1) How do you feel about the men's treatment of Nolan and of their strict adherence to the policy of never letting Nolan hear of the United States? What would you have done had you been aboard a ship with Nolan? Why?
2) Is there ever a time when breaking a rule is the right thing to do? Why or why not? Explain.
4 comments:
1. I feel shocked and surprised in a bad way about how they treated Nolan. The way they treated Nolan was wrong. I feel that way because even though he is sent to this punishment, you should not suddenly become very quiet or shun him just because he is just about to hear something about the United States. I feel that they should let him hear some things about the United States because he loves his country and everyone knows that but some people are just very mean and think that Nolan deserves to be punished like that. It would not be nice to let a person suffer from being shunned about the United States. I feel that they follow the rules too much. People should use their common sense every once in awhile. Besides, he was a young person, some people lose their tempers very easily. Also, when he was going to say sorry, he wasn't given a chance to say sorry. If I were on board the ship he was on, i would give him lots of aid and presents and visit him very often and try to be friends with him. I would do that because I don't think Nolan deserved to be punished like that. He was still young and yes he was convinced to rebel but he decided to not rebel and to say sorry but he was not let a chance to speak which is really weird.
2. I believe most of the time, it is the right choice to break a rule and take the road of common sense. I say this because some rules prevent you from doing something right or helping someone. For example, there was a news report about a few patrol guards watching women beat up another girl and steal her things. They did not get involved or stop the situation because their rule or policy was " to not get involved but to just report situations." That is just dumb. It is common sense to stop a human from beating up another human but they had to follow the rules instead which is really stupid. If they broke the rule, it would have saved someone and would have a good excuse of why they had to break that one small rule. That is a perfect situation for when you have to break a rule for "Common Sense".
I think how they treated Nolan was cruel, even if they were just following orders. Sometimes I wonder how their patriotism could overlook the sufferings of a man who made a mistake in his youth. In fact, I was quite please when Ingham stated that Nolan could ‘cut Texas out of his atlas,’ because it meant that someone was finally standing up for what they thought was right. If I had been aboard a ship with Nolan, I would probably secretly pass along messages about the United States to Nolan. Maybe it’s because I’m not in the military, maybe it’s because I am only half American, or maybe it’s because I have never found myself in that position, but I’m not one to just stand by and watch one suffer, especially for words spoken in the midst of uncontrolled rage.
There always comes a time when breaking a rule is the right thing to do. It all depends on the situation. In Nolan’s case, he had repented for almost half a decade. He had agonized over his words again and again. At times he had probably looked like a dead man walking. Living without really living. And all because of two measly sentences spoken in youth and rage. It is, by all means, cruel and unfair. With conditions like this, how can one be expected to follow rules? One word about the United States could have given him a little consolation. Consolation he deserved a thousand times over.
In general, however, it can’t really be put into words. It’s that intuitive sense that tells you what is right and what is wrong. Some people call it sympathy. Some call it weakness. But I call it justice. It’s that moment where all you can think is ‘this is wrong,’ and ‘I need to make it right.’
1) I think that the men's treatment of Nolan and their strict adherence to the policy of never letting Nolan hear of the United States is not fair. Some of the crew might be afraid of breaking the rule even if they really like Nolan. They would not want to risk getting in trouble just for one man. Nolan just considered an offer of treason, but Aaron Burr was the one behind every thing. Aaron was not guilty, but Nolan was. How could that be? Nolan should be the one who was not guilty. Nolan is treaty badly and is miserable. The least that the crew could do is tell Nolan of the United States.
If I were on the ship with Nolan I would have told Nolan what he wanted to hear because of two reasons. First I would have sympathy for him because he is loyal to the U.S. but he can never hear of it. Second even if I broke the rule how would the government find out? We would be at sea and for a long time.
2) There are some times when breaking a rule is the right thing to do, because the rule does not consider some factors. For example if someone is dying and they are in a field that is labeled "private property do not Trespass" you will have to go in even though it is against the law. Another example is in Robin Hood. He stole money from the rich but he gave it to people who actually needed it. He broke the rule, but it was the right thing to do.
1. I feel that the men were prey to the shark of conformity. In the beginning, they probