Thursday, July 13, 2006

Burke's Pentad

Act: Debate about justice
Purpose: Determine the meaning of justice
Scene: Cephalus' house
Agent: Socrates and others seeking truth
Agency: Analysis through dialogue

This pentad displays how the agents all play in defining truth. All the men talk, reason, and analyze justice and injustice in an attempt to find the true meaning. They attempt to find what is not just and from that conclusion figure out then what is just. Socrates remains during the entire conversation with the others chimming in. Most of the time, the others' comments would go along with Socrates. Each had their own reason for joining the debate, but all contributed to the final conclusion.
I am not totally clear about utopia, but from what I have gathered thus far, I would say this does not truly represent utopia. These men sit around debating justice, but it doesn't seem that any of them has actually got involved with the lawmakers and justice enforcers. You would think that if they felt so strongly about finding the absolute core of justice that they would be more involved with enforcing it. I envision the people of a utopian society to work together to find truths and not always bother with minor details that are not affecting people anyway. They would embrace justice and work to make it better their society instead of trying to decide if every act done or decision ever made is just or not.


Blogger Tiffany said...

I agree with you that if Book 1 were representative of a utopian society that all would be working together to achieve a single goal. However, as you mentioned, they decided to enter into the justice debate for their own individual interests, and with their own definition of justice. And nothing was accomplished in the end but a few snide remarks. Not very harmonious, not very utopian.

11:43 AM  
Blogger Jordan said...

As I've been reading through everyone's entries, I first strayed away from the idea that utopia was represented, then returned to believing it was present. Your opinion is very interesting, I think it has helped me find a "happy medium". While arguing over the mere definition of "justice", the agents seem only to belittle its very meaning. If they really did feel it to be such an important factor, arguing over trivial details does seem rather unimportant. I can say that "justice" IS a very utopian idea, however the self-serving concept of winning a debate is not: not very harmonious, not very utopian. (Thanks Tiff, well said!)

8:18 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home