HUM 105 Discussion Forum 8 If we don’t know what is true, how do we know what is right?
HUM 105 Discussion Forum 8 If we don’t know what is true, how do we know what is right?
HUM 105 Discussion Forum 8 If we don’t know what is true, how do we know what is right?
HUM 105 Great Ideas of World Civilizations
This week, we’re going to talk about the
ancient play by the Athenian playwright Sophocles, Oedipus the King. To prepare
for this discussion, you’ll need to do the following:
Read the Britannica article on the myth of
Oedipus (It’s in the Materials for the Four Units area, in Unit 3’s folder).
You need to know the story before you read the play.
Read the play. You can buy a copy, or find
it on line, but I recommend the translation that I listed in the texts for this
class. It’s easier if everyone is using the same translation, but it’s not
absolutely necessary.
It’s a very good idea if you watch the play
as well. I’ve linked us to two different filmed productions – the BBC
production with Michael Pennington and the American film production with
Christopher Plummer. Each one has its strengths and weaknesses. Pick one of
them and watch all the way through. It will be worth it, to help you understand
the play’s impact better than just reading it.
After you’ve read/watched the play,
participate in this discussion forum. As before, your first response should be
your own answer to the question below. Make your answer about 100 to 150 words,
and use at least one quotation from the play. This first post is due by 11:59
pm Thursday, April 4th.
Finally, respond to a classmate’s post.
Make this post at least 2 to 3 sentences long, and post by Sunday, April 7th,
11:59 pm.
Here is the question:
In the story and in the play,
Oedipus makes choices that appear to be both moral and wise. He wants to be a
good king, a good son, a good husband, and a good father, and he tries always
to do the right thing. He is admired by his people for his wisdom (as the
solver the the Riddle of the Sphinx), his justice, and his compassion as a
ruler and he is confident of his own abilities and the rightness of his
intentions. But when the truth is revealed – by Oedipus himself – it is
revealed that all of his choices were not only mistaken, they were horribly
morally wrong. In your view, what has Oedipus’s story to say to us about our
own moral choices? Is it possible to make morally right choices when we can
never know for sure how those choices will work out? If not, is there any such
thing as right and wrong?
To answer this question, consider the
following:
There are two destructive and extreme ideas
in the history of human thought. One is absolutism – the belief that I (or my
community or religious group) have the only possible single truth, and that all
others are wrong. As we have seen throughout history, absolutism leads to all
sorts of horrors: persecutions, inquisitions, intolerance, and wars.
But the other extreme, called
“relativism”, has also been equally destructive. Relativism says
that, since we can’t know truth, there is no such thing as truth. Anything
goes. All beliefs are equally true. All feelings are equally right. All actions
are equally moral. Anything that a person chooses to believe is to be accepted.
But that leads to a serious problem. If I
toss a piece of wood I picked up onto a platform and call it a work of art,
should it be accepted that it is great art, just because I think so? Is it okay
for me to say that my people are superior to all others, or that the Sun
circles around the Earth, in spite of all of the evidence, because that’s
“my truth”? Are you prepared to say that the person who believes that
human sacrifice is necessary to please his gods should be allowed to practice
his beliefs freely? Is anything and everything true, because I want it to be?
Relativism makes law, morality, and excellence impossible, because it allows
for no stable standard outside of our individual prejudices and
preferences. Even though it’s supposed
to allow complete individual freedom, relativism inevitably results in the opposite
of freedom: the strongest, loudest voice dominates, without needing to have any
concern for the merit of what it is saying.
Okay, so let us say for the sake of this
discussion that we reject both of those extremes. But how then do we avoid the
error that destroyed Oedipus, without becoming relativists?
As before, make sure you do at least one of
the following for each of your two posts:
Be the first to post an answer to the
question. (You get extra credit if you do!)
Agree, but then add to what someone else
has already said.
Disagree with something already said, but
explain why you disagree.
Add a new element or new idea to the
discussion.
Again, do not just agree, disagree, go off
on an unrelated tangent, or base your argument on “It’s just my
opinion”. Give reasons. Be clear, reasonable, and respectful