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.
However, Christie feels as though individuals particularly involved in conflicts, are still restrained of their rights by those in power. If they were given this opportunity, then a sense of conflict would be added and this is exactly what he feels is devastating to a society; the lack of conflict. He explains, “Our industrialized large-scale society is not one with too many internal conflicts. It is one with too little. Conflict might kill, but too little of it might paralyze.” (Christie, 1977.)
Together, these suggest that Wolsey didn’t let anything get in the way of his quest to achieve justice for all, even if it gained him powerful enemies and went against the tradition of the time. Although source three does agree that, in his unconventional way, “he [Wolsey] punished the rich”, it disagrees with sources one and two in relation to the question because it claims
John told Judge Danforth and the other residing judges about his act of adultery with Abigail. They brought in John’s wife, Elizabeth, and she denied that John had committed adultery. Therefore, no one to believed John (Miller 1309-11). John is not punished for committing adultery, but he is hung for supposedly committing witchcraft
So the comments can make others feel down and insecure. This brings us to selfness, which can cause personal fulfillment to be a problem. People go against each other just to themselves but fail to recall the next person. Certain individuals that go this phase break laws and rules just to make it on top. All their worried about is their vision and how they are going to get there.
This development in Charlie's personality is ironic since his ambition in the beginning of the story is to get enough mental prowess to be included in the same community that he distances himself from when he criticizes the average human as being limited and slow. Mr Keyes draws a unfortunate parallel between intelligence and arrogance turning Charlie into a elitist snob without much compassion for the people around him. His mental awakening is constantly portrayed as being at the expense of others. In my opinion this draws on the cliché of the book smart know-it-all. There is no attempt to try to explain why Charlie loses his good natured care for those around him other than that he can expose those who have been insincere to him.
These are lies told in order to avoid causing unintentional harm to another person, such as, lying to a friend by telling them they look good, even if they don't, just so they won't feel bad about themselves. If someone told the truth and didn't give a little "white lie" then they would just sound nasty and disrespectful. She even says that not telling socail lies is "arrogant". I agree with Viorst because lying in this way isn't always a bad thing when someone is just simply asking for your opinion. You can lie to them about something that doesn't mean much to you but your response could mean the world to them.
Haley Coles Theissen SPH 131 17 November 2013 U.S. vs. John Lennon My overall reaction to the movie U.S. vs. John Lennon was that the government was wrong and acted unfairly towards John Lennon and Yoko. Before watching this movie I was not aware of any of the incidents that had happened. I had heard of John Lennon and that he was part of the Beetles but I didn’t even know that he was dead or was murdered. I was very shocked to find out how the government had treated him and the lengths they had went to, to try to get rid of him. It was very interesting to learn about the story of John Lennon and Yoko.
He would do anything to keep his name. However, at the end, he finally realized his happiness was less important than the truth. He realizes that he had made a mistake cheating on his wife. Proctor tries to act like a good man, but “he is not as good as Rebecca, his waivers before commuting himself to a course of action” (Hill, Phillip). Pride is powerful.
In this case, Joe is working unethically, so his actions must be an immoral example for the employees. Also, Joe´s unethical acts will be affect the organization’s performance because Joe is not hiring the best prospective employees; he is hiring the most pessimistic people. Additionally, I think that Joe is using utilitarian-type reasoning. Utilitarian-type reasoning means that it is easy to take the welfare of few individuals over the welfare of another group of individuals. In this way, I think Joe is using utilitarian-type reasoning because he is thinking just in his benefit, but he is not thinking of stakeholders’ benefits.