The Right and the Good in Aeschylus’ Oresteia and Yael Farber’s Molora:<br>Transitional Justice between Deontology and Teleology

The antagonism between deontological and teleological conceptions of law can be felt throughout the field of law. It is particularly pressing, however, in the context of what is commonly referred to as ‘transitional justice’. Should the legal response to massive violence and bloodshed be primarily a...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Lukas van den Berge, Christiaan Caspers
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Utrecht University School of Law 2015-01-01
Series:Utrecht Law Review
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.utrechtlawreview.org/articles/10.18352/ulr.313/
id doaj-3620fc6f040b414ca2e9d3d7a379d93d
record_format Article
spelling doaj-3620fc6f040b414ca2e9d3d7a379d93d2020-11-25T03:43:03ZengUtrecht University School of LawUtrecht Law Review1871-515X2015-01-01111809810.18352/ulr.313306The Right and the Good in Aeschylus’ Oresteia and Yael Farber’s Molora:<br>Transitional Justice between Deontology and TeleologyLukas van den Berge0Christiaan Caspers1Utrecht University School of LawRadboud University in Nijmegen and the Murmelliusgymnasium in AlkmaarThe antagonism between deontological and teleological conceptions of law can be felt throughout the field of law. It is particularly pressing, however, in the context of what is commonly referred to as ‘transitional justice’. Should the legal response to massive violence and bloodshed be primarily a deontological one, giving primacy to the right in awarding ‘each what is his’ (suum cuique) according to a given set of principles of law? Or should this response be primarily teleological in nature, with the right being subservient to the restoration of society as a higher good? Our paper investigates this issue from the perspective of a Ricoeurian reading of Aeschylus’ Oresteia and Yael Farber’s Molora, a modern play in which Aeschylus’ story is staged against the backdrop of post-apartheid South Africa. It is argued that both the Greek original and its modern adaptation confirm Ricoeur’s view of justice as a precarious balance between Kantian deontology on the one hand and Aristotelian teleology on the other.http://www.utrechtlawreview.org/articles/10.18352/ulr.313/Ricoeuradjudicationconflict resolutiontragedySouth AfricaTruth and Reconciliation Commission
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Lukas van den Berge
Christiaan Caspers
spellingShingle Lukas van den Berge
Christiaan Caspers
The Right and the Good in Aeschylus’ Oresteia and Yael Farber’s Molora:<br>Transitional Justice between Deontology and Teleology
Utrecht Law Review
Ricoeur
adjudication
conflict resolution
tragedy
South Africa
Truth and Reconciliation Commission
author_facet Lukas van den Berge
Christiaan Caspers
author_sort Lukas van den Berge
title The Right and the Good in Aeschylus’ Oresteia and Yael Farber’s Molora:<br>Transitional Justice between Deontology and Teleology
title_short The Right and the Good in Aeschylus’ Oresteia and Yael Farber’s Molora:<br>Transitional Justice between Deontology and Teleology
title_full The Right and the Good in Aeschylus’ Oresteia and Yael Farber’s Molora:<br>Transitional Justice between Deontology and Teleology
title_fullStr The Right and the Good in Aeschylus’ Oresteia and Yael Farber’s Molora:<br>Transitional Justice between Deontology and Teleology
title_full_unstemmed The Right and the Good in Aeschylus’ Oresteia and Yael Farber’s Molora:<br>Transitional Justice between Deontology and Teleology
title_sort right and the good in aeschylus’ oresteia and yael farber’s molora:<br>transitional justice between deontology and teleology
publisher Utrecht University School of Law
series Utrecht Law Review
issn 1871-515X
publishDate 2015-01-01
description The antagonism between deontological and teleological conceptions of law can be felt throughout the field of law. It is particularly pressing, however, in the context of what is commonly referred to as ‘transitional justice’. Should the legal response to massive violence and bloodshed be primarily a deontological one, giving primacy to the right in awarding ‘each what is his’ (suum cuique) according to a given set of principles of law? Or should this response be primarily teleological in nature, with the right being subservient to the restoration of society as a higher good? Our paper investigates this issue from the perspective of a Ricoeurian reading of Aeschylus’ Oresteia and Yael Farber’s Molora, a modern play in which Aeschylus’ story is staged against the backdrop of post-apartheid South Africa. It is argued that both the Greek original and its modern adaptation confirm Ricoeur’s view of justice as a precarious balance between Kantian deontology on the one hand and Aristotelian teleology on the other.
topic Ricoeur
adjudication
conflict resolution
tragedy
South Africa
Truth and Reconciliation Commission
url http://www.utrechtlawreview.org/articles/10.18352/ulr.313/
work_keys_str_mv AT lukasvandenberge therightandthegoodinaeschylusoresteiaandyaelfarbersmoloraltbrgttransitionaljusticebetweendeontologyandteleology
AT christiaancaspers therightandthegoodinaeschylusoresteiaandyaelfarbersmoloraltbrgttransitionaljusticebetweendeontologyandteleology
AT lukasvandenberge rightandthegoodinaeschylusoresteiaandyaelfarbersmoloraltbrgttransitionaljusticebetweendeontologyandteleology
AT christiaancaspers rightandthegoodinaeschylusoresteiaandyaelfarbersmoloraltbrgttransitionaljusticebetweendeontologyandteleology
_version_ 1724521544144650240