Introduction
Laws exist to protect individuals’ safety and ensure the citizen’s rights against abuse by others, organizations, or the law system itself. As such, unjust laws and moral laws exist whereby an unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law, while the moral law is a conduct derived from the objective right or wrong (Foroughi et al. 133). Respecting just laws is both morally and legally required. On the other hand, it is morally right to defy unfair laws. Any law that strengthens the character of people is correct. Any law that discredits the human psyche is unfair. This paper compares the aspect of civil disobedience and the letter from Birmingham Jail. It also vases these two writings’ logos, ethos, and pathos and concludes with a personal argument on the topic.
Logos, Ethos, and Pathos
To persuade the reader to follow his perspectives on unjust and moral laws, Thoreau uses three rhetorical approaches: Pathos, Ethos, and Logos. Thoreau uses logos to start and pathos to finish his essay “Civil Disobedience,” providing personal instances of why men should follow their consciences rather than rules that contradict their moral convictions (Atilgan 168). Throughout the entire work, Thoreau frequently uses ethos. He tries to convey to the readers that they have a responsibility and the right to stand up for their beliefs.
Moreover, Thoreau’s use of pathos is prevalent throughout the essay as an attempt to persuade the readers to make a logical and ethical choice (Atilgan 177). He uses these terms interchangeably to anger the reader into acting on what Thoreau’s essay perceives as an unjust law system. An example is when he refers to “the mass of men” as people serving the country, the soldiers, as being the “same worth only as horse and dogs” and of serving “the state thus, not as men mainly, but as machines. This is a provocative statement that Thoreau uses to make the makers mad and take a stand on unjust laws or immoral acts.
On the other hand, the Letter from Birmingham Jail heavily uses pathos, ethos, and logos. In his writing, Martin Luther King addresses several clergy members who criticized his actions during the protests. In this letter, he used ethos when referring to his readers as fellow men (Marks n.p). Using the phrase “My dear Fellow Clergymen,” King looks to his readers as equals. However, people do not see it that way. He uses logos in his arguments, especially when he tells the clergymen that he came to Birmingham to fulfill his duty as a civil rights advocate. Using logic, he responds to those referring to him as an outsider that any injustice anywhere threatens justice everywhere. Hence, anyone residing in the States can never be an outsider.
Furthermore, Luther goes the extra mile by using pathos all over his writing by using emotions in his language. An example is when he talks about his immediate family members in his work and narrates how his children have always asked him tough questions about race (Marks n.p). The idea that Funtown used to be restricted to white children only anchored depressing clouds of inferiority to colored children. This distorted their personality by allowing colored children, including his own, to develop bitterness towards whites.
Compare and Contrast
David Thoreau and Martin Luther King have written exemplary persuasive essays depicting social injustice and civil disobedience. King’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail addresses a specific audience (Whites and Blacks) by discussing why he feels they should work together to end racial segregation (King n.p). On the other hand, Thoreau, in his article Civil Disobedience, speaks to a broader audience that needs to be addressed. In his letter, Thoreau expresses his emotions towards the unjust law system and how individuals have strived to keep up with it (Thoreau 29). However, despite their audience differences, both essays focus on the issue of morality and justice and use these topics to inform and motivate their audience.
The two essays are similar as they both talk about morality and justice under governmental authority, which are related subjects. Thoreau and King describe how and why individuals should respond to unjust laws nonviolently to educate and inspire others. (Bass n.p). We are taught the value of upholding morality and pursuing justice through the authors’ insightful analogies and vivid examples. Most significantly, Thoreau and King support civil disobedience to protect people’s God-given rights and individuality for future generations and serve as inspiration for a struggle for liberation from the government.
Moreover, although the two essays address the issue of morality and justice, they are different. The essays vary in writing styles, tomes, and the overall goals of the speakers. Martin Luther King addresses his readers on the issue of injustice that African Americans faced at the hands of White Americans (King n.p). King uses emotional appeal and optimism for freedom to anchor his message home. This writing differs from Thoreau’s piece, which largely focuses on the unfair Government (Thoreau 35). Unlike King, he’s writings speak to his readers in a distressed and aggravated tone as he wants them to abide by unjust laws. King’s essay differs from Thoreau’s as he represents one goal while Thoreau addresses multiple goals. He describes the government’s unfair laws but also enlightens his readers on how and why to denounce such laws.
King and Thoreau’s pieces are similar as they persuade people to fight for what is morally right and never be complacent in the face of injustice. Thoreau asserts that a society where the majority gets to dictate the laws governing them is said to operate on unjust laws (Thoreau 37). As such, he claims that issues of morality should be decided by the individual and not by the laws set by the government. However, since this has always been the system, he pushes people to fight for their rights. Similarly, King’s letter contends that the minority’s right is granted when fought for, and the system is challenged (King n.p). He asserts that the oppressor never gives freedom voluntarily; hence, people need to fight to reclaim their rights.
Personal Argument
The two essays have adequately presented the concept of unjust laws and moral laws. By sharing a unified form of social justice and civil disobedience, these two articles have been used to bring light to society on minimizing the oppression of people with low incomes. In reality, people have protested unfair and unjust laws imposed on them in a civil way. While in high school, I was part of the revolt against a decision that led to the automatic disqualification of a whole class after a rumor of exam irregularity erupted. I protested against this rule as it was unjust and morally wrong for those students who did their exams without cheating.
Additionally, these two essays challenge the government’s rule, including the institutions embedded in it. As such, these essays are said to present similar plans purposed for revolution. They attempt to convince their audience that what they are fighting for is right; however, their approach to these arguments significantly differ. Another example in my life is my involvement in the protests for racial equality following the death of George Floyd in 2020. I believe that this case was unjustly handled and should have been considered voluntary manslaughter.
Conclusion
Civil disobedience is explored in essays by Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King. Although their messages are similar, their tones are very different. King deliberately keeps his tone more respectful because he is a black guy living in an oppressive environment. From this comparison, people learn that even though Thoreau is a white man and is not personally impacted by the injustices the government upholds, he nonetheless criticizes them (Bass n.p). Additionally, this comparison enlightens us that despite being 100 years apart, both men have extremely distinct perspectives but present related points of view. Both exhort people to follow their moral convictions and to resist ceding control of their social standing to the majority. As such, these two essays are essential as they enlighten the general public about the importance of fighting for their rights.
Works Cited
Atilgan, Hatice. “Reframing civil disobedience as a communicative action: Toward a critical deliberative theory of civil disobedience.” International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 40.1/2 (2020): 169-183.
Bass, S. Jonathan. Blessed Are the Peacemakers: Eight White Religious Leaders, and the” Letter from Birmingham Jail” and “Civil disobedience.” LSU Press, 2021.
Foroughi, Pouyan, et al. “Peer effects in corporate governance practices: Evidence from universal demand laws.” The Review of Financial Studies 35.1 (2022): 132-167.
King, Luther Martin. “Letter from Birmingham Jail” Studies in Philosophy, Politics and Economics, 3(1) (1963).
Marks, Robert. “King’s Letter from Birmingham Jail: Its Merit Through Dramatism.” (2021).
Thoreau, Henry David. “Civil disobedience.” Civil Disobedience in Focus. Routledge, 2002. 28-48.
write