Socrates is shocked that Euthyphro would do such a thing, and remarks that Euthyphro must be “an extraordinary man, and have great strides in wisdom” to make such a charge against his father. Socrates also suggests that Euthyphro’s father must have killed a relative for Euthyphro to even think of charging him (para. 18-32). Euthyphro agrees with Socrates flattery, but, in contrary to Socrates’s assumption, the murdered man was not a relative. Euthyphro remarks that it does not matter who was murdered, only if the murdered man has been “justly slain.” He believes that his father has committed an act which “pollutes” his family, and the only way he can “cleanse” his family is bringing his father to court (para.
In 12 Angry Men this theory can almost be considered false to the jurors involved in this murder case. But one man can be credited with sticking to the innocent until proven guilty theory that most likely saved a man’s life. This juror must show 11 other jurors that he can prove with enough valid evidence that this boy is be wrongfully accused of killing his father. Reginald Rose shows us how that one mans integrity can prove to make a big difference in a kid’s life. Juror #8 can be credited with saving someone’s life.
The hermit hut sub plot is a great way to define good and evil. The hermit was said to have killed his wife and son, many people read what he did and said he was a murderer. When Ellie, Fi etc. found the notes in the hermits hut they realised that the hermit was not actually a murderer but he was a hero. He killed his wife and son to save them from having a horrible death from beings severely burnt.
For example, it was the number of people Macbeth had killed that led to the lord’s suspicions of him. If he had been more discreet about his murders, and less eager to eliminate all competition through bloodshed, he may have, ironically, been able to maintain his kingdom. Another side to that is his treatment of his subordinates. Had he not been so callous and cruel to the people he presided over— calling his servant a “cream-faced loon” with a “goose look” (V.ii.11-12) even as he brought him vital news— he may have been guarded in his final hours, by faithful subjects and friends. Second, Macbeth, as superstitious as he was, put much faith in the witch’s prophecies, even from an early stage.
Second, there was a verbal agreement between Hrafnkel and Einar which made both of them responsible for their actions and justified the act. Third, Hrafnkel even compensation for Einar’s death, something he’d never done previously. Lastly, Einar’s father was the one who made him leave the house and look for a job, and allowed him to work under a man like Hrafnkel. Hrafnkel may still be guilty in a regard that he did kill Einar due to his solemn oath, which cannot be changed. However, it was not only Hrafnkel’s fault.
He went too far. He also doesn’t know that his revenge will also hurt him. He won’t go to heaven because he killed someone. This story is also saying something that is true. Revenge is sweeter when the person least expects it.
Now it’s ironic how they were great friends and companions towards each other, however Macbeth is the one who ultimately kills Banquo without even laying a finger on him. Macbeth’s guilt from Duncan’s murder carried on in Macbeth’s life, as he was too scared to fight off this darkness. Now Macbeth was faced with a decision whether or not to murder Banquo to keep his royal prophecies true. With the help of his gang, the decision was clear enough for him not to pass. Instead of Macbeth directly killing Banquo, Macbeth hired his gang members to act out this murder.
In Cold Blood, Perry Smith is presented to the reader as a heartless and savage murderer, but during his confession, he says, “I didn’t want to harm the man. I thought he was a very nice gentleman. Soft-spoken. I thought so right up to the moment that I cut his throat” (302), which makes the readers realize that it is not his savage nature that drives him to murder; it is Smith’s mental condition that does not allow him to feel that his actions are wrong. In Capote, Perry is seen as a soft-spoken gentleman the whole movie.
This quote shows that after a while Brutus was glad to kill Caesar even though he was Caesar’s best friend. People at first was also glad to see Caesar die but they didn't get the truth and all the details to the stabbing. Now a person that could go under the same kind of situation is Barack Obama. The reasoning for
There are some men who think of themselves in grandiose terms and are just upset that the world have failed them. Mass killers are so caught up in themselves that they think the choices they make to kill others are the thing to do. They seek their own fame through violence, and also revenge on those people who did not give them any attention they thought they deserved. In Jack Levin and James Alan Fox’s article, “Extreme Killing: Understanding Serial and Mass Murder,” Fox says, “It's very important to them that the world doesn't view them as some nut that killed for no reason. In their minds, they are good guys” (pg 10).