Falstaff is completely harmless, he does not choose a side nor defend his own, he simply does not care. But Falstaff’s apathetic character shows that there may not be a good enough reason for anyone to care about anything, and this may be the lesson he wants Hal to learn before Hal loses himself in brainwashing royal duties. Falstaff is significant because he is the control in an experiment. There are characters who are in the heat of the moment, so driven by justice, fear, or honor; in reality, as Falstaff stands on the side as a mindless participator of this nonsense, he shows that none of it
Single Paragraph Essay “ Harrison Bergeron ” “ Harrison Bergeron ,” written by Kurt Vonnegut Jr. focuses on equality — physically andmentally — strongly controlled by the government in the year 2081; the beautiful are forced tolook ugly, the physically skilled are required to wear weights. With these handicaps makingeveryone so equal, the world became very different, odd, and average. But the government hasno right or reason to push the whole world to be “…equal every which way.” (203) To suppress someone’s natural looks or physical talents is not only wrong to natural human rights, but it is also illegal, and for very good reason: everyone is different. Equality means everyone has equalrights, not that nobody is better than anyone else
For Meursault he does not feel remorse for any of his actions or antics because there is no purpose to life; There will be no judgement or ‘Hell’ for Meursault after death. Normally people of faith abide by certain commandments that would thus grant them acceptance to ‘Heaven’. Meursault finds such beliefs as silly and pointless, much like everything else. Meursault holds a pessimistic and absurd outlook on life; Camus made it apparent to infuse his atheistic and existentialistic values into the form of
They couldn 't see colors and they didn’t have feelings. In “Harrison Bergeron” by Kurt Vonnegut the community was forced to be the same. The government put them down to the same level of sight,speech,and intelligence. Samuel Johnson once said “It is better that some should be unhappy rather than that none should be happy, which would be the case in a general state of equality.” Samuel Johnson’s quote about equality is most related to The Giver and Harrison Bergeron because the quote illustrates a central idea that people don’t
His dull and average life seemingly pushes him to the brink and makes him start wondering what the point of his existence is if he was “...the surest person to perform nothing today…” (Hawthorne 1). At a certain point even he was bored of himself, which is interesting because he can’t stand being the ideal guy. It makes the reader ask themselves why society sets these standards that make people miserable and unhappy. At the start of “Bartleby the Scrivener”, Bartleby already is miserable and unhappy. Though the narrator originally leads the reader to believe that this is because Bartleby works day and night with “...no pause for digestion” and hardly speaks to his co workers, it is because life has already worn him out (Melville 11).
Even though Nick might not be very productive, he is an admirable person in the fact that he stays out of the way by doing absolutely nothing. Within in “The Great Gatsby”, everything that is done is bad. Every move that characters make eventually come back to haunt them. This is the point of the novel. To take the least of the evil within the group of characters, Nick again proves to be the most admirable.
But, because turning all these rules into action doesn’t always work well, we see these laws becoming unfair, which resulted in leading David Thoreau being thrown behind bars. Just as I mention before, two of the rhetorical devices Thoreau uses in the passage is anaphora and logos. He repetitively uses the word “It” in the following passage, “It does not keep the country free. It does not settle the West. It does not educate.” In the quote above, you can clearly acknowledge that the “It” is referring to the government.
This cowardice event shows that he is not a hero. In conclusion Odysseus is not a hero because he is missing many profile traits a hero would posses. As I’ve expressed copious times Odysseus is not a hero because he is egotistical, cowardice, narcissistic, and alienated. He sacrifices his crew, is unloyal to his faithful wife, and is a
Both Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau discuss the role of the individual in great lengths. In Emerson’s Self Reliance he expresses his frustration with the general population’s unwillingness to fulfill the duties of the individual. Emerson believes that everyone has innovative thoughts and ideas, but only true revolutionaries have the courage to share them with the world. In Thoreau’s Resistance to Civil Government he focuses on the rights of the individual as part of the State, or government. He believes that it is the people’s duty to disobey the laws if they are unjust.
Patrick Henry was one of those famous powerful figures, patriots, who provided support for the antifederalists. Anti Federalists were in debt and they feared a strong central government who would make them pay-off their debts. They thought that it gave too much power to the national government at the expense of the state governments, and there was no bill of rights, thus, they opposed the ratification of the constitution. As shown on Document G, even in a political system, with checks and balances, a certain branch can be too powerful, which can lead to tyranny of the common people. This document was directed towards the Federalist by the antifederalist to explain a possible problem of the checks and balances system, after the drafting of the constitution and awaiting approval.
Or maybe it’s not that the government is incompetent, it’s just that they are extremely corrupt and care for the anyones well being but their own. After all, they are obviously putting forth the rights given to us in the constitution and disregarding those rights. So not only does the government deny us our natural rights but also shows signs of corruption. And in the declaration of independence, it says “That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these end, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation down on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.” So when I see the government showing signs of corruption, I look to this quote and think about the fact that we have the right to revolt and alter or abolish it. And then it remind me of the fact that the reason why the colonists revolted was because the government denied us of our rights, and the fact that it was becoming corrupt.
2. Thoreau refers to civil disobedience as not simply a right, but as a duty merely because individuals are responsible for the actions taken by the government. The government is only what the people let it be, and it can be corrupted and abused if men allow it be. He believes men have “the right to refuse allegiance to, and to resist, the government, when its tyranny or its inefficiency are great and unendurable.” (942). Thoreau alleges people have the right to oppose an oppressive government, it is their duty to rebel against it.
Fear and guilt are both Attilas and the Witch-Doctors methods of asserting dominance, for Ayn Rand, rationality can’t flourish when someone is vulnerable to fear and guilt. For Rand, religions such as Christianity also inhibit people from reaching their full reasoning capabilities as they force people to believe that they should live a life of submission and inferiority. Rand doesn’t agree with the idea that other philosophers have proposed in the past that reason and freedom have already failed and that we should rely on faith (Rand,
The author thinks when people suffer; they said it is god will and they do nothing about it. However, if you do not believe in God, you try to find a solution for your sufferance. He thinks people who believe in God are narrow-minded which mean there will not tolerate other people view. The author chooses not to believe in God because it makes him happier. He does not think there is an omnipresent force that makes our choices for us.