The Instigator
Abgrimm92
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
jtorres
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Is Medea responsible for the death of her children?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/8/2015 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 331 times Debate No: 75009
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

Abgrimm92

Pro

1.Aristotle"s definition of anger relates to an impulse, accompanied by pain, for pleasurable revenge due to the slighting from another person.
2.Anger involves investment into another being, or thing.
3.Anger leads to irrational behaviors and leads us to do things we would not normally do.
4.We only become angry if one slights us in a way that goes against the expectations we held for an individual.
5.In the story of Medea, her husband hurting her goes against the expectation she had for him to uphold his love for her. This slighting her husband causes her makes her feel anger which then makes her feel revenge is absolutely necessary.
6.Medea"s idea for revenge is to take his children from him, as it says she "responds passionately to [his] betrayal," and to "punish Jason," Medea takes the children.
7.Infanticide is defined as the killing of a child, especially one"s one.
8.Anger is never justified, as Seneca stated. It is merely our disappointment due to the expectations we held for people to do better, when we should not hold such expectations.
9.Medea committed infanticide on behalf of a plot for revenge she had due to the slighting her husband caused her.
10.Medea committed infanticide out of anger.
11.Anger is never justified, therefore Medea is not justified in committing infanticide.
12.Medea is responsible for the death of her children.

Non-Controversial: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9. These premises are definitions we agreed upon, and parts taken directly from the story.
Controversial:
5. One can argue that Medea did not feel angry, but rather felt jealousy or another emotion. However, it is evident that Medea feels anger towards Jason. Her vocabulary used, her persistence in the need to achieve revenge on him for how he hurt her, it all falls under the definition of anger and shows she had evident anger towards Jason.
8. One can argue that anger does have justification. However, one cannot argue Seneca"s point. Anger stems from a disappointment due to an expectation, and if we did not hold expectations for people, they could not cause us to be angry. So Medea is AT LEAST responsible for holding an expectation of Jason (which inevitably led to the failure of Jason to meet the expectation, which led to anger, which led to the death of Medea"s children.)
10. Again, one may argue it was not anger that Medea was feeling.
11. One can argue that anger does have justification. However, one cannot argue Seneca"s point. Anger stems from a disappointment due to an expectation, and if we did not hold expectations for people, they could not cause us to be angry.
12. This statement is my conclusion.
jtorres

Con

1.Aristotle"s definition of anger is agreed upon.
2.I also agree that Medea"s anger stemmed from the investment she made in Jason, as well as the expectations she had for him.
3.A critical part to the equation of anger states that one slights another, and that SLIGHTING is the cause for the anger.
4.Jason is a critical part of the equation that ends with the death of Jason and Medea"s children.
5.Without Jason"s betrayal of Medea, we cannot know that the children would have died under Medea"s control.
6.Medea is not responsible for the death of their children, Jason is.

Non-Controversial: 1, 2, 3, 4. These are agreed definitions and parts of the story.
Controversial:
5. My opponent can argue that this is a hypothetical and that the children did ultimately die, however who is to say that if Jason never slighted Medea, that would have been the case.
Debate Round No. 1
Abgrimm92

Pro

1.If there is an equation, it all begins with Medea"s expectations.
2.Medea had expectations for Jason, and that is where she first faulted.
3.Whatever happened after that is to be taken for full responsibility by Medea for she started the process of anger herself. Medea"s expectations led to Medea"s disappointments which are the cause for her anger, and desire for revenge.
4.We agreed upon definition that anger leads to a desire for a pleasurable revenge, so Medea found the infanticide pleasurable.
5.Medea enjoyed the act she committed, and should therefore be held responsible for her crime.
jtorres

Con

1.We hold expectations for others no matter if it is justified or not. It is a natural psychological tendency.
2.Regardless of the expectations Medea had, if Jason did not fail them, Medea would not have been angry.
3.If Medea had not been angry, she would not have felt the need to seek revenge.
4.Medea"s anger is due to Jason"s slighting, not the natural expectations she held, much like we all do.
5.Jason is the cause of the infanticide of their children.
Debate Round No. 2
Abgrimm92

Pro

1.We are not arguing about whether or not she had normal or abnormal psychological tendencies, but more so what her psychological tendencies led to.
2.Once again, Medea was ONLY angry on behalf of the failure of Jason to meet her expectations. In reference to your equation previously stated, that is the starting point of the equation.
3.Medea held what many people do, and that is anger based off their own mistake.
4.Medea has had many mistakes, the fact of her expectations is only the beginning.
5.Medea is to be held responsible for infanticide because she killed her children and the cause was her anger for her partner.
jtorres

Con

1.When two people unite in a relationship, it is likely that they agree to be faithful to the other in bad and good times.
2.Jason betrayed Medea, which left her heartbroken and mentally unstable.
3.As we agreed, anger makes you do things you would not normally do.
4.If Medea was out of her realm in committing her crime, doing something she would not normally do because she was blinded by the anger she was feeling, she is not actually responsible for what happened during a time she was not in control of herself.
5.Jason was in control of himself the entire time, and was selfish in his decisions. His actions led to Medea"s vengeance, which concluded with the death of their children.
Debate Round No. 3
Abgrimm92

Pro

1.Medea"s actions of infanticide were not those of a mentally unstable individual.
2.Medea was capable of devising a plan that would advertently create pain for Jason, would leave him without anything (as it was her plan to take everything from him for betraying her), and actually felt she was helping the children.
3.Medea felt she would be helping the children by taking them away from people that may possibly "insult and torture" them.
4.Medea was fond of her decision to commit infanticide; She felt she was doing a good deed, as well as hurting Jason which she strongly desired for.
5.Medea was completely aware of what she was doing and should be held responsible for the death of her children.
jtorres

Con

1.No normal human in a normal state of mind could commit infanticide.
2.Medea could not have been in control of herself, nor could she have been mentally stable.
3.Jason was mentally stable and betrayed Medea for selfish reasons, leading to the anger and rage Medea turned to revenge.
4.Jason is the cause for Medea's anger and seek of revenge, and should therefore be held responsible for the death of their children.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.