Comments Week 3

Responses:
No, actually he says some thing along the lines of, "War is like a new boss that demands three times the work and doesn't bother to thank you for your efforts."

I think that it is similar to America, but we definitely are not as much nationalistic as Nazi Germany. 

Comments:

To Nate Carter
I like how you used Liesel and Hans as two of the main points of morality. It is true that what they do throughout the book can be viewed as immoral, but I like how you say they are justified. I think you could have mentioned the Nazis a little more, as they are pretty much the most immoral thing in the book. For the most part, you raised good points and were able to support them with evidence from the book. Good post!
To Cody Davey
Right at the beginning I liked the quote from Winston Churchill. It grabbed my attention and was very relevant considering he was a very influential figure at the time. I really liked how you raised the point that people twist their morals to fit their lifestyles. One thing I disagree with is that you said the people only felt justified in killing during combat, but what about the mass murder of Jews? I think you could have mentioned that a little more to clarify. 
To Mariah McKenna
I really liked the points you raised with the three major characters, especially what you said about Hans. He was very compassionate and selfless throughout the book. You also had good supporting evidence from the book. One thing you could have improved was your conclusion.
To Daniel Justice
I liked the questions that you raised at the beginning, you could easily relate them to things that occurred in the novel. I also like what you said about being willing to die for your country. I think that a lot of people say they would die for their country, but sometimes I wonder if they really would when put in the situation. I like to think that I would, but if the situation presented itself I think I might not have the courage. You raised good points and provided evidence to support it. Good post
To Chris Cummings
I thought this post was excellent Chris. You never got sidetracked and you kept to the form of a persuasive essay. You had a good introduction and a strong conclusion. Also you provided good quotes and were able to provide support for each example. I also like how you chose a book that was very different from the social norm just like Antigone. Other than a few grammatical errors, I thought this post was great. Good job Chris

Comments Week 2

Responses:

No, I think usually when someone doesn't take pride in their actions it is because they were not acting in accordance with their moral compass. I think you should take pride in any decision you make that is based on your moral compass.

Yes Chris, I think we do take for granted the importance of our freedom to express ourselves. This is why two of my compass points are freedom and America, two things that I really cherish. 

That's true although there are many things in modern America that I disagree with, I love what this country stands for and the beliefs it was founded on.

I didn't answer the question mainly because I feel its one of those morality questions that really makes the reader think. In that situation I would like to think that I would choose the selfless option but until I'm actually in the situation I'm not really sure what I would do 

Comments:
To Tucker Wheaton
I like how you tied religion into this and actually used the Bible as a source. In this subject, it is a very good source that points out morality and even shows that even during the writing of the Old and New Testaments, morals have remained the guidelines by which people live. One thing you could write about is how the morals of modern society have changed in some ways.
To Cody Davey
I liked about what you said about the importance of loyalty. I agree that it is a very desirable trait, especially in friendships. I agree with Grant that you maybe should have expanded on that trait. I like how passionately you described baseball, it reminds me of my love for music and the dedication it takes to become skillful in your hobby. Good post
To Nate Fuller
I was able to relate with you when you talked about your passion for music, because we both really share that same passion. You talked about not being able to get into a good college because you believe you aren’t a skilled enough musician. This really sparked my interest because sometimes I feel the exact same way. Then I really start to think about the amount of progress I’ve made in a short time and realize I’m just being hard on myself. I think this may be the case for you because I think you are a talented musician. Anyway, this was a very good post and I could relate to it.

The Book Thief: Death’s Interest in Contradiction

Markus Susak, author of The Book Thief constantly played with light and dark imagery told from the perspective of Death himself. The supernatural narrator witnesses many contradictions. A Jew escapes the Nazi’s powerful clutches carrying only a copy of Mien Kampf, Hitler’s autobiography. A father and son look nearly identical, yet have political views that are exact opposites. Of all the juxtapositions in the novel, none were as black and white as the theme of morality. Although in the book this topic can be seen in many different examples, it is most prominent between good and evil, and right and wrong.

            In all great stories, there must be conflict. There must be some point at which one side must face opposition and struggle to overcome. This is what makes an interesting plot. In the case of The Book Thief, and often in many other novels, this conflict is between good and evil. The evil in this was possibly the most hateful force in recorded history, the Nazi Party. Under Hitler’s rule, the German people were brainwashed with fear and nationalism. This resulted in the Holocaust, one of the most evil acts in human history. So how did this happen?

