Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Revisions For Civil Disobedience and Man Vs
Revisions For Civil Disobedience and Man Vs
Kayla Whitty
Mr. Pace
Civil Disobedience
In the excerpt from Henry David Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience" and Arthur Miller’s
play "The Crucible," the act of rebelling against societal norms and disobeying authority is
justified in cases where it protects people's civil liberties or their identities. However, it is
important to note that this does not imply that going against the law remains unpunished, even if
The concept of civil liberties should be defined by the laws within a country, and
individuals should have the right to stand up against any injustices they face. Thoreau questions
the government's lack of encouragement for citizens to point out its faults and suggests that
challenging a government that restricts civil liberties is essential to being a good citizen
(Thoreau, 2). Rebelling against societal norms is how societal change is brought about, and those
who fight for change continue to inspire others. While laws are meant to be upheld within a
nation, there are circumstances that may convince individuals to defy them. In "The Crucible,"
characters struggle with feelings of mistrust, lack of freedom, and powerlessness over their
futures. Many people in the town are accused of witchcraft without concrete evidence, and
Reverend Hale disobeys the court by sitting and praying with those who have been condemned
(Miller, Act 4, 123). Hale's actions demonstrate his lack of faith in the judges' ability to identify
those who are truly guilty. He defies the rulings of the court to provide comfort and a glimmer of
Whitty 2
hope to those who have been wrongfully accused. Both sources, "Civil Disobedience" and "The
Crucible," reinforce the instances where it may be acceptable to go against written laws or
societal norms. When individuals believe that they or other citizens are not receiving their
unalienable rights, it is expected that they do everything in their power to ensure that everyone is
In many cases, individuals may lie to protect themselves or those close to them, even if
telling the truth would have been beneficial in the long run. In "The Crucible," there are laws and
customs that may not be as common in contemporary times, but citizens are expected to abide by
them. Elizabeth Proctor, for example, lies to the court in order to protect her husband's reputation
(Miller, Act 3, 113). By lying, Elizabeth goes against the rules regarding perjury in a court of law
to shield her and her husband's identities. Thoreau writes about the government and emphasizes
the importance of standing up against injustice. He suggests that if abiding by a law requires an
individual to participate in injustice towards others, then that law should be broken (Thoreau, 2).
Every person belongs to a community, and it is their duty to stand up for justice and not comply
Both Thoreau and Elizabeth justify their actions based on the expected outcomes.
Elizabeth, unaware of John's attempt to save her, lies to protect her husband's reputation as she
believes it is her duty as a married person, even though telling the truth could have saved her.
Thoreau argues that abiding by unjust laws makes individuals complicit in the injustice suffered
by others, and going against the government may be the only way to protect one's unalienable
rights.
Whitty 3
Rebelling against societal norms or laws set by community leaders is justified when authority
restricts citizens' unalienable rights or when individuals seek to protect their own identities and
reputations. Thoreau and Miller provide instances where people defy the law or go against
societal standards, and in these instances, justifications can always be found. However, it is
essential to consider the limits to which one can go in order to continue justifying their actions.
Whitty 4
Work Cited
Miller, Arthur. The Crucible: A Play in Four Acts. Penguin Books, 2011.