Thursday, February 26, 2009

"Are you a man, or are you a mouse?

It is easy, when sitting in the comfort of your cushy armchair or in a beautifully maintained classroom, to proclaim that you would do the "right thing" if faced with two morally difficult choices. Sadly, the "right thing" is more often than not the least practical option to take. Unconvinced?

Paint a picture in your mind, for a moment. You are no older than 40. You are sitting in jail, convicted of a death-penalty felony (pick a card, any card.), and are scheduled to be executed tomorrow. This is a twisted society- peace officers, government officials, and people of that nature are allowed to do as they will. A particularly twisted judge offers you a decision: You can kill an innocent on the street and get out of jail with a clean record- free to partake in the sweet freedom of life again, or you can refuse... upon penalty of your death and the death of every member of your immediate family.

What would you do? This is only a hypothetical situation, but pretend for a moment that it is true.
Would you sacrifice one innocent to protect those who are close to you, or would you sacrifice yourself and your entire family for one innocent? So I ask again: What would you do?

Indeed, in Maus, one must sympathize with the mouse who gives away Vladek's location to the Nazi's. He did it perhaps to protect himself, or his family. A part of this is not because the mouse was of low morals, or was a crook only looking to make a quick buck. It is because we, as animals, have an instinct of self-preservation- of survival. We prioritize survival in social circles that increase in size. There is oneself, then there is one's family, then there is one's close relations, and et-cetera.

Now, I am not trying to convince you that moral failings are totally acceptable; at this point in our evolution, morals and ethics have become so ingrained in our mental makeup that they can compete with our natural instinct of survival.

I just want you to keep in mind that when judging people based on their actions, consider that people think and act differently under stressing conditions than they would at peace. Things in the world are not definite black and white. They are various, multitudinous shades of grey. We are only human, and to err is human. In times of war, such as Maus, we err quite often.

Things are all relative- relative to place, time, situation, emotions, other things (which, too, are relative).

* * *

". . . Grant me the Serenity
to accept the things that I cannot change;
Courage to change the things I can;
...and Wisdom to know the difference."

Indeed, there are things that we must do quite often that we detest, yet there are no other choices. This we must understand.

~ ~ ~
With that final parting note, I bid you so long, and good night.

~Kevin Ji

P.S.: The movie Valkyrie is an interesting twist. Klaus von Stauffenberg, a Colonel in the German military, plans to kill Hitler to "do the right thing" and save Germany from destruction.

13 comments:

  1. You have a really good point that everything is relative, and that we shouldn't be judgmental of others, because they were most likely in a different situation than us. Also, nice title, it really fit in with the piece.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I loved the way that this piece was written. Your word choice, use of the rhetorical questions, and just overall flow of your argument draws one in. One can't help but question her/his actions and her/his judgments.

    I agree with Christophe that you do bring up a very good point about morality being relative. But I also believe that we will never be able to not judge someone. As humans, we are quick to judge and almost always judge someone before we know them. But, while we may not be able to not judge people, we can learn to be willing to try to empathize with them.

    ReplyDelete
  3. There are many good aspects to this piece. The first is your use of rhetorical questions, vocabulary, and the overall structure. In general, it is a piece I would read simply for its syntax. However, another thing you did very well here was your analysis of the human mind (or, in the case of Maus, I guess it's more like the mouse mind). You make a very good point: that people act differently under different circumstances, that when people feel scared or powerless they tend to make decisions that will protect themselves and the ones close to them, rather than thinking of strangers. I agree that human actions are not spurred by the fact that they are either fundamentally bad or good, but I also agree with Priyanka in that we as humans will never be able to hold back our instinctual judgment of others. Maybe after the fact we could step into the other person's shoes, so to speak, but in the moment we do see in black and white.

    -Sarah

    ReplyDelete
  4. I love the way you bring the focus to morality and human nature. I especially liked the way you slyly incorporated the importance of Spiegelman's analogy (humans as animals), which brought out the heart of the graphic novel. Your piece was a little stressful to read, but in a good way. You really got to the point.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It is one of the most intriguing questions that a lot of people have to ask themselves everyday. While we were looking at it in class, I thought of two immediate examples of different moral choices that are hard to make. The first one is the book that we read Freshman year, The Sunflower, where the Jewish man was asked to forgive the dying German soldier, and the other is this Twilight Zone episode that my parents had told me about. A man goes door to door giving the choice to the residents that they can either push a button and someone that they don't know dies, and they will receive a million dollars or they don't push the button and will receive nothing. After a while the man decides to push the button, and as the stranger is leaving the house he gives him the million and says something along the lines as "don't worry, I'm sure that the next person I ask won't know you," turning the tides and now putting the man in the position where his life lies in the hands of another.

    I think that this is so good because it addresses that all important question of what is the value of life, which will probably never end because of human nature, and as long as there are wars going on.

    ReplyDelete
  6. when this was read aloud to the class I was really impressed, and rather astounded at the profound concept you used to get across your point. You raise a good question concerning the fight or flight instinct that all human-beings carry. buen trabajo chico

    ReplyDelete
  7. This was a great op-ed. At all points in your paper, you keep the reader intrigued. I attempted to do a similar thing with the beginning of my paper and put a situation forth for the reader to imagine, but mine didn't work as well as yours. Your beginning is very strong and interesting to read. I actually stopped and thought to myself about the situation of protecting my family vs. killing an innocent. Your point about how our instincts of survival competing with our ethical code is very valid and we can see it happening all the time, even in our every day lives. this is a great response!

    ReplyDelete
  8. This was a really good Op-Ed because it helped show us the other side of a story. We often attach labels to actions with little thought to what might be driving them. We can easily say "It was wrong" but that rarely gives the full tale hidden beneath the justice it is due.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I really liked this op-ed because it uses not only your own opinions, but others as well. Your use of quotes helped this piece vastly, and I think that it tied your thoughts together nicely.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I can't find anything wrong with your piece, Kevin. It's so good it's hard to believe you wrote it. Your begining situation is such a good introduction to your piece. You not only incorporated your opinon but also the opinion's of others. The quote you incorporated was perfect for your piece. I am glad you discussed Maus because nearly everyone else (at least the one's I have read) have written about Afghanistan and I like the variation. I look forward to seeing the revision of this piece and pieces to come!

    ReplyDelete
  11. I really enjoyed reading your op-ed. It kept me intrigued at all times and raised some very controversial questions about morals and human nature. You did a wonderful job choosing an example for your introduction piece. Great job.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I thought that this was a great Op-Ed. It clearly illustrated your point and you used questions throughout the piece that kept the reader interested. I also thought that this was a very interesting point to explore and that in the end you tied it together very well.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Kevin this is straight up money and much respect for such and original concept. Your perspective on the issue was truly enlightening and totally BAMF. It's a beautiful piece of art.

    ReplyDelete