Is Medea responsible for the death of her children?
Debate Rounds (4)
2.Revenge defined as the opportunity to retaliate or gain satisfaction by something done in vengeance.
3.Anger also being defined as a strong feeling of displeasure and belligerence aroused by a wrong; wrath.
4.In Medea"s tragic story, she is responsible for the death of her children because she let her anger take control of her self-conscience. Which she should have never let that happen in the first place, concerning to Seneca sense of anger.
5.In regards to the last premise: Seneca was a philosopher that claimed that nothing is useful in anger. That anger is something that a person can control, but its manipulative desire over rules and controls us.
6.She is guilty for the reason of sacrificing two innocent boys of her own, out of revenge and anger. This is a severe sin and unmoral act.
7.Medea is also wrong because the death of those boys didn"t gain anything it was more of a lost for both her and her ex-husband Jason. But for Medea it was a necessary evil and she needed to gain that pleasure.
8.Medea is a women who had lost her common sense within the wrath of anger and revenge. Feeling that it was a necessary evil to kill her two boys because it was the only punishment that fitted to the level of the betrayal her ex-husband had done to her.
9.Therefore, Medea is responsible for the death of her two sons and it does not exempt her from being beyond the bound of an inhumane person.
-Premises 1 through 3 because both parties agreed on the definitions concerning on the topic of the debate.
-Premises 6 is non-controversial because no one has the right to take anyone life away.
-Premises 7 and 8 are non-controversial because it explains Medea"s intentions more detailed and it is background information of why she is guilty for murdering both of her sons.
-Premises 4 and 5 are controversial because anger can be used in many different forms and in my case Seneca views anger negative. There are people that may not agree on that anger is not useful, clearly by view anger in another perspective.
4. In this premise you stated that Medea let her anger control her when really it was the hurt she experienced from the abandonment of her ex-husband that was the influence for her actions. In the story of Medea she makes it clear that it is not something that she wanted to do, but something she had to do in order to allow her ex-husband to hurt the same way she did. She loved her kids and didn"t want to take their life, but the circumstances she was under didn"t allow for her love for them to shine through.
5. I agree with those ideas of anger from Seneca, but I do not think it completely applies to this situation. Medea makes it clear that she is trying to protect her children from those that may cause harm to them because of all the wrong she"s done by trying to get back at her ex-husband. She takes this loss in trying to protect them.
6 &7. As you stated in premises 6 and 7, you feel as though Medea sacrificed her children out of revenge and anger and to satisfy her own pleasures of revenge. The reality is that she had already gotten her revenge on her ex-husband Jason by taking the life of the King and his daughter who was once his wife also. The sacrifice of her children was for them as Medea states in her story. She endured a lot of hurt and pain felt from her ex-husband that she could no longer allow to affect her children because she knew that her troubles would soon take a toll on them.
9. In saying this, Medea is not responsible for the death of her two sons because of her intentions. She had intentions of revenge but realized that it was in their best interest to protect them from their surroundings.
-I agree with premises 1 and 3 so they are non-controversial.
-Premise 6, 7, and 8 I disagree with because according to Medea, because she was the one to give those two boys life it is only her that is capable of taking it away.
-I agree that premises 4 and 5 are controversial because of the different ways of handling anger. It is true that many different people have different ideas determining whether or notU" anger is necessary to get a point across. According to Aristotle, Anger is of use because in order to be able to bash somebody back that has slighted you, you would need that anger inside you to let them know that you cannot be taken advantage of. If you use Aristotle"s view of anger and his methods of handling being slighted, then it leaves more room for vulnerability and being taken advantage of.
5. Seneca"s idea of anger does applies to Medea situation because she could have used Seneca"s alternative solutions of ignoring anger, which are: first order of desire (wanting something "x") or the second order of desire (want to want something). The second order of desire is the preferred solution for anger because it is the strategy of avoiding being angry even before the situation occurs. Therefore, Medea shouldn"t have had those expectation of Jason never leaving her because it shifted her mentality towards a negative space. In this case her space was to kill everyone who has some sort of connection with Jason, in revenge.
