The novel, “Blood Meridian,” written by Cormac McCarthy, presented acts of ruthless violence that engaged certain characters to act as savages or let their personal values take effect. In some scenes, violent behavior was necessary but other moments were unprovoked. However, there was a scene in particular that offered the opportunity to examine the reasoning behind the violent behavior. The jail scene, where the Judge lectures the Kid about his acts of compassion and failure to continue acting on impulse, embodies the conflict of historical law versus moral law. Judge highlights this conflict by first presenting his definition of historical law and moral law. The Judge conveys the point that the act of participating in moral behavior represents …show more content…
The Judge states, “Moral law is an invention of mankind for the disenfranchisement of the powerful in favor of the weak. Historical law subverts it at every turn. A moral view can never be proven right or wrong by any ultimate test” (McCarthy 261). This quote is significant because it further indicates how the Judge is trying to make evident that moral law is weak. As well as possibly suggesting that something that is not valid should not dictate ones actions over the values of historical law. Two key phrases of this quote is “Moral law is an invention of mankind… in favor of the weak” and “A moral view can never be proven right or wrong”. The term invention refers to a product produced stemmed from imagination. The Judge stating that the idea of morality comes from an individual’s imagination shows how it was a fabricated/thought of decision from civilization to keep down the strongest of men. In preference to cater only the weak as mentioned. In addition, saying that this theory cannot be proven right or wrong loses its credibility to be valued by others since it cannot be verified in the Judge’s eyes. With this being said, this strengthens the argument the Judge is trying to get across because he felt the Kid failed to obey the natural order since he was more in touch with his human nature. The fact …show more content…
As mentioned before the he interprets historical law as an established bylaw that needs to be valued over moral law. His lecture towards the Kid represents the conflict in the novel regarding historical law verses moral law. In the Judge’s eyes, The Kid displaying a conscience and/or occasionally remorse interfered with historic law that resulted in him being in jail for betraying this law. The Judge said, “But you were a witness against yourself. You sat judgment on your own deeds. You put your own allowances before the judgments of history and you broke with the body of which you were pledged a part and poisoned it in all its enterprise… What joins men together… is not the sharing of bread but the sharing of enemies” (McCarthy 319). This quote reinforces the Judge’s viewpoint that displaying morals is unacceptable in the natural world. The moment an individual decides to choose their personal values breaks the code of historical law. The quote mentioning “You put your own allowances before the judgments of history” and “You broke with the body of which you were pledged a part” represents what the Judge believes. Suggested from the text, he believes a person is supposed to commit to the natural world and live without principles. Not committing to laws put in place before man betrayals the natural order. The Kid being placed in jail was
While morality and sympathy can be in a constant battle, ultimately the one that wins is what the person is more obligated to. Bennett presents Heinrich Himmler, Jonathan Edwards and Wilfred Owen in the article to show how sympathy does not always win over morality. Heinrich Himmler is the Nazi who came up with the “Final Solution” to murder mass amounts of people.
Truman Capote’s classic true crime novel, In Cold Blood, examines the definitions of murder and capital punishment and questions whether any form of death or act of aggression is justifiable. The book documents the vicious murders of the Clutter family from the small town of Holcomb, the execution of the two men that killed them, and the antipathy surrounding the community’s response to these men. By painting a candid portrait of the murderers and the reactions of the town, Capote brings light to the irony and hypocrisy of death as an antidote to death. In the context of this novel, the phrase “in cold blood” is shown through these crimes by the lack of empathy and moral qualms involved in both of these killings. With this explanation in mind,
He states that a just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral code, while an unjust law is out of harmony with the moral code. He states
In both “The Scarlet Letter” by Nathaniel Hawthorne and “The Crucible” by Arthur Miller, there is an overarching motif of sin and the effects that sin has on the characters and the prose itself. Throughout both pieces of literature, the effects of sin are a large driving force that both progress and enhance the plot. In order to attain a deeper insight of the role of sin in both pieces of literature, it is necessary for the reader to not only look at the sins of the characters, but also look at the background and context of both prose, the treatment of the characters due to their sins, and the overall character development throughout the story. While the focal point of this essay will be to compare and contrast the role of sin in both prose, it is necessary to first look at the backgrounds and
This quote points out clearly that moral injustice exists when a majority that does not include the well being of minority citizens foregoes laws put in place for equality and restates laws that protect on the
“The notion of free will is indispensable to our choosing, deciding, and judging... This is the case with our apprehension of the ‘moral law’... Before any act I should ask myself: Would I approve if all men do this? Any action that can be universalized can be accepted as ethical” (p247 text). Without free will, people will lose the capacity to abide by “moral
(general 239) Those in authority are corrupt and Mr.Chiu attempts to use logic and reason with them. He is still a law abiding citizen but his frustration causes him to grow impatient with those in charge. “ Now you can admit you are guilty,” the chief said[...] “We won’t punish you severely provided you write a self-criticism[...] Mr. Chiu cried.
