Yes, Oedipus argues that he is morally innocent in "Oedipus Rex" and "Oedipus at Colonus" by Sophocles (495 B.C.E. - 405 B.C.E.).
Specifically, disgraced Theban King Oedipus argues that he is morally innocent of criminal acts and immoral behavior. For example, he cannot be charged with murder because he kills his own father and four others in self-defense and in ignorance during a street brawl in which he is outnumbered six to one. He cannot be charged with incest because he marries his own mother in complete ignorance of her and his true identities. He pleads a lack of motive and intent.
Why does Creon share Oedipus's power?
quakers
quakers
quakers
yes, there is. Some would argue that the taking of life (killing someone) is morally wrong. A counter-argument might be if in self-defence, the taking of a life might be morally right, since it preserves another's life. However, this does not contradict the point that the taking of a life is still morally wrong. Indeed, the taking of a life can be both morally right and morally wrong.
This is a subject of great debate. Some argue that the arrogance of Laius and Jocasta and later of Oedipus lead to the tragedy. Others contend that the gods set this all up and Oedipus is an innocent victim. Evidence exists on both sides. Select one side and support it with passages from the text. For example, if Oedipus were not so hotheaded, he would not have killed Laius along the road. On the other hand, if the gods decreed that he would kill his father, then he was destined to kill him eventually. When Jocasta gave birth to Oedipus and Laius learned that his son would murder him, it was a done deal: nothing could stop it from happening. The gods saw to it that his life was spared by the shepherd so that he could fulfill the prophesy.
Oedipus killed his father and married his mother to become King of Thebes. He did not know that the man he killed was his father, or that the woman he married was his mother. Oedipus was not a bad man, but his crimes were about what he did, not what he meant to do. * Since the above was written, it has occurred to this contributor that some may argue, "No, he didn't! He answered the Riddle of the Sphinx!" This is the PG rated answer, and it will do nicely, but answering the Riddle of the Sphinx would not have made Oedipus the King of Thebes without first killing the King, and afterwards marrying the Queen. So there.
That he needs to go home is what Jocasta says to Creon in "Oedipus Rex" by Sophocles (495 B.C.E. - 405 B.C.E.).Specifically, Theban Queen Jocasta's brother Creon and husband King Oedipus argue. Jocasta attempts to stop the fight. She says that are more important things to worry about than their petty fights and that each one just needs to go home.
That the chorus does not accept Oedipus as Laius' killeris how the second ode can be summarized in "Oedipus Rex" by Sophocles (495 B.C.E. - 405 B.C.E.).Specifically, the chorus begins with the necessary pursuit of Theban King Laius' murderer by Apollo the god of prophecy and his Furies of fate. The members defer to the perfect wisdom of Zeus the chief god and Apollo. They question Teiresias' charges because human wisdom is imperfect, no known quarrel exists between the Corinthian and Theban royal houses, and Oedipus' reputation for defeating the Sphinx and ruling wisely argue against a criminal past.
Car salesmen are not exactly an esteemed profession! Nor are they expected/needed to have any particular financial ability. Many would argue that to be a successful one you actually need to be morally bankrupt. Financially in turmoil too.
Argue about what. Be more specific.
to argue = hitvake'akh (??????)