6 & 7. I will have to disagree with your response on both of these premises. First, because it is true that Medea did not want to leave her children behind in hands of her enemies, but she also used her children as the main target of Jason"s punishment. In the text Medea does go back and forth with deciding on whether she should kill the boys or not. But she also mentions of letting go all feelings she have for her children, because the act she was about to commit had to be done, and so she did it. As Seneca would describe her would be a coward person that hides behind the walls of anger and ignorance, instead of using reasoning. Which in this case she did have but decided that her pleasure for revenge is much greater and stronger.
9.Therefore, pertaining to your conclusion, Medea is still responsible for the death of her child because even though her actions was influenced by the bad behavior of another, it does not justifies the act of taking her children"s life away. Also her intention might have been to protect them, but that kind of protecting is morally wrong and sinful.
6 & 7. In regards to these two premises you have to take into account and consider any mental disorders that may be associated with her actions or how this may have affected her emotionally and mentally. Medea"s ex-husband may have triggered some mental instability she may have that can sometimes trigger her to think and act irrationally. It is important to look at all angles of the spectrum and to keep in mind the possibilities of why things like this happen.
9. As it pertains to your premises and your conclusion following, I cannot accept that Medea may be completely responsible for her children"s death. I do believe that with analyzing this situation we have to consider all possibilities and circumstances.
6 & 7. I do agree in taking to account the mental issues and insecurities that Medea went through because based on the passage she does go back and forth several of times and she also admits consciously that the act the was going to commit was very wrong. But I believe that the kind of mental issue that she might have gone through was simple rage, because a person that has mental disorders barely recognize the wrong of their actions and doesn"t go back and forth so much in deciding. It may be the case on what you are claiming, but she sounded very conscience of what she was going to do and that if she didn"t do it then Jason would not suffer what she had suffered in the past with him. A demented person would have taken action fast, not sloth too much on whether doing it or not.
9. Therefore, Medea is still guilty for murdering her children, even though your exception of having mental issue or considering other circumstances/possibilities might have sounded hopeful, it does not justifies the act of murdering two innocent boys. It is morally wrong and unethical, as how I mentioned repeatedly earlier.
6 & 7. Although you are saying that she went through mental rage, you cannot conclude that Medea did not having mental issues because not every mentally ill person reacts right away to their thoughts. There are some mentally ill people that have battles within themselves between what is right and wrong. It makes it even more the case that she may have a mental disorder because of the battle she continued to have in her mind between what is moral and what she actually wanted. This goes to show that there may be even more of an issue with her mental stability because of the mere fact that she even had to second guess herself of taking both the lives of her two children.
9. Based on your premises and the conclusions you"ve attempted to make, it cannot be assumed that Medea does not possess any mental instability. It can very well be the case that she has a mental disorder and what not in the correct state of mind when she made this decision, leading me to conclude that she cannot be entirely responsible for the death of her children.
6 & 7. Your response towards Medea having mental issue does sound convincing, but I must restate that she repeatedly claims that what she is about to commit is a sinful/wrong thing, but it must be done because her anger and pleasure of revenge is greater than the love of her children. So, therefore she is very committed to what she was going to do, it can be the case that she is not mentally disordered.
I have agreed on certain terms and conditions with my opponent and in fact agree on that Medea may have had certain circumstances in were mental issues may have taken a role, but that conclusion has not yet been completely resolved between me and my opponent. Medea is responsible for murdering both of her sons and therefore makes her guilty of committing that sinful act. Medea had a choice, every human-being has a choice to handle situation the correct way, but in this case Medea decided to follow her possessive anger and pleasure of revenge instead of saving her kids life. Her issues with her ex-husband Jason does not justifies the murder of those two boys.
6 & 7. You continue the state that it may also be the case that she may not be mentally disordered which is neither proving your case right or mine wrong.
My opponent and I have come to some agreements and disagreements pertaining to the premises listed above. Although she stayed strong in her argument, her responses do not prove mine nor her argument to be right nor wrong in stating that Medea was completely responsible for the death of her two children.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.