I believe the statement is wrong, because there is no such thing as a "weak person". To be considered a weak person, you would have to be weak at everything. Everyone has their strong capabilities, just like how everyone has their weak capabilities. There is no way with all the possibilities on Earth, that you could
Something that in the movie they can't really define it seeing to how Beowulf can't even describe what he is to his comrades. And there's really no definition on a troll. Why? To be honest it's simply more relatable to have something that people can interpret in there own way than have something that's point blank easy to describe. When people interpret things in there own view they lean a lot towards there own side, Grendel kin of Cain isn't human and is ridiculed for being that way and people can interpret that however they want.
If you were to fully analyze this poem without all of its additions, it would be the absolute antithesis of what he has made it to be: interesting and mild chaotic. “!blac” is the perfect example of how punctuation can take something so far. “Cummings never placed capitals or punctuation marks at random—there was always some point behind the deviancy”
Again, Macbeth is the only one who doesn’t meet the heroic qualifications, as he fails to have a sense of obligation towards his people and only focuses on his own interest. Lead by his own ambitions, Macbeth acts unheroic and begins a
Everyone is born with different privileges, yet these privileges do not define people. The adversities that someone has in life should not define their success or happiness. No one is destined to have a life full of misery. It is people’s attitude towards their resources -good or bad- that defines this. People write their own endings through the choices they make.
These findings have important consequences for the broader domain of world perspective. These authors, like everyone in the world, have different opinions of many issues. There is not one way to judge Daisy because everyone perceives her in a different way. Leland Person’s claims were based on his own opinions, but they were very valid. The first point he made was, “She is
Without responsibility, an individual is not able to tend to matters that are important and cannot deal with the consequences that come with their actions. A hero must be responsible in order to be fulfill their duties, otherwise a hero that is irresponsible does nothing and cannot react. Accordingly, the characters in Catch-22 cannot be considered as heroes due to their actions and the lack of responsibility that comes with them. All in all, responsibility is a human attribute that is required for one to be able to be called a hero, and in the end, the characters of the squadron fail to be
As so far whatever and in whichever religion, culture, the tradition we believe is true. In every situation, we all look different way, and the knowledge of being right or wrong never applies to moral beliefs. Cultural moral relativism, it varies from culture to culture, all cultures are equally important, and there is not a single culture which whom we can say is better than any other. And it depends on that finally there is no standard of good or bad. So, every decision regarding right and wrong is the result of society.
There cannot possibly be a definitive “right” and “wrong” because there are so many different cultures, standards, and religious ideals that counteract one another, and there is no way to tell between moral “good” and “bad” because the views on both of those social constructs are based off of perspective. There is no way to tell someone that they were right or wrong to questions regarding moral standing, because every facet depends on a person’s upbringing and their personal bias. This poem is truly a brilliant work for being able to convey this message in a simple conglomeration of six lines, of which there are merely thirty four words and only one character. “When the prophet...” by Stephen Crane beautifully illustrates the conflict between good and evil, and condemns the religious entities that perpetrate the notion that such boundaries exist within a mortal
Being moral in a growing and continually changing world is no easy task, especially when there is no specific rules or guidelines to follow. If one were to ask specifically what is morality, Appiah would say that living a moral life is living an “eudaimonia,”(Aristotle) or the idea of highest good, normally translated into “happiness,” or “flourishing” (402). Living a life to the highest good is a very vague answer, considering everyone’s definition of good is different, and everyone has a different view of happiness. These opinions are so diverse because morality is not just one idea, but a mix of ideas that make up each person’s moral values. In these difference in morals, there is bound for someone getting hurt in some way, either physically, emotionally, or even spiritually.
Jason Compson’s inability to get over the grudge that he has for Caddy, proves that one must forgive what has happened in the past to be happy in the present. Similar to Quentin and Benjy, Jason is an unreliable narrator as he does not accurately give a representation of what is going on around him. Although Jason understands the difference between past and present, certain details are muddled and twisted by his point of view. An example of this is when Jason is asked to show a customer “a churn or a nickel’s worth of screen hooks”. Both of these items are extremely unalike and would never be asked for as a substitution for one another.