Oedipus Rex Fate Vs Free Will Essay

When analyzing “Oedipus Rex”, the concept of Fate vs. Free-will is incredibly prevalent. Even though free-will could potentially have contributed to the outcomes of the situations presented in the story, Sophocles wrote “Oedipus Rex” as commentary to the Greeks' lack of regard for the fate bestowed upon them by the gods. This is exhibited throughout the play in many cases, most notably when Teiresias, the blind, noble prophet, and speaker of the truth is condescended upon simply because Oedipus is unhappy with the repulsive events to which he has been made aware of, Oedipus's constant need for justification as to why the oracles are false and correlational occurrences are mere coincidence, and Jocasta and Oedipus’ blatant ignorance of the oracles and the evidence of the prophecies being accomplished ultimately ruined them.

First, Sophocles wrote “Oedipus Rex” as commentary to the

Greeks' lack of regard for the fate bestowed upon them by the gods by explicating this when Teiresias, the noble prophet, and speaker of the truth is condescended upon simply because Oedipus is unhappy with the repulsive events to which he has been made aware of. Teiresias asserts this in a blunt manner:
TEIRESIAS: Alas how terrible is wisdom when
It brings no profit to the man that’s wise!
This I knew well, but had forgotten it,
else I would not have come here. (346-349)
Oedipus’ haughty nature in retaliation to an undesirable statement by Teiresias provokes Teiresias to make the preceding remark. Interpreting Sophocles’ usage of this particular device as means of exegesis of predisposed fate as determined by the gods, it is very implicit as to what was believed to have been expected of the Greeks and how the gods were thought to react to this. By verbalizing the idea that man does not appreciate truth unless it resides for the purpose of his own benefit, one could infer that Sophocles intended for such a narrative to illustrate how he believed the gods viewed acts of rebellion against their already established concept of fate. Due to the fact that plays like those as “Oedipus Rex” were aimed to guide and educate the ancient Greeks in various aspects of life, the previously addressed quote may be construed as Sophocles’ execution of a commentary regarding the Greeks’ lack of acknowledgement and respect for the fate allotted to them by the gods.
Additionally, Oedipus's constant need for justification as to why the oracles are false and correlational occurrences are mere coincidence further contribute to the idea of Sophocles’ stance in view of the gods’ position concerning fate. Throughout the play, Oedipus develops, often irrational, means of vindication as to why the oracles deeming him his father’s murderer (among other things) must be falsified. Oedipus’ denial is exhibited a remarkable number of times, particularly in the following:
Oedipus: That he would not have said that I killed Laius
had he not met you first.
Creon: You know yourself
whether he said this, but I demand that I
should hear as much from you as you from me.
Oedipus: Then hear, ― I’ll not be proved a murderer. (663-668)
In the play, Creon may be credited as the most rational character.

This is shown in the reference where Oedipus and Creon are discussing the oracles’ relation to events that have occurred. Creon signifies the murder of Laius as potentially being on the hand of Oedipus. However, Oedipus abruptly rejects this idea with full confidence despite lack of factual basis, other than his own self-serving bias. Oedipus’ foolish surface-level ignorance in approaching the subject of the oracles comes full-circle to cause harm being that he is indeed the murderer of Laius, which is a slippery slope to a slew of quite a few major dilemmas. In this particular example, Oedipus’ shallowly founded state of denial represents the deception the Greeks exposed themselves to when attempting to alter the fate the gods created. This creates a foundation for the outcomes later in the plot that exemplify just how brutal the consequences of “playing the gods” may be. Through this, Sophocles further utilizes his work to explore the notion of the ways he believed the gods used fate to shape the events in ancient

Greece.
Finally, the most important reason Sophocles wrote “Oedipus Rex” is Jocasta and Oedipus' blatant ignorance of the oracles and the evidence of the prophecies being accomplished. Throughout the play, many obvious events take place that should have been red-flag situations. However, Oedipus and Jocasta choose to overtly scorn the facts to which they will be held accountable for and Creon, the rational one, persistently, yet with fail, attempts to make this known to them, “If you think obstinacy without wisdom, a valuable possession, you are wrong.” (634-635) Through this citation, Sophocles expresses a considerably esteemed allegation which extends far beyond the extent of its purpose within the story. As expressed previously, the intent of the play was to bring awareness and discipline to the Greeks’ rebellious attitude to their fates as determined by the gods. Oedipus and Jocasta’s blindness to the truth of their fates is, presumably, a measure of relatable occurrence in the everyday lives of the Greeks. By using Creon as an envoy of this message, Sophocles illuminates this vital and virtuous statement as a central precept to the role of fate, especially as a major theme in the play.
Indeed, while free-will could potentially have contributed to the outcomes of the situations presented in the story, Sophocles wrote Oedipus Rex as commentary to the Greeks' lack of regard for the fate bestowed upon them by the gods. Throughout the play, Sophocles takes the Greeks’ arrogance towards the gods and exaggerates the potential events and penalties of these events in order to teach the Greeks the lesson that he ultimately intended to display as a major theme in the play.