The Moral Logic Of Survivor Guilt Analysis

“...We often take responsibility in a way that goes beyond what we can reasonably be held responsible for”(Sherman 154), says Nancy Sherman in “The Moral Logic of Survivor Guilt.” Sherman believes that people blame themselves too much when something goes wrong in a dangerous situation; and even when something happens that is out of their control, they cannot forgive themselves for the outcome of the event. Should people in life-or-death situations be held accountable for their actions? Someone might argue that people should take responsibility for what they do, even in survival mode. However, in life-or-death situations, people should not accuse other, and make them feel remorse for their actions, because, in survival mode, a person wants to save themselves before anyone else. To start, Nancy Sherman says that people take too much responsibility for what happens under their watch even though they could not have kept it from happening. She says, “One feels guilty despite the fact that he knows he has done nothing wrong”(Sherman 154). Sherman is saying that people cannot forgive themselves for anything that happens in life-or-death situations, even if it wasn't their fault. Nevertheless, they should not feel guilty,

“‘I’m getting out of here,’ I yelled to K. He was maybe ten yards down the beach, squatting with his back to me, and looking at something. I was sure I had yelled loud enough, but my voice did not seem to reach him” (Murakami 137). In this example, the boy, who was only ten years old, tried to save his friend, but he failed to save him. His friend’s death was not his fault, because he did not have the ability to save him. The boy in the story also says, “I had to run away” (Murakami 137). Any child would run away when frightened. Blaming a person for a bad result, especially when that person tried to help, is