in the best interest of each individual as well as society as a whole, he should abide by it and make every effort to live by its standard. But reversely, should the law be found guilty of evil intentions and causing more harm than good, it is the duty of every person under that law to disregard it and make an attempt "to wash his hands of it, and, if he gives it no thought longer, not to give it practically his support," (Disobedience 6).
History has encountered many different individuals whom have each impacted the 21 in one way or another; two important men whom have revolted against the government in order to achieve justice are Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King Jr. Both men impacted numerous individuals with their powerful words, their words carried the ability to inspire both men and women to do right by their morality and not follow unjust laws. “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience” by David Henry Thoreau along with King’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, allow the audience to understand what it means to protest for what is moral.
Comparing Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience and Martin Luther King's Letter From a Birmingham Jail. The two essays, "Civil Disobedience," by Henry David Thoreau, and "Letter From a Birmingham Jail," by Martin Luther King, Jr., effectively illustrate the authors' opinions of justice. Each author has his main point; Thoreau, in dealing with justice as it relates to government, asks for "not at once no government, but at once a better government. King contends that "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.
This quote shows Dr. King?s opinion on going to jail. King knows that he was
...goals, they both discuss similar topics of morality and justice under a government’s rule. In hopes of informing and motivating people, Thoreau and King explain how and why these people should take non-violent action towards unjust laws. From each author’s vivid examples and brilliant analogies, we learn the importance of fighting for justice and maintaining morality. Most importantly, Thoreau and King argue in favor of civil disobedience not only to inspire a fight for freedom from the government, but also to ensure that the people’s God given rights and rights to individuality are preserved for generations.
During the time of Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King Jr., freedom for African-Americans was relative terminology in the fact that one was during slavery and the other during the Civil Rights era. “Civil Disobedience,” written by Thoreau, analyzes the duty and responsibility of citizens to protest and take action against such corrupt laws and other acts of the government. Likewise, King conveys to his “Letter from Birmingham Jail” audience that the laws of the government against blacks are intolerable and that civil disobedience should be used as an instrument of freedom. Both writers display effective usage of the pathos and ethos appeal as means to persuade their audience of their cause and meaning behind their writing, although King proves to be more successful in his execution.
In the great era of foundational philosophers, two stand out, Plato and Thoreau. Each had their own opinion on various topics, especially on civil disobedience. Plato’s life span was approximately 428-348 BC. Plato wrote numerous works throughout his lifetime, however we will be focusing on one, the Crito. Thoreau’s life span was 1817-1862. To help us determine what civil disobedience means to both of these philosophers we will first look at a general definition. According to Merriam-Webster civil disobedience is defined as “refusal to obey governmental demands or commands especially as a nonviolent and usually collective means of forcing concessions from the government.” This definition will act as a springboard to compare and contrast both of their thoughts on the topic. We will determine, according to Plato and Thoreau, when we are called to engage in civil disobedience and when the moral parameters of civil disobedience are pushed too far.
Dr. Martin Luther King addressed many topics in, “Letter from Birmingham Jail”. He answered all the issues that were aimed towards him in a very skillful and well thought out manner. These issues came from, “A Call For Unity”, which was a letter published by eight local clergymen expressing their feelings about what Dr. King was doing. One concern in particular that King did an outstanding job of confronting was that of the clergymen’s anxiety about him breaking the law. King addresses the question of, “How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?” by clarifying that there are just and unjust laws. He also goes on to explain the difference between the two, the effect of unjust laws on the people that they are aimed towards, as
In his famous essay, “Letter from Birmingham Jail,’’ Martin Luther King, Jr. cites conscience as a guide to obeying just laws and defying unjust laws. In the same way, Henry David Thoreau wrote in his famous essay, “Civil Disobedience,” that people should do what their conscience tells them and not obey unjust laws. The positions of the two writers are very close; they use a common theme of conscience, and they use a similar rhetorical appeal of ethos.
The essays, "Civil Disobedience," by Henry David Thoreau, and "Letter from a Birmingham Jail," by Martin Luther King, Jr., incorporate the authors’ opinions of justice. Each author efficiently shows their main point; Thoreau deals with justice as it relates to government, he asks for,”not at one no government, but at once a better government. ”(Paragraph 3). King believed,” injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Paragraph 4 - "The 'Path of the 'Path of the 'Path of the 'Path of the 'Path of the 'Path of the 'Path of the 'Pa Each essay shows a valid argument for justice, but King's philosophy is more effective, because it has more logical points of view.
This letter covers the ways in which peaceful protest and standing up against injustice can lead to positive results. Both pieces conveyed a similar message of standing up for what is right. The strongest rhetorical methods which Thoreau uses are allusions, logos, ethos and rhetorical questions. However, King’s use of Thoreau’s piece was written prior to the civil war, and was in response to the Mexican-American war and slavery in some territories. It was intended for US citizens; more specifically, those who are unhappy with the way the United States government is ran.
Civil Disobedience occurs when an individual or group of people are in violation of the law rather than a refusal of the system as a whole. There is evidence of civil disobedience dating back to the era after Jesus was born. Jesus followers broke the laws that went against their faith. An example of this is in Acts 4:19-20,”God told the church to preach the gospel, so they defied orders to keep quiet about Jesus,” In my opinion civil disobedience will always be needed in the world. The ability to identify with yourself and knowing right from wrong helps to explain my opinion. Often in society when civil
In the past in this country, Thoreau wrote an essay on Civil disobedience saying that people make the law and have a right to disobey unjust laws, to try and get those laws changed.
This includes the need to prioritize one's conscience over the dictates of laws, based on the principle by Thoreau that we men should be first, and subjects afterwards. People have an important duty to refuse a government that is corrupt, and distance themselves from these unjust institutions.
Henry David Thoreau was an American philosopher lived in 19th century, when young and feeble American society was not powerful as nowadays. His illustrious work called as “Civil disobedience” demonstrated his polar point of view towards unjust government. Objection to pay taxes, protests, follow own conscience are only some of the methods of disobeying. His main point is that any man, who treats himself as a conscience man, should differentiate laws in order to determine which law is right or wrong, and consequently no to obey that unjust law. I mostly agree with this statement, and this essay will show how does he reach such conclusion and will provide arguments for and against to this statement.