In today’s world, one can find many instances of selfishness, whether it be corruption, killing, or even breaking a heart. However, like a diamond in the rough, someone who is truly selfless is hard to come by. One example of a selfless writer is C.S. Lewis, author of Till We Have Faces. Lewis wrote some of his novels in a way to not only educate the world that selflessness will always win but also the fact that selfishness will always lose.
The two critical theories studied this week, new historicism and cultural criticism, share many of the same concepts. Both theories are under the belief that history and culture are complex and that there is no way for us to fully understand these subjects because we are influenced by our subjective beliefs. Also, both theories believe that people are restricted by the limits society sets, and that people and these limits cause friction and struggle. Furthermore, both of these theories share from some of the same influences such as from the French philosopher Michel Foucault. New historicist believe that the writing of history is merely an interpretation, not an absolute fact, other than the big facts we know such as who was president at the time or who won a certain battle.
Unlike Marx who views Multiculturalism from the theory heading downwards Dalrymple views multiculturalism from the ground going up. His day to day experiences prove that "not all cultural values are compatible or can be reconciled by the enunciation of platitudes." This means that although multiculturalists support the idea that people should embrace different cultures, there are many challenges that make implementation difficult. Dalrymple argues that the idea that we can co-exist in a society whereby the law doesn't favor one culture at the expense of another one is a lie. In short, the author's main argument is that some cultural values will always be superior to others in every society and the idea that all cultural values can be compatible with every ethnic group makes no
With indifference people are only punishing the victim and helping to achieve the goal of the unrighteous. This idea is not only held by Ellie, but also former president Theodore Roosevelt, who stated “In any moment of decision, the best thing people can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing,
Adams book is a superb view into the life of Caligula and shows a little bit better look at the Roman Emperor that Winterling’s. The only reason I have for saying so is because of the different variables they focused on. Winterling’s psychological approach makes complete sense, however it is harder to prove something in the mind of an individual as opposed to observing their
A Critical Analysis of the Article “Stealing is always wrong” In the article “Stealing is always wrong,” the author deals with the issue of whether stealing in the form of downloading music from the internet is wrong, morally and through social sanctions, other than legally. He argues that stealing is always wrong and the wrongdoer should be entitled for social sanction. The author’s point of view in this article is biased as he stressed on the wrongfulness of stealing. First half of the article was used to support his argument that stealing is always wrong. Moving on to the fifth paragraph, he then included a different ethical perspective from authors that support unpaid downloading.
Martin Luther King a famous social activist once stated, “we must develop and maintain the capacity to forgive. He who is devoid of the power to forgive is devoid of the power to love.” When referring to these words it is shown how forgiving we can be for people that we hate or dislike. In William Golding's book The Lord of the Flies his character Jack shows the actions of power, fear, and acceptance. People in power are more afraid of losing that power because it may show you as a failure, and to take control is much easier than taking responsibility for actions because there may be consequences, but most of all forgiveness is the hardest to do because it is just too hard to let go. Jack was a different type of leader than Martin Luther
What if individuals accept the worse and when offered something better, they believe they don’t deserve it? George’s character is somewhat insinuating this because of his abilities he deserved to be handicapped, and if he does something out of the way he needs more punishment. I chose George because I believed that he depicted what was wrong with the society and how that we let higher ranking people tell us what we deserve. George is a smart individual, and knows that his government is wrong, yet does nothing. In some cases aren’t all individuals
In “The Moral Logic of Survivor Guilt” by Nancy Sherman, one has done no wrong, but still has guilt, even in situations that are unexpected, as this happens way too much, and that those who have done wrongdoing should be feeling guilty. She states, “We often take responsibility in a way that goes beyond what we can reasonably be held responsible for. And we feel the guilt that comes with that sense of responsibility. Nietzsche is the modern philosopher who well understood this phenomenon: “Das schlechte Gewissen,” (literally, “bad conscience”)-his term for the consciousness of guilt where one has done no wrong, doesn’t grow in the soil where we would most expect it, he argued, such as in prisons where there are actually “guilty” parties who should feel remorse for wrongdoing”(Sherman 154). Illustrating, this proves that we take the responsibility for actions that we did not do, and should not feel any remorse, but that the people who have done wrongdoing, should have this feeling of guilt.
This pressure could have been one of the reasons that triggered his writer’s block in the first place, which would explain the anger-fueled apathy that he addresses the reader with. In summary, “8 Count” has an inherently ironic nature that is only enhanced by the way it is written As Russell Harrison explains it in his collection of Bukowski essays, “[…] we cannot fully appreciate the ironic situation of a protagonist unless we feel – to some extent – positively involved in his fate” (201). After all, the only people whose fate the reader is more concerned about than the characters of their beloved writers are the writers