If Nolan was acting as a military assistant to a more senior officer, he wouldn’t be critical of its commanders as suggested in Source 3, because it would be in his role to follow orders. Source 1 also disagrees that Nolan was to blame for the disaster of the Charge of the Light Brigade because it says that the Light Brigade opposed his theories on tactics so he could never have suggested it. This shows that it would have been almost impossible for Nolan to make the decision as others were against his ideas. However, Source 3 disagrees as it says that Nolan wasn’t to blame because it says, ill-suited to deliver Raglan’s order for the charge, suggesting that it was not in Nolan’s characteristics to follow orders from anyone else. This means that even if it was his responsibility to deliver the order he would not have done so because, as it also states in Source 3, he is headstrong so he is self-willed, portraying that Nolan is to blame for the disaster of the Charge of the Light Brigade by refusing to follow orders.
Therefor he is only just acting on his theory and doing nothing, whilst source three would argue that maybe he should go back a look at the situation again and look for a different theory as to why the world is the way it is and act on the new theory. Source two also goes against the statement of source one where men cannot bear to see the suffering of others. The man in source two clearly cares for his comfort and wellbeing vs. the comfort and wellbeing for others which goes against what source one had to say. Source two does not care how big of a mess the world is as long as it does affect him. He is doing busy doing nothing to ease
When faced with a hard decision with no time to think, we often make irrational decisions based on certain circumstances. To take the law upon oneself is not an option available to those who have no authority. John Steinbeck’s ‘Of Mice and Men’ readers are confronted with a situation of similarity as George’s malignant action of shooting Lennie at the end of the novel was pressured by the threat of Curley and an apparent weakness for other’s suffering. George’s actions raised debate on how his response can be justified, however, also condemned. In support of George, he saved Lennie from a potential death at the hands of Curley, however in rejecting George’s actions, it was not definite that Curley was going to kill Lennie, but by shotting him,
Holden judges people based on his opinions and therefore preventing him from bonding with the average “phony”. Holden wants to connect with people but can't, even when he has perfectly good opportunities. Often, Holden can’t get to the point of reaching out at all. His indecision takes over at all the key moments. There are scenes in which Holden wants to talk or
He continues to believe that one person can make a difference and those actions will change principle. However, if an individual leads and no one follows, then one must at least refuse to condone the evil and must withhold one’s vote or expedience. Thoreau claims, "If I devote myself to other pursuits and contemplations, I must first see, at least, that I do not pursue them sitting on another man's shoulders" (p. 969, Thoreau). By all means, noncompliance was Thoreau's preferred approach to most social injustice. All together, if one did not follow a leader’s actions for justice and passively accepted the majority vote, that individual should remove themselves from the undemonstrative submissive
The jurors cannot base their certainty on concrete evidence as the play indicates that very few facts are absolute because (quote). Instead, they must make up their minds based on the apparent likelihood of various events and on their own personal beliefs. Rose portrays that when it is difficult to maintain certainty about one’s beliefs, in this case the innocence or guilt of the boy, doubt is a reasonable and intelligent state of mind. This is proven by the 4th Juror and the 11th Juror when they say they “ … now have reasonable doubt”. Each of the jurors has a different degree of certainty about the opinions they hold, but cannot be completely sure, as the 9th Juror points out “He doesn’t say the boy is not guilty.
He simply was not strong enough to say no because he believed that this would show weakness inside of him. Weakness leads to failure, and Okonkwo simply cannot fail. He tries to accuse Obierika in order to cover up for his own feelings. This quote adds to Okonkwo’s character by inducing even more of the idea of his fear for failure and weakness. He does anything possible to cover up his weaknesses and will never give in to them.
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.
The root of Creon’s immoral behavior, towards Antigone, is not an inability to distinguish between what is wrong and what is right, but rather a fear of what would happen if he were to choose the morally right way to function. In the play, Creon says that he is very afraid to stray from the established laws in anyway, until the very day he dies (Sophocles 1495). Creon is a power-hungry leader. He is developing into a tyrant. Creon is compared to “a politician without the capacity to be a statesman, because he cannot resist the temptations of power” (Winnington-Ingram).
This proves that Oedipus is fully unaware and unwilling to listen to what the prophet has to say about the truth. Because then everything Oedipus has gained would be out of sin, and because he does not want to lose his power, he denounces the prophet. In the end, however, his hubris will be his