Moral scavengers are less likely to have people complain about them, which could endanger their way of life. While they are digging through dumpsters for useable items, they come across quite a bit of sensitive information such as bank statements and prescription bottles (Eighner 362). A moral person will simply leave those sensitive items where they are, but an immoral person might take that those items and somehow use them against the owner for monetary gain. Ultimately, if dumpster divers used that information they could be fined or go to jail, which would put them in a much worse situation than they were already in. Another example of how a dumpster diver must be moral is by resisting the temptation to create a better selection of food by calling in false orders to fast food restaurants.
When you lie about something, you put a lot of thought into it and decide yourself whether the truth or a lie is better for you. When you bullshit, you know barely enough to just get by without having to put any effort into what you are supposed to have done. The bullshitter is lazy, and laziness is not a trait that we should
There are a plethora of problems with the system that the city refuses to ix. One of the main problems with the subway is the dirt and grime that are overrunning the carts. Everywhere you look there are piles of garbage lying around on the platforms. There is an inadequate amount of trash cans on the platforms. Due to this problem, people resort to throwing their used napkins, cans, and wrappers on the floor.
I feel that’s an inequality, because when people do not want to look after there area or things start going down hill instead of helping prevent it the problems get worse and people move away. The police and other authorities are helping to prevent it which is good but the people in the community need to see what’s happening and help. All these things add up and make a lot of little inequalities along City Road. In conclusion. I would say there are a number of inequalities that shape City Road, How it works and how the people work.
The people that Shelton killed are considered combatants because they support they governmental system and work with it. Based on Just War Theory, the proportionality of killing these people is that their deaths are outweighed by the justice that will bring to the judicial system. Shelton believes the system to be corrupt, focusing instead on conviction rates rather than making sure the right person is placed behind bars. By killing these people Shelton can put a new mindset into the “system” because those affected by the killings will want the right man punished rather since they now know how it feels to be wronged. All the killings made by Shelton were to people who were directly showed how flawed the system was.
1. What is the context of this passage? Montag is in a vulnerable state and is easily influenced. He is also inconclusive about how he feels about his society’s values. However his superior Captain Beatty is trying to convince and advise Montag that he shouldn’t be interested in the books and he shouldn’t read them.
‘Who hurt George?’ he demanded” (Steinbeck 73). Lennie’s childish anger in this scene proves how he is able to put others in danger without having a malicious reason to. Another scene was when Lennie panicked and accidentally broke Curley’s wife’s neck, due to his strength. Many situations like these can happen again, resulting in Lennie murdering more lives. George only obliterated this danger by killing Lennie.
In today’s society there are many people who have forgotten about the chivalry codes and dishonor the values we had by doing harm onto others, that’s why for the first code to be brought back should be “Destroy evil in all of it’s monstrous forms”. Evil can be in many forms of actions that people do throughout society. For example, Scams, Abducting people for ransom, setting people’s houses on fire, the list can go on. This can be stopped by giving harsher punishments to those who deserve it. You may say a harsher punishment won’t do any good, but allowing them to be in prison for a longer period of
Despite the unhealthy, some addicts will careless and continue to do what they want; comparably, some people still go to McDonald’s. That is why, “forbidding young people things they like or think they might enjoy only makes them want those thing all the more” (884). Vidal’s statement is exact to all ages. Besides, “every man, however, has the power (and should have the legal right) to kill himself if he chooses” (884). Vidal mocks the power of choice; it can execute a person in a simple and ordinary way.
For instance, police officers would begin cracking down on smaller crimes such as kicking vendors out of unissued areas in the hopes that it would somehow eliminate drug sales or theft. Because of this theory, many people were getting in trouble by the law for things they previously did without thinking twice. I think that in short term, this theory can truly be beneficial because of its hands on action. However, in the long run, crime will happen no matter what because people will rebel due to the strictness of these officers. This theory has gotten much support, but because of its intensity it has also received some criticism.