Moral Ambiguity and History within The Assault Harry Mulisch’s The Assault is a self-proclaimed “story of an incident” (3) wherein “the rest [of the events are] a postscript” (55). The incident in question is the murder of Anton Steenwijk’s parents, and the postscript refers to the future, where Anton uncovers details relating to the incident. Despite Mulisch’s definitive distinction between events, however, the incident itself is convoluted and its details shift over the span of the work. Through the development of major and supporting characters, Mulisch brings forth a diverse range of perspectives and reconstructs the history of the incident, thereby exploring the motif of moral ambiguity within The Assault.
The thrilling novel “The Road” by Cormac McCarthy is a story about a post apocalyptic world following the lives of a man and a boy as they head south to escape the cold winter that is headed their way. Along with the cold of winter approaching they also have to deal with the new dangers of the land while traveling such as cannibals, robbers, and many more dangers. This is a tale of a unnamed man and a boy who must not only learn how to survive but find a inner “fire”, establish a code of ethic, and continue in finding reasons to live in this “new world”. With McCarthy’s unique approach to the characters of the book having no names or the cause of destruction of the world unknown it helps the reader feel the confusion and whats really important
Although Truman Capote attempts to illustrate the humanity in the murderers, Mr. Capote’s primary goal is to separate the two murderers’ characters; therefore, he claims, not all murders are equally as guilty. Mr. Capote humanizes the murderers, creating a sympathetic tone towards the killers. When the crime of murdering the Clutter family was committed, it did not just end the lives of the family, rather, Capote says that, “...four shotgun blasts that, all told, ended six human lives” (Capote 5). Through the use of a paradox, Capote demonstrates how the murderers are not shown as monsters, but rather humans.
The juror’s emotions affected their belief by putting the boy onto the chair. Juror number 3 was convinced that the teenage boy was guilty. This was due to his past experiences within his family; the rage that he had towards his past created a very one-sided belief. Therefore, juror number 3 let his emotions choose the side he would be on. His emotions gathered up anger, frustration and family rage leading him to ignore the rest of the information provided.
He describes the objection as, “all men desire the apparent good, but have no control over the appearance, but the end appears to each man in a form answering to his character” (1114b). This view argues that all people pursue that which seems good, but some people cannot see the true good, which is out of their control. The immediate implication of this objection, if it is indeed true, suggests that “no one is responsible for his own evildoing” (1114b).
“Do good and avoid evil” is a result of the differing educational, religious and cultural influences on man in the various times and places of his historical development. Thomas Aquinas contended that general principles of the natural law cannot be applied to all men in the same way on the great variety of human affairs, thus arises the diversity of positive laws among various people. Human laws deal with changing and contingent matters and often with singulars, do not have the certitude that belongs to the speculative sciences. Each has its own realm of operation and is sufficient that each have the certitude proper to its own realm. [ Ibid. ]
The point is that moral approvals and disapprovals done by our moral sense are specific in nature and only operate when there is an action that can be appropriately judged of by our moral sense. Reasoning and information can change the evaluation of the moral sense, but no amount of reasoning can or does precede the moral sense in regard to its approval of what is for the public good. The moral sense approves of the good for others. This concern for others by the moral sense is what is natural to humankind, Hutcheson contended. Reason gives content to the moral sense, informing it of what is good for others and the public good
(Ethics 938). It is not enough to state that one is virtuous, nor is it enough for someone to be born virtuous and end there. Rather, it is the continuous pursuit, the juxtaposition of virtuous activity and of that which isn’t, that allows an individual to flourish in an Aristotelian society. We can deduce, then, that “…human