            Death narrates the common practices of German culture at the time and shows in detail how the majority of the people convinced themselves to support such evil. One thing that led people to Nazism was fear. Propaganda created the widespread fear that the Jew was trying to take money, jobs, and ultimately rule Germany. This created a boogeyman that the people would soon try to eliminate. There was also the fear of consequences for non-conformity. Hans Hubermann is ostracized from the community for painting over hateful graffiti on the door of a Jewish shop. The vandalism reappears in less than a day, showing the omnipresent hatred in Germany. Even though some people, like the Hubermann family believed the Nazis were wrong, they were powerless to stop them. Another thing that united the people together was German nationalism. From a young age, children were taught to be proud of being German and that all other races were inferior. This extreme pride and racism made it the moral standard for the German people to defend their race at all costs. When something was announced a threat to the country, it was their moral duty to eliminate it.

            Sometimes morality may not be simply black and white, but Death definitely believes that there are boundaries. He knows the Germans have stepped over the line by systematically murdering millions of people. He does not enjoy taking souls, and describes the process of taking life with the use of only dark imagery. He is interested in contradictions, which is why he takes such an interest in the Hubermann family. They are a small beacon of hope in a seemingly hopeless nation.

Moral Compass: Defining Individuality

            You find yourself in a situation that presents only two options. The first option will greatly benefit you at the expense of a stranger’s happiness. The second option will benefit the stranger, but will provide you with no physical reward. This opportunity will never present itself again. Which would you choose?

Nearly every time that you are presented with two or more options, a decision must be made. In every conscious decision an individual processes the outcomes and then acts accordingly. Each person is different in their thinking, yet the process by which everyone ultimately comes to a decision under these circumstances is very similar. First, the individual must encounter a situation that provides two or more options. This occurs countless times on a daily basis, though the gravity of each situation certainly varies. Then, the outcomes of each known option are weighed and compared with one another. After this is done, an intentional choice is made depending on what outcome the individual prefers.

Try to envision being placed in the situation described above. Would you choose to benefit yourself or a total stranger? The answer will vary from person to person, simply because everyone has different guiding factors that influence their decision making. Like a moral compass, these deciding factors are what point us in a direction when we are given choices. These points can be anything; family, survival, music, religion, happiness, or anything else. The list is limitless. Some may wish to benefit themselves above others, while some may focus on being selfless toward everyone, or perhaps only a select few. If everyone follows their own true North, they will all travel along different paths. This is individuality.

The influencing factors in my life are the guidelines for each decision I have made or will ever make in my entire life. These so-called “points” to my moral compass are ultimately everything that makes me the person I am. When I am reduced to my simplest form, in its most basic entirety, I am motivated by only a few things. In no particular order, these are love, happiness, values, education, music, survival, freedom, family, friendship, and America.

As an individual, my moral compass differs from yours. This does not make you wrong. It does not make me right. I personally believe that you should take pride in what makes you unique and celebrate individuality. So I implore you to follow the advice of a very clichéd idiom. “March to the beat of your own drum.”

Shades of Grey: The Inner Search for Morality

            What actions can be defined as “moral?” This is not an easy question to answer. Perhaps an even more difficult question; “What actions are “immoral?” The answer to this question may vary depending on each individual that provides an answer. The reason for this is not complex. Like many other thought provoking questions such as “How did we get here?” or “What is our purpose?” we cannot yield an answer. We simply do not know the full truth. We do not know what is right and what is wrong. All that we have based our beliefs on is due to what has been passed on through generations, what has been deemed “right” by society, and what we have been told. The reason these morals differ amongst each person can only be explained by the varying environments that helped the individuals craft their moral compasses.

Perhaps the greatest of all human faults is its inability to truly see things from another perspective. The majority of us are unable or unwilling to understand why another individual or culture does things the way they do. Not only do we not understand these practices, but we believe it is our moral duty to change them. Examples of this can be seen again and again throughout history. Some have had negative results like the crusades or the spread of western culture into Africa, while some, like the abolition of slavery have had more positive outcomes. Whether positive or negative, the truth remains that we, as humans, try to infect the rest of society with our own personal ethics.

Once an individual has established their morals, it is nearly impossible to alter them. Anyone who has tried to do this will attest to the stubbornness they faced. Someone who has never smoked a cigarette may find it morally wrong to do so. When they encounter a seasoned smoker, they may look down on them or try to influence their thinking. They may say something along the lines of, “How could you do that to yourself?” Their tone will reflect the disgust they feel towards the smoker. The man with the cigarette may respond, “It helps me relieve stress. I am aware of the negative effects it may cause to me, but I personally believe the positives outweigh the negatives.” The non-smoker, set in his way, will most likely be disgusted by this response and find moral objection to it. According to the article “The Moral Instinct” by Steve Pinker, “people tend to align their moralization with their own lifestyles.” Even without any good reason to justify their thinking, they will be permanently fixed to their original beliefs. Pinker says, “People don’t generally engage in moral reasoning, but moral rationalization: they begin with a conclusion, coughed up by an unconscious emotion, and then work backward to a plausible justification.”

Everyone will have their own set of morals, but these are not the only moral. Ethics are what you truly believe without any outside influence. When you find what is right, and know it with an unfaltering certainty, then you will have found morality.