The historical notes are really pushing the audience to think relative to the society they are examining. It is an old Greek philosophical method known as moral relativism. We live in a society that is founded on natural law which is considered to be god given or unalienable as the declaration states. Societal truths are based on the laws that govern the culture of society and decide what is right and wrong. There is a huge difference between natural law and code law. The Gileadean society had a breakdown in government protecting the law. The reason Gilead existed was due to a lack of government protecting the laws set forth by the people. The trouble is deciding what is right or wrong while considering the change in cultural practices or moral compasses. All moral ideas are subjective so generally whichever society “wins” gets to pick a universal truth. The society that gets to write the history books and lectures like Dr. Pieixoto get to anoint a truth. The nice thing is that they at least know that they need to be careful with this power. Why should the winner be careful in judging the past? Obviously when we judge a past society we can come to some quick truths. Who would question that Hitler was evil and killed people? Who questions that genocide is bad? There are still people that question those facts. So …show more content…
It attacks the ideas of basic beliefs that are the basis of United States government. It questions the foundation or fundamentals of our country. Look up Ben Franklin’s view on the principles of religion, these are the ideals that all religions share. America was founded on the same principles as every major religion in the world. That there is a God/divine authority that upholds a moral code just like Islam or Judaism. It is rooted in human nature which throughout time will never change. While culture changes relative to time human nature will never