“It is easy to argue that people should be stopped from putting themselves in danger”.Some people may say that people in life or death situations deserve to pay the consequences since they were the one’s that put themselves that that position .These people should not be held for their actions or situations that they are in for the following reason from the story “The Cost of Survival”, “Usually, when people need to be rescued , it is because something unexpected happened.” First of all , these people who are in these type of situations may not have even known that this would occur or that they were putting themselves in danger. According to the story “The Most Dangerous Game”, “ he realized he had reached too far and had lost his balance. The cry was pinched off short as the blood-warm waters of the Caribbean Sea closed over his head”. Rainsford had no idea that he was going to fall over and be left by himself on the island with nobody by his side.The story also states that “ The menacing look in the eyes did not change.The revolver pointed as rigidly as if …show more content…
The story “The cost of survival” states that “It is easy to argue that people should be stopped from putting themselves in danger. However, this would be impossible to enforce”. It is impossible to stop somebody from doing these risky things but you can’t stop them from doing the things that they enjoy and make them happy. The story also says that “ We know that when people believe that they are going to receive a large bill for SAR mission, they delay a call for help or they refuse to to call for help.”. It would be unfair that someone wouldn't call for help because they are going to be billed for getting help. Finally “ We're out there to save lives. You can’t put a price on that.”. There are lots of money but a person only gets one life and that is why you can't put a price on
Sanger Rainsford stays intrepid, fighting and feinting until he finds his way to the precipice of the island. Unflinching, he leaps into the Caribbean Sea, later meeting the General for a duel to the death. Rainsford is victorious, but he didn’t win.
In the January 29, The Stanford Daily editorial Stanford, California, it debates the different essential of the principle of morality and identified Brock Turner had applied a use of force in raping an unconscious woman behind the dumpster. Furthermore, the young man attended Stanford University and participated in his college swim team dreamt of partaking in the Olympus. The victim heartfelt statement during the trial is disregarded because he comes from a class of privilege and is a man. Not to mention, Brock Turner’s father wrote a letter to expressing the universalizability to court saying, “my son’s life shouldn’t be ruined over 20 minutes of action (Dreher,Rod).” Therefore, Aaron Persky who is a California judge implemented an ethical decision that contemplated the clarity around both the specific choice and decision then declared a six months sentenced ruling.
When an unfortunate accident throws Rainsford overboard, he stays calm (Connell 28). In this sudden event, he needs to stay calm, and he does that very well. From this point, he immediately looks around and surveys to find a place to go that isn’t stranded in the ocean. “General, I wish to leave this island at once” (Connell 36). Hearing all about the island and General Zaroff makes Rainsford decide he needs to leave.
(27). When he throws himself off the cliff into the rocky waters below, he knows that he may not live, yet he becomes fearless and takes the risk. Rainsford's instincts arose and he wanted to survive, but he did it in a manner where he stood his ground, retained his strength, and grew valiant. “In his hand the man held a long-barreled revolver, and he was pointing it straight at Rainsford's heart… ‘Don't be alarmed,’ said Rainsford with a smile…” (9).
Thinking with a humane mindset it is more ethical to continue to fight a long and hard struggle, rather than slaughter many innocent
Rainsford believes that he is a hunter and isn’t too concerned with feelings of the hunted. In the story Rainsford learns in the fight for survival, he should never underestimate an opponent in the sport of hunting. In the beginning of the story, Rainsford falls off the yacht and finds himself at the mercy of the Caribbean Sea. Rainsford’s advanced survival skills tell him to swim ashore.
He had to struggle and swim in order to stay alive. Once he fell off, he knew he was in danger. On page 174, it says “The cry was pinched off short as the blood-warm waters of the Caribbean Sea closed over his head.” This is the exact moment when Rainsford’s body hit the water, and he was off the ship. Rainsford desperately tried to tell the yacht to come back,
In life we have to make decisions that could result in someone's life ending. When people are put in these situations I think that they should not be held accountable for their actions. The decisions that they make could be affected by if they are held accountable or not. I think that people should not be held accountable for their actions in life or death situations.
This example shows that Rainsford had to use his wit and mind to survive and out play his foe. Towards the end of the story Rainsford escapes by jumping off a cliff into the ocean to get away from General Zaroff. Rainsford escapes the island in a very clever way: “He reached it. It was the shore of the sea ...
As a result... some people have over thought this idea they still would want to do this, but it is still there choice on this if they do or do not want to do this. In fact... many people have died from these situations or couldn 't get saved by the people trying to rescue them. For example...if you go mountain climbing
He uses examples of cases in which people committed crimes involuntarily. Eagleman also cites examples of mental diseases in which the victims have no control over their impulses or actions. In other words, there are people who simply cannot stop themselves from making horrible or regrettable decisions. Therefore, this essay challenges the assumption that people have the power to choose how they live their lives and to make the right decisions at all times. Eagleman addresses the readers directly in order to be able to demonstrate that he understands that his readers will find his ideas radical.
“After swimming for what seemed like forever, I heard an ear piercing sound off in the distance. I decided to swim in the direction of what I knew was a gun-shot, knowing that where there is men, there is food.” Rainsford explained. He later went on to tell about how he weakly pulled himself onto a rocky shore, knowing that he had now escaped from the tortuous waters, he went into a deep sleep.
In order to fully understand this argument, one must contemplate the exemplification which was examined earlier. Essentially, by forfeiting one’s life to a cause, attention surrounding the cause itself begins to build. Naturally, the public will wonder what cause would be worth a life. Consequently, like-minded individuals will stumble upon the cause and join the efforts. The momentum that will have resulted from the act have the ability to facilely surpass long-term efforts.
In another instance, when Rainsford was hiding from General Zaroff, he had to convince himself not to regress to those animal-like instincts that he had developed. The text says “Rainsford’s impulse was to hurl himself down like a panther, but he saw the general’s right hand held something metallic—a small automatic pistol.” (231). As you can tell from the text, Rainsford really wanted to jump down from his hiding spot and attack the general, but he couldn’t. If he had done so, he would end up losing the game. Then, near the end of the story, Rainsford is running from the General and his pack and he sees the ocean shore and it’s deep waters below.
It can lead to death and in that case life is much more important than a person’s