Differences Between Creon And Antigone

Both Creon and Antigone Display Heteronomous Moral reasoning

Heteronomous reasoning is apparent in both Creon and Antigone in the beginning of the tragedy. Though the set of laws they are following is different, both Creon and Antigone treat the law as an external force. They uphold their laws with little regard to the negative consequences to themselves and other individuals. For Antigone her absolute law emanates from the gods. For Creon it is the head of state. He believes that “the man the city places in authority, his orders must be obeyed, large and small, write and wrong” (Sophocles 48-50). Once his law has been set down it is an entity of its own. Its interpretation would be literal and its punishment absolute.

Though some may argue

against Creon's heteronomy. They would do so because Creon creates the laws of his kingdom. They would instead label Creon as autonomous because he a lots himself the privilege of creating law. This would however be an erroneous assumption. The distinction between heteronomous morality and autonomous morality isn’t as simple as that. Though he created the laws, he is not approaching the laws with autonomy. He does not accept the true purpose of law. The true purpose according to Ronald Duska and Mariellen Whelan is to regulate social interactions for the best interest of the members of a society (11). Those who would uphold laws that did not work to the best interest of the society have not internalized morality nor are they operating with autonomy. Creon is ruthless with his upholding of the law. Once he has created his law it isn’t open to further interpretation or amendment.
Because using heteronomous moral reasoning law derives from authority, Creon uses his authority to defend the blind upholding of the law. He attempts to use a more externalized rational, when his argument of state authority is resisted by his son Haemon. He bases a more complex argument on loyalty and ones duty to his family and people at large. It is Creon’s contention that no “wound cuts deeper than a loved one turned against you” (Sophocles 727-28). He tells Haemon that by breaking the law Antigone was in “naked rebellion [and a] traitor” (731). He is contemplating the notion of family loyalty in relation to law but he does not follow this reasoning logically. He does not consider Antigone’s family loyalty to her brother or any of her possible motivations for breaking his law. He also does not consider that Antigone was not acting to be disloyal to him as her uncle nor to be disloyal to her country. Her transgression was only to break an arbitrary law that she believed to be invalid and against her own heteronomous moral code. In Antigone’s reasoning, the law she follows trumps the law of her king\uncle. She does so because her uncle and King, Creon, to her is a lesser authority than the gods.
Autonomy
Autonomy is the opposite of heteronomy. Where someone employing heteronomous reasoning would see law as binding and externalized, a person employing the autonomy in his moral judgments would understand that law and moral judgment is objective and therefore requires careful deep consideration. His understanding of law would be internalized (Sieckmann). This person would realize that only social convention gives laws authority. He would attribute the ability to amend laws and consider each transgression against the law individually. He would analyze the intention of the person who committed the transgression and whether the law itself is reasonable. The type of punishment that this person would prescribe would not be excessive and would consider the motivation behind the crime (Sieckmann). In modern law autonomy is at work when there are distinctions made between murder, manslaughter, and self-defense. Though there is an external law dictating that inflicting death upon another person is illegal, each individual transgression is considered separately and a proper punishment is prescribed. Self-defense may carry no punishment, manslaughter may carry a sentence of only a few months, but murder may carry 20 years to a death sentence depending on the motivation, method, and amount of premeditation involved (“Title 18”). This type of autonomous interpretation of law is synonymous with a democratic law process. Autonomy bestows the ability for the citizens to be tried by their fellow citizens as well as the ability to amend laws. Heteronomy law is seen in principalities and dictatorships.

Ismene and Haemon display Autonomy
In the beginning of this play only two characters display a significant amount of autonomy in their moral judgment.

These two characters are Antigone’s sister Ismene and her cousin\fiancé Haemon. Ismene displays autonomy because she assess the situation. She weighs the risks of breaking Creon’s law for both herself and her sister. She asks Antigone “ What’s the risk?”(Sophocles 51). Her asking of this question wasn’t cowardice, but rather the ability to consider the positive and negative consequences of the action (Kirkpatrick 402). She does so because she is not only looking out for her own welfare but the welfare of her sister. She says she is “so afraid for [Antigone]” (96). Ismene acknowledges that the law was arbitrary and unjustified. She agrees with Antigone and believes that if Antigone breaks the law she is justified. For Ismene her reluctance is based on the possible outcomes to her sister. In Ismene’s mind her sister's life is more valuable than making a statement against the law of Creon. She recognizes that how her uncle upholds the law and feels that it would be wrong to encourage her sister in an endeavor that could cost her and her sister’s life. In doing so Ismene is displaying internalization and autonomy, because she is considering the consequences to her sister and comes to the conclusion that it is a greater injustice for Antigone to die arbitrarily when for her brother. Ismene when Antigone cannot be dissuaded from her quest cautions her to be

