While not righteous or honorable in any traditional sense, the Pardoner argues that he is appropriate to preach against his personal vice of greed due to his understanding of the sin and that in the process he is able to truly assist others in the relinquishment of their faults. In correspondence, the Pardoner “preach for nothing but for greed of gain… from it, I can bring them to repent” (p. 243). The transparency of the Pardoner’s confessions is without a doubt
In many ways, John Proctor is seen as a ‘tragic hero’, he is portrayed as a man with definite great values which he has flawed. Proctor isn’t initially seen as truly moral character, his adultery and redundancy to completely dismiss his religious beliefs and rites prove otherwise. His beliefs are dismissed due to the immortality Abigail displays in her characterisation that effectively rubs off on him. John chooses to be immoral, but he himself knows the difference between right and wrong, and his conscious still plays a big role in the decisions he makes, unlike with Abigail. Throughout his characterisation, John Proctor is seen as a man of integrity, despite his immoral actions.
He comes up with the several suggestions about piety: “to prosecute a wrongdoer is pious and not to prosecute is impious”; “what all the gods hate is impious, and what they all love is pious”; “where there is piety there is also justice” (Plato (1997), p.88.). In Euthyphros actions to prosecute his father he relies on this statement. Even though, he considers himself as pious man, Euthyphro is pious in prosecuting his father. Look at Euthyphros notion “to prosecute a wrongdoer is pious and not to prosecute is impious”. Let imagine this case as his father is guilty and he would hide it from authorities, from
While I agree with certain aspects of both theories, I have to dispute both outlooks on the ultimate power of God. John Hick believes that there is no way you can deny the existence of evil, but he believes all evil exists because the all powerful God allows it to. How could a God who is all good allow evil to be present, you ask? Hick’s answer to your question would be; In order to draw us closer to him(GOD). If there were no sorrows, pains, or woes, mankind would not see the need for God’s forgiveness and love.
It was chosen specifically to create a stark contrast with the idea of morality and “moral victory”. This also reveals the irony that Marlow and Kurtz’s relationship contained. Marlow embodies a sense of goodness and Kurtz embodies greed and deception. They are at two different ends of the spectrum and yet Marlow is attracted the character of Kurtz. The sentence after Marlow’s explanation of the “abominable “acts, suggests why Marlow ironically draws closer to Kurtz.
Redcrosse must shield the common domain of reprobates in addition to the profound domain of evilness. The rich characteristics of faithfulness, modesty, penance for the benefit of other people, and sensitivity for those less blessed are seen woven into the content and also the contrary results from covetousness and pride. He experiences a few scoundrels, the mythical serpent from hellfire, Archimago (underhanded alchemist), Sansfoy (without confidence), Sansloy (without the law of god), Duessa or Fidessa (misrepresentation and the Roman Church) to give some examples. These wrongdoers battle Redcrosse Knight through double dealing, desire, and untruth. Accordingly he should be equipped with confidence in Christ to conquer the disasters of the otherworldly domain.
In Shakespeare’s “Sonnet 148”, the speaker is clearly a man that is in love, but seems to think of love in a negative way. He feels that love itself is tricking him and clouding his judgment. He sees his love as far better than everyone else sees her to be. He states, “O me, what eyes hath love put in my head/ Which have no correspondence with true sight!” (1-2). This shows how the speaker thinks he is being robbed of the sight of reality.
I had difficulty deciphering whose thoughts were being expressed. However, the topic was interesting. Blow’s interpretation of good and evil was disturbing, yet intriguing. I liked how she used Dante’s Inferno to express her view of sin and Christianity. Blow believed that people should not be punished for learning through sin, whereas Dante felt as though being exposed to sin was a permanent mark on your soul.
Hamlet’s insight behind justice and rightful revenge derives from the precept of the divine rights of kings. Although it’s pretty straightforward where Hamlet’s personal grudge for Claudius came from, the most compelling rationale behind his actions is to reform the splintering state of Denmark. From this, the only way to dispose of the corruption is by addressing the source, which Hamlet determines to be Claudius. Once Claudius dared the divine right of the king and committed a grisly murder, he began the destruction of the country. It’s because of this rationalization, Hamlet believes that it’s his God given opportunity to condemn Claudius 's soul as punishment for his behavior.
Antony gains power by avenging Caesar and that causes him to become a power-hungry. As Antony says to Octavius, “There is a slight unmeritable man, meet to be sent on errands. Is it fit, the threefold world divided, he should stand one of the three to share it?” (IV i 12). He wants to strip his third, weakest partner in the triumvirate of control. Even though Antony becomes a leader by chance, he still becomes thirsty for power as a result of his loyalty to Caesar.