Though Dawson appears to have no remorse over what he 's done, we see that he knows what he did was wrong when he says “I never meant to hurt Willy” to Kaffee, Jo, and Sam after he 's been sentenced. Would Dawson and Downey have done what they did to Santiago if they were at home with family? If they had never joined the Marines? Zimbardo 's answer to this would be a definite no. To explain his reasoning, he says “To what extent do we allow ourselves to become imprisoned by docilely accepting the roles others assign us or, indeed, choose to remain prisoners because being passive and dependent frees us from the need to act and be responsible for our actions (117).” Through Zimbardo 's viewpoint, Dawson and Downey were nothing more than ordinary men who were placed in an extreme role and were radically changed to assume that role.
Huck wanted to protect Jim so he told a lie to the slave hunters about a small pox outbreak to keep them from searching near him and it actually worked. In this situation Huck went against society because during this time in the book slavery was still going on. It wasn't likely for a Black man to be protected so Huck was open minded in this situation and did what he thought was right because Jim was a loyal friend to him. He's taught by society to regard Jim but he realizes that that's not how he wants to be and sees Jim as a human like himself and everybody else. Huck realizes that society teaches to treat people poorly because of their skin color.
Consequently, Socrates was afraid that the state would harm his family by depriving them of property or citizenship. His principles obligated him to stay in prison in order for him not to violate his principle of harming others. Socrates was a man of good principles. He was not afraid of was committing himself as a sacrifice to save his family’s rights. He knew that his situation caused a dilemma that needed to be taken into consideration by reasoning what was right.
Not even the threat of death could force Meursault to conform. In The Guest, Daru’s sense of moral individualism is much more apparent in. He tries to maintain his neutrality to the conflict between the French and the Algerian by living an isolated life on a desserted plateau. Daru’s neutrality constitutes to Meursault’s indifference. Even though Daru appears to be avoiding society’s influence
Albert Camus’ The Guest revolves around the notions of moral justification and solitude with the underlying themes of absurdism and nihilism. Camus personifies absurdism through the protagonist, Daru–whether Daru makes the decision to release the prisoner to freedom or delivers the Arab prisoner into prison does not matter, since Daru allows the prisoner to choose, and the prisoner chooses to be imprisoned. There is also a sense of uncertainty of moral justification–how is one justified in one’s choice of action and on what scale is the justification based on, which is essentially the foundation of Daru’s dilemma. With the internal confliction of Daru’s personal beliefs against abiding superior authority, Daru is faced with two moral dilemmas:
In this state there is low reproduction rates so Handmaids are assigned to these exclusive couples in order... ... middle of paper ... ...tion is wrong, however Socrates reasons to Crito why he must comply with injustice given to him. “But, my dear Crito, why should we care so much about public opinion? Reasonable men, of whose opinion it is worth our while to think, will believe that we acted as we really did” (Plato 53). Socrates understands that what he did to receive execution was unjustly represented. However Socrates tries to explain to Crito the need to comply with his sentence for he does not care what society’s opinions are, as long as those who actually know what occurred understand that Socrates did nothing wrong.
Meursault does not view prison as a punishment for killing the Arab; ins... ... middle of paper ... ...rent and apathetic man to a human who has accepted his fate and role in the world. During this momentous transformation, Camus clearly brings his Absurdist philosophy to light. In this way, The Stranger could be seen as a tragedy. A man whom society fails to understand is condemned and is treated like an outcast because of his character. But it can also be viewed as a happy story instead.
Huck with his anti-society attitude, you would presume that he would have no problem in helping Jim. Yet he fights within himself about turning over Jim to the authorities, by this action within Huck shows that he must have feelings that slavery is correct so that the racial bigotry of the time may be seen. This decision for Huck is monumental even though he makes it on the spot. He has in a way decided to turn his back on everything that "home" stands for, this allows us to leave our thought of bigotry behind and begin to see Jim for what he really is a man. 	Huck’s attitude for Jim is racist which is seen when he decides to play a trick on Jim during their voyage.
One thing he did which probably saved Prospero’s life is he warned him when men were coming to kill him. Ariel is the opposite of Caliban. He doesn’t want to be a slave but he knows that Prospero will give him his freedom when it comes so he does the work. Caliban doesn’t want to be a slave but he complains about it and hates Prospero all in one. The first one who wants to be lord of the island is Caliban.
Ellison gives us no final resolution to the novel; Invisible Man is as perplexed as ever as to his identity, but he is, in no way, the same man he was early on. He has changed and will continue to change. Through struggles we all learn; it lies within us to find the positive in the negative. Works Cited http://www.voicesofcivilrights.org/