Natural Rights In The Most Dangerous Game By Richard Connell

996 Words4 Pages

Natural rights aren’t given to people, but they are earned. In history, people have argued and fought for their rights, like in the American Revolution. Some of these natural rights are the rights to freedom and life. These natural rights help to form the ideas of morality in America and people happily live by these rights every day. But, like most things, these rights can be taken away through violence. When these rights are taken away, morality can be tossed aside as a consequence. Ayn Rand, a philosopher and creator of Objectivism, explains this, saying, “Morality ends where a gun begins”. Rand refers to violence as the destroyer of peace and describes its ability to blind a person in their actions. The idea of morality being broken down comes from one of humanity’s greatest desires: safety. The need for safety guides people through their actions and thoughts for their entire life. In the short story, “The Most Dangerous Game” by Richard Connell, the main character, Rainsford is shown to be immoral throughout most of the story as he violates others’ rights to life. The ideals of life and liberty are valued in America above everything. These rights allow people to dictate their own lives. In the past, wars have broken out over …show more content…

When Rainsford was in the forest, he set up a Malay mancatcher in hopes of killing Zaroff (13). Although he failed, Rainsford’s actions are considered immoral as he still tried to murder Zaroff. Rainsford’s attempted murder of Zaroff shows his immorality because Rainsford violates Zaroff’s right to life. Later on, Rainsford tries again to kill Zaroff but ends up killing Ivan (14). Rainsford’s attempts at killing Zaroff show his immorality. His fear for survival leads Rainsford to use violent methods, such as setting deadly traps in order to kill others. Throughout this time, Rainsford shows his immortality through violating the right of

Open Document