Viewers are trying to understand Spade’s character and his motivations while Spade is trying to unravel the criminals’ intentions. On the one hand, Sam Spade is in charge of solving the case because he is the detective assigned to the case. On the other hand, instead of arresting the criminals involved, he makes a deal with them. Furthermore, it is important to note that Spade takes money from Gutman and O’ Shaughnessy to provide the impression that he is corrupt so that he may fit in. As a detective, he is still morally obliged to “resolve” the situation as demonstrated by his response to Brigid after they all find out that the falcon is worthless.
To prove this, Socrates describes how “everyone would surely say that if a man takes weapons from a friend when the latter is of sound mind, and the friend demands them back when he is mad, one shouldn’t give back such things, and the man who gave them back would not be just” (331c). Even though the man who gave back the weapons did it to repay his debt, it would be unjust since the weapons could be used to harm other people, leaving the man with the guilt of knowing that any casualties were the consequences of their actions. Additionally, if someone was to follow Cephalus’ definition of justice and be completely honest with his friend who was of an unsound mind, it might result in the friend lashing out. Because the friend is not completely rational at that current moment in time, they would not completely understand the logical truth. As a result, they would become enraged and act violently.
I think he would’ve rejected it immediately, but he knows that while some things are looked down upon, the things that they were doing during his time were just as bad. This man was known for taking everything in, and although he was a skeptic he never passed judgment on others. He knew that although he was firm in his beliefs that others thought, and acted differently. So, if presented with the Mayan games he would understand how that fit into their culture, and overall life style. He says it perfectly himself when he says, I do not share that common error of judging another by myself.
An anti-hero is a main character that does not possess the traditional heroic qualities and is instead admired for what is generally considered a weakness by society. They can also be someone who fights for the side of good but has a tragic flaw, or uses questionable means. On the back cover of Rule of the Bone by Russell Banks, there is a quote describing Chappie as a “young modern anti-hero”. The question that this arises is whether or not he should be considered an anti-hero. While Chappie is a character that can be admired despite his shortcomings, he doesn't fight for or sacrifice himself for any sort of ideal or side.
"Character is doing the right thing when nobody 's looking. There are too many people who think that the only thing that 's right is to get by, and the only thing that 's wrong is to get caught", said JC Watts, an American politician. Yet many people seek opportunities to do what is right only when they think that someone else will view them favorably because of it; others conform to ideals they do not believe just so they can fit in with the group. A true hero is someone who always follows their morals, no matter what. In To Kill A Mockingbird, Atticus is unusual in Maycomb because he works hard to act the same in private as he is when others are watching.
Anyone could say that if Montag had conformed he would have stayed on the side of “good;” however, there is no true “good” side there is uniqueness and being individuality which is considered to be “good” to most people in the society in which people live. Conformity and individuality in this book were hard to see due to the fact that Montag’s society wanted everything to be perfect in a world that was not. One should always be themselves even if society tells them to be something different. Be a unique individual not something, or someone, someone else wants you to
In sealand people are very forgiving of of the sins the people make and they do not care about deformities that some people might have. However the people of waknuk are not as forgiving. Especially Joseph Storm who is david's father, who beats david when he said “I could managed it all right by myself if I’d had another hand” (26). After this statement had been said Joseph had beaten david very badly. On the other hand the people from the fringes are not forgiving of the people from waknuk because they were outcast from there.
The classical traits of a hero are honesty and courage, and so a bias towards independence over obedience can be seen. We have more respect for the rebel than the conformer - our heroes topple oppressors and lead armies against injustice. A hero does not stand by, instead facing the villain outright. The protagonist’s heroism must be obvious, their actions bold and foolhardy. There is no honored title for those who play the system to their advantage - using subterfuge and trickery in the name of self-interest is not noble.
Socrates does not make sound arguments because although his premises are logical, they sometimes have nothing to do with the original argument. In Plato’s Euthyphro, the Euthyphro dilemma argument states whether the Gods love the pious because it is pious or it is pious because the Gods love it. In order to support this distinction, Socrates’ first premise in supporting this conclusion is the example of being carried. Socrates claims that there is a difference between something that is already in the state of being carried because it is carried or if something is carried because it is in the state of being carried. Similarly, there is a difference between something being in the state of being loved because it is loved and something being loved