Amistad: A Philosophical Examination of Natural and Positive Law

The movie "Amistad," directed by Steven Spielberg, delves deep into the complex interplay between Natural Law and Positive Law. Set against the backdrop of a historical trial in the United States during 1839-1840, the film recounts the mutiny of a group of African slaves who, after rebelling against their captors, find themselves entangled in a legal and political quagmire. This essay explores the philosophical perspectives of Thomas Hobbes and Plato, analyzing their contrasting views on the justification of the slaves' actions and the ensuing question of reward or punishment, weaving a narrative that transcends the screen and delves into the timeless philosophical discourse.

The Historical and Philosophical Context

The Amistad trial, a pivotal event in the pre-Civil War era, unfolded as a multifaceted legal drama with profound implications for the nation. As the North and South of the United States grappled with their differences over slavery, the Amistad case emerged as a symbol of the moral and legal quandaries surrounding the institution.

Get quality help now

Prof. Finch

Verified writer

Proficient in: Law

4.7 (346)

“ This writer never make an mistake for me always deliver long before due date. Am telling you man this writer is absolutely the best. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

Internationally, the trial strained relations between the United States and Spain, adding another layer of complexity to the unfolding events.

Against this historical backdrop, the film weaves a narrative that forces viewers to confront fundamental questions about justice, morality, and the nature of law. At its core, the movie raises the pivotal inquiry: Were the actions of the slaves justified, and what should be the consequences of their rebellion?

Thomas Hobbes and the Framework of Positive Law

Thomas Hobbes, a prominent philosopher of the 17th century, laid the groundwork for the theory of Positive Law.

According to this legal philosophy, laws are a set of rules formulated by the state, and citizens are obligated to obey them for the greater good of society (Alexandrowicz et al., 617). Hobbes' view of human nature as inherently war-like and evil shapes his interpretation of the Amistad events.

In Hobbes' eyes, Cinque's initiation of chaos and violence on the slave ship aligns with his belief in the competitive and conflict-ridden nature of humanity. The struggle for survival, fueled by competition, diffidence, and glory, reflects the war-like qualities that Hobbes ascribes to all individuals (Stanford University, 77).

However, while Hobbes might acknowledge the justification for the slaves' actions based on their innate qualities, he would advocate for their punishment. Positive Law, as conceived by Hobbes, exists to control the inherent evil within human nature and to maintain order in society. Cinque's actions, though born out of war-like tendencies, would be deemed a violation of the established legal structure, warranting consequences to preserve societal stability.

Plato and the Ethical Foundations of Natural Law

Contrary to Hobbes, Plato, an ancient Greek philosopher, championed the philosophy of Natural Law. This theory posits that human laws derive from eternal and unchangeable principles that govern the natural world, principles that individuals can comprehend through the use of reason (Alexandrowicz et al., 617).

Plato's worldview diverges sharply from Hobbes' bleak assessment of human nature. Plato believed that individuals are naturally born good, equipped with the ability to make sound decisions and guided by instincts bestowed upon them by a higher power.

This stark contrast in perspectives is crucial when interpreting the actions of Cinque and the slaves. Plato would argue that their rebellion stems from a sense of justice and survival instincts. The recognition of the inherent equality of all individuals, as encapsulated in Plato's assertion that "all men are by nature equal," becomes the moral compass guiding the slaves' actions in the face of oppression (www.publicquotes.com).

Yet, similar to Hobbes, Plato would insist on the enforcement of laws. Despite the justifiability of the slaves' actions based on Natural Law, Plato, influenced by Socratic teachings, maintained that individuals must follow the law regardless of circumstances. Even in life-threatening situations, adherence to the law was paramount in Plato's philosophical framework.

Comparative Analysis: Hobbes vs. Plato

A nuanced examination of Hobbes and Plato reveals both convergence and divergence in their assessments of the Amistad events. While both philosophers acknowledge the justifiability of the slaves' actions, the roots of their justification differ fundamentally.

Hobbes, emphasizing the intrinsic war-like nature of humanity, sees the violence as a natural outcome of competition and conflict. In contrast, Plato, championing the goodness of human nature, views the slaves' actions as a response to the call of justice and survival instincts.

However, a parallel can be drawn in their insistence on punishment. Both philosophers, despite their disparate views on human nature, advocate for the enforcement of laws as essential for societal order. The underlying principle is that laws, irrespective of their philosophical origins, serve as the bedrock for maintaining social harmony and must be followed.

Amistad as a Philosophical Narrative

Steven Spielberg's "Amistad" serves as an insightful exploration of diverse legal interpretations and their philosophical underpinnings. The film invites viewers to contemplate not only the historical significance of the Amistad trial but also the timeless ethical and legal questions it raises.

The juxtaposition of Hobbes and Plato within the narrative underscores the complexity of the human experience and the nuanced nature of legal philosophy. The film, in essence, becomes a canvas upon which these philosophical debates play out, challenging viewers to question the foundations of justice, morality, and the role of law in society.

Conclusion: The Legacy of Amistad

In conclusion, "Amistad" offers a profound exploration of Natural Law and Positive Law through the lenses of Thomas Hobbes and Plato. The historical and philosophical context surrounding the Amistad trial enriches the narrative, elevating it beyond a cinematic experience to a philosophical discourse on the nature of humanity and the societal constructs that govern our actions.

The contrasting perspectives of Hobbes and Plato provide viewers with a rich tapestry of ethical considerations. While the film presents the justifiability of the slaves' actions from both philosophical standpoints, it does not shy away from the imperative of legal adherence, highlighting the enduring importance of laws in shaping and preserving the fabric of society.

As we reflect on "Amistad," we are compelled to recognize its enduring legacy as a cinematic masterpiece that not only recounts a pivotal moment in history but also challenges us to grapple with profound questions about justice, morality, and the intricate dance between human nature and the laws that seek to govern it.