Morality and Power Essay

Thucydides written history of the Mytilenian Debate and the Melian Dialogue reflects the reality of a period where exampleity is dependent on the exercise of antecedent and those who make it. The main theme running through the telephone line of these twain debates is that those with the federal agency to act as they wish inherently possess the power to visit holiness. The arguments that decide the fate of the Mytilene are made non stringently on the basis of morals but on how their power allows them to exercise the moral course they choose.The Melian dialogue reveals how those in power can dictate ethical motive in terms of self-interest. Both cases as well demonstrate how religion is also a function of self-interest. The question of the relationship between power and morality also hinges on the definition of these two vague terms. Morality, in the broader whiz of moral order, has been defined as a set of rules which define what is function and wrong. (Outka and Reed er, p. 5) Who decides what is right and wrong often depends, as with Thucydides history, on who has the power in a given situation.Power can broadly be defined, as the capacity to achieve what one wants. (Dickerson and Flanagan, p. 24) In the case of these two debates, the Athenians were the ships comp two who possessed the power. They had the coercive ability to decide the fates of some(prenominal) the Melians and the Mytilenians. This power was derived strictly from the military might their empire was able to build up. In both cases, power allowed them to dictate morality to the inferior parties.Thucydides history of the Mytilenian debate lucubrate the discussion of a council deciding on how to punish the citizens of Mytilene for a failed mutiny. The two options on the table are to either slaughter all the inhabitants, as had been previously agreed upon, or to leave them without severe punishment. Cleon, the Athenian prudent of initially deciding to slaughter Mytilene, bet okend that it was necessary to take out his brutal course of action for the safety of the empire. He stated succinctly that leadership depends on superior strength and not on goodwill. (Thucydides, p.213) He believed that killing the Mytilenians was a question of safety for the empire If you are going to give the kindred punishment to those who are forced to revolt by your enemies and those who do so of their own accord, can you not see that they will all revolt upon the slightest pretext, when success means freedom and failure brings no very dread consequences. (Thucydides, p. 216) In this statement, Cleon argues that Athens has a moral duty to put floor this revolt in the harshest way. He makes it a moral argument because it is in the self-interest of Athens, and any state, to protect its citizens.It is their moral duty. The Mytilenians, in their own self-interest, would argue that it is immoral to slaughter a whole population. They are both right. Subsequently, the council d ecides not to slaughter the inhabitants of Mytilene. They are convinced to look for a method by which, employing moderation in our punishments, we can in future secure for ourselves the climb use of those cities which bring us important contributions. (Thucydides, p. 221) They do this not the pursuit of the Mytilenians, but for one of pure self-interest. Morality, in this situation, is dictated by the party in power.The Melian Dialogue concerns the history of the island of Melos. Melis, a colony of Sparta, had refused to join the Athenian empire and side against Sparta they instead chose neutrality. Athens had brought a force to the island to take Melos by force. Before the siege, the two sides met to discuss the surrender of the Melians. (Thucydides, p. 401) Athens does not argue the morality of what they intend to do, they say sanitaryly that the standard of arbitrator depends on the equality of power to compel and that in fact the strong do what they have the power to do an d the weak accept what they have to accept. (Thucydides, p. 402) In this situation, power does not dictate morality it completely voids it. The Melians contain repeatedly if the Athenians would not agree to ? being friends instead of enemies. The Athenians reply by verbalism that if we were on friendly terms with you, our subjects would regard that as a sign of weakness. (Thucydides, p. 402) The Melians question the Athenians morality by saying that this is not fair play since they have not posed any direct threat to the Empire.Athens responds by saying that by subjugation you we shall increase not only the size but the security of our empire? this is no fair fight? it is rather a question of redeeming(a) your lives and not resisting those who are far too strong for you. (Thucydides, p. 403) In the end, the Melians do not surrender and the Athenian army slaughters them. In Thucydides history, those in power decide morality. In both of the aforementioned cases, both sides have had morality on their side. The Mytilenians and Melians believed the moral precept of saving their own lives.The Athenians believed in the morality of preserving their empire. Neither side was right or wrong, neither side acted immorally. They both acted in their own self-interest. What decided the moral outcome was that Athenians had the power to land their moral right on their powerless, but equally moral opponents. whole kit Cited Dickerson, Mark and Flanagan, Thomas Government and Politics Scarbourough, Ontario ITP Nelson, 1998 Outka, Gene and Reeeder, John pietism and Morality New York Anchor Books ,1973 Thucydides History of the Peloponnesian War Toronto Penguin Books, 1972