This negativity is expressed in everything he does. For instance when Meursault is convicted he doesn't try to defend himself. He doesn't believe in living and doesn't want to fight for his life. He clearly doesn't care and would rather be taken away from society to alienate himself once again. Meursault and Holden aren't the greatest with other people.
George warned Lennie not to say anything while he was talking to the boss. It’s for Lennies own good which shows that George cares for him. Lennie doesn’t abide what George has told him and therefore speaks while he is talking to the boss. George behaves viciously because he is starting to get irritated due to Lennie because he creates more problems. He is also angry because he doesn’t have enough money to make the dream become reality, therefore he requires a job, but Lennie minimises the opportunity available because of his child-like
McCandless and Reuss were not comfortable in the world that valued the obtainment of material things and the completion of specific accomplishments. They did not want to be hindered, as they saw it, by the desires of others who thought what they wanted should apply to everyone. There is part of me that understands this and sympathizes with the two men because no one likes to be narrowed into a box of
Nicholas was not suited to his role as Tsar, and would rather spend his time with his family. As a consequence, he was out of touch with his people and could not see that whilst in theory, autocracy would demand the respect he so desired, in practice, it would do the contrary. Furthermore, whilst Nicholas was more suited to his role as a family man, he was better at ordering repression, probably because it required less charisma and was easier to do, especially as he could hide behind the facade of administration and autocracy. Albeit Nicholas had been born for this role as Tsar, he wasn‟t a born leader and his lack of concern for his people began to be regarded not only as indifference for the welfare of his people, but also for his role. “It is awe inspiring, it is frightening, but we cannot do without a Tsar” ran a Russian proverb, “however, soon enough, his people
Cleante’s ideological views, while enlightening, are often ignored by those who are directly in conflict with Tartuffe’s character, thus Cleante must exercise rationality at every chance he gets. Molière’s inclusion of Cleante, along with Dorine, eventually creates a foundation upon which Orgon’s family, as a whole, views Tartuffe as a hypocrite. This foundation is critical to the exposure to Tartuffe’s true nature. Cleante’s firm stance on reason can be attributed to his desire to avoid violence at all costs. Not only does Cleante assume it his duty to avoid conflict, he also attempts to persuade the other characters to view the situation from his neutral standpoint – one of which allows him to judge without bias.
Freedom or Safety Freedom and safety seem to be mutually exclusive. To be safe is often to suffer under a repressive regime that does not allow one to be free. To fight for freedom, and even more rarely achieve it, requires conflict. To choose between freedom and safety is a nonissue, according to Mencken, because men do not want freedom, they simply want safety. As history, literature, and current events show, Mencken’s simplistic observations are not fully applicable in today’s world, because man often sacrifices security to pursue intellectual, personal, and political freedoms.
I mistrust the judgment of every man in a case in which his own wishes are concerned. ~ Daniel Webster. To an extent I agree with this quote, but some arguments I have say otherwise. To a degree a man’s judgment can be trusted if his intentions are altruistic ones, but the pervasive issue still remains in that it is human nature to see flaw in others hopes to make a conclusion in which may or may not be true. The purest judgment lies in those who expect no results and thoroughly analyze the conclusion they wish to understand, disregarding judgments about selfishness due to one who’s own wishes are concerned.
Singer’s second argument is a touchy subject, in which he feels the need “defend” his viewpoint. In the given text, Singer provides several counterexamples to defend his position. The main point of his second argument is that Singer does not believe that the amount of people involved in a situation should affect whether or not a person should take action to prevent something bad from happening. His critics, who may be in disagreement to the pertaining subject, would argue that the number of people involved changes whether or not a person is responsible. Singer admits that there may be a “psychological difference” among the conflicting cases, but he also believes that it provides no excuse to a human’s moral obligation.
I believe that Lennie cannot be held responsible for the decisions he makes because he doesn't understand the problems they cause at all. One prime example of Lennie's inability to make good decisions comes at the beginning of the book. He threatens to leave George alone since he is such a bother to him. On pg. 12 Lennie says, "I could go off in the hills there.
Patrick McMurphy is an ornery, loud, idiosyncratic individual. He believes he should act whichever way he feels like. This turns around to have a negative impact on his life however, because of his rash, exaggerated actions he finds him self being scrutinized. He still sticks to his own ways though, which Bromden points out when he says, “Maybe that’s it he never gave the Combine a chance [..] because a moving target is hard to hit”(92). McMurphy doesn’t let ’the Combine’ of people outside the ward get him down or change who he really is.