discreet. Her moral judge
Antigone although she claims she is breaking the law because she believes her brother’s spirit would walk the earth without proper burial, seems to be displaying less internalization than Ismene because she doesn’t consider the consequences of enlisting her sister's help. She asks Ismene if Ismene “[likes] dishonoring the laws the gods hold in honor” (90-91). She does not consider that her sister may be put endanger. She is therefore still displaying heteronomous reasoning. She is going against Creon primarily to uphold divine law for its own sake. She does not consider that if she is captured her brother, she, and her sister all may share the same fate of rotting in the sun unburied.
Haemon like Ismene does not only consider law alone, but seeks to employ reason.

Haemon knows his father is not being reasonable. Though he disagrees with him he tells him that he is loyal and that his advice is sound (Sophocles 710-712). He however only does this to get his father to lower his guard so he can be persuaded. Haemon tells his father that “only the gods endow a man with reason” (764). He tries to persuade his father by making him away that the other people of the kingdom disagree with his law and his severity. Haemon is thinking using the concept that the law is made for the welfare of the people. He also lists motivations for Antigone’s actions. The case he makes to his father is based on autonomous morality. Creon does not heed his advice, but rather dismisses Haemon as a boy who doesn’t know anything and doesn’t have any authority. He is still reasoning in his heteronomous

ways.
The Transition of Creon from Heteronomous Reasoning to Autonomy
To understand Creon’s transition from autonomous reasoning to Autonomous reasoning it is important to understand the six Kohlberg stages which are contained in the three levels of preconventional, conventional, and postconventional. The first two stages are rudimentary and deal only with rewards and punishments in respect to oneself. Others are not factored into the equation. Stage three is contained in the conventional level. It is the following of rules for the sake of acceptance and approval rather than the avoidance of punishment. The next stage, stage four is a stage where laws are to be followed stringently because of their own merit not the punishments or rewards they may produce (Duska and Whelan 43-47). All four of these stages operate under a version of heteronomy, as the welfare of others and consideration of others motivations and beliefs is taken into account.
Both Antigone and Creon are stuck at this stage. Antigone solely for the fact that she did not consider her sister's welfare and the possible consequences that may befall her. She falls into between stages for and stage five. It is at the postconventional level, stages five and six that true autonomy comes into existence (Duska and Whelan 47). This stage is called “the social contract legalistic orientation” (Duska and Whelan 47) stage. When making her moral assessment Antigone considers “natural law” (Robinson), but also her loyalty to her brother (Sophocles). She professes this when she is faced with the reality of her imminent death. If Antigone had broken Creon’s law solely to save her brother’s body and had not made divine law her largest concern, she would have transcended to the fifth level.
Creon transcends to the fifth level. He only does so when he is faced with the death of his son. Some would think that he made this transition sooner, when he decides to free Antigone. This however is not the case. After he has decided to free Antigone he exclaims that “ it’s best to keep the established laws to the very day we die” (Sophocles 1238-39). He hasn’t at this moment transitioned into the next stage. He doesn’t transition until both Antigone and Haemon are dead. His change of heart is seen when he exclaims that his crimes were “so senseless, so insane” (1395). This is when he realizes that his adherence to law without reason was a crime unto itself. By leaving Creon's epiphany until the end of the tragedy, It is Sophocles' intention to show the importance of autonomous moral reasoning. He is showing the consequences of blind heteronomous reasoning. The messenger articulates this when he exclaims that " Creon shoes the world that of all ills afflicting men the worst is lack of judgment" ( 1373-4).
Conclusion
By using the Tragedy Antigone to display the consequences of unyielding heteronomous moral judgment, Sophocles is to instill in his viewer the importance of autonomy. This autonomy is the ability to reason beyond law authority. He wants his viewers to see that being unyielding and giving laws an absolute power is dangerous. He shows that heteronomous morality brings