The Instigator
oscanoak
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
leah_of_hyrule
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Is Medea responsible for the death of her children?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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: 5/11/2015 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 582 times Debate No: 75126
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

oscanoak

Pro

1. Both parties agree to the definition of anger which is a strong feeling of annoyance, displeasure, or hostility.
2. We also agree that revenge is defined by the act of gaining satisfaction from another person's expense or pain.
3. Medea is responsible for killing her children because she let anger get the best of her. Anger is no excuse to do something drastic like that.
4. Not only does she kill her children but she kills the King and his daughter also. Even though what her husband did was wrong the act of homicide is not a justified retaliation.
5. There was no other possible gain or benefit that Medea could have gained other than the satisfaction of revenge stated on Premise 2. What she did was truly selfish and evil.
6. Not only was Medea angry but she was jealous as well. She did not want her kids to be happy while she was upset about her husband. She also was jealous of the King's daughter which was why she killed her as well.
7. What she did was selfish because she only did it for her own satisfaction of getting revenge on her husband. Her children didn't provoke her to kill them.
8. Therefore, Medea was fully responsible for killing her own children.

Non-controversial:
Premise 1- It is the definition we have both agreed on.
Premise 2- The same reason as to why premise 1 is non-controversial.
Premise 5- Because it was said in the excerpt that Medea had no other motive to kill her children other than to get back at her husband.

Controversial:
Premises 3,4,6,7.
leah_of_hyrule

Con

1. I agree on the definition of anger.
2. I agree on the definition of revenge.
3. Medea is not responsible for killing her children because, at the time, she had been experiencing feelings of rage and antagonism. Anger often clouds one"s judgment.
4. In Medea"s eyes, killing her husband and daughter was also punishment for herself.
5. Epictetus mentions that Medea was trapped in a state of anger, and due to this she has wronged only because she is trapped under a blanket of negative, blinding emotions.
6. Medea thought that by killing her children and her husband, she was handing them over to Zeus and getting rid of her selfish desires.
7. Epictetus also stresses that Medea is doing what she believes is best both for her and the others.
8. Due to the overwhelming feelings of anger Medea had been experiencing, she is not responsible for killing her own children and instead the reason can be found in her misguided self.
Debate Round No. 1
oscanoak

Pro

3. Feelings of anger is not a valid excuse for what she has done. If she had just calmed down and rationalized her situation she could have dealt with her problems in a different way. What she did was perform a permanent solution for a temporary problem.
4. True, but her main goal was to punish her husband.
5. Her state of anger did not physically make her kill all those people. Medea let her emotions control her through her own will. She didn't have to kill her husband, children, the king and his daughter. She chose to, which makes her responsible for her actions.
6. As I mentioned on premise 3, she chose to use a permanent solution for a temporary problem. There were other ways to get rid of her selfish desires. One cannot get rid of their selfish desires with selfish actions.
7. If Medea believed that it was the best for everyone else, means that she did careful thought to what she was planning to do. If Medea was doing careful thought to her decision then that means her cloud of anger wasn't so big after all, which could mean that she is indeed responsible for the death of her children if she really believed it was the right thing to do.
leah_of_hyrule

Con

3. Although it would've made sense for Medea to calm down and rationalize, that option was not possible due to the fact that, at the time, anger had taken over her thoughts and overpowered her moral reasoning. Besides, it did seem like Jason intended to stay with the king's daughter for good.
4. In her defense, Jason was the one that started the betrayal.
5. While I agree she chose to kill her children, she made the choice in a state of rage opposed to clarity which again distorted her thoughts and made her think she was doing the right thing.
6. Jason was selfish as well, abandoning Medea and their children just for wealth and power.
7. Medea could've used offhand self-justification at first, or maybe not even thought it through. Epictetus states that Medea "did not know where the power lies to do what we want," suggesting that perhaps she didn't know the extent of the effects of independent decision making, especially on impulse.
Debate Round No. 2
oscanoak

Pro

3. Medea let her own anger get the best of her. She had a choice whether to let it get that far or not. She chose to get angry like she chose to kill her children, which makes her responsible.
4. Just because Jason started the betrayal does not mean that it was right for Medea to kill him and their children. She could've chosen a different route if she wanted to, or she could have even let all of that behind her. Anger can work in many ways and without knowing how to neutralize it, it can make people do maniacal things; like what Medea did.
5. She still made the action, rage or not, she killed her own children. If someone gets in trouble from things like that, the judge won't look at a person and say "well you were angry so I guess that was okay."
6. I agree that Jason did a selfish thing but the way Medea chose to handle the decision was no better.
7. I agree with your reasoning in this premise, but it doesn't help prove that she wasn't responsible for killing her children.
leah_of_hyrule

Con

3. It was true that she had a choice, but maybe Medea didn't choose to get angry. We don't always have control over our emotions, especially strong ones as such, and even if she'd let anger get the better of her it could've been unintentional.
4. She could've, yes, but she truly believed that murder was the best way to solve her problem. Technically, in her situation, choosing a different route wasn't an option.
5. Well perhaps if she pled insanity haha then maybe
6. I agree, that was a bit drastic...
7. True.
Debate Round No. 3
oscanoak

Pro

3. I just don't see Medea could let anger control her. This anger didn't not physically old her against her will to kill them. This anger did not physically poison others, it was Medea's own hands, which makes her responsible.
4. I agree, but that doesn't make it okay. What she did was selfish.
5. If she believed it was the right thing then she can't plead insanity. She was well aware of what she did.
6. Therefore, Medea was indeed responsible for the death of her children.
leah_of_hyrule

Con

3. No, but anger is not a physical force so much as a mental, more manipulative force that can take over a person"s whole mind and override certain abilities to think rationally and reason.
4. Of course it isn"t "okay", but according to Medea, the murders were the only solution to her problems.
5. She believed it was the right thing because she was mentally unstable and not competent to properly rationalize.
6. Medea was not responsible for the death of her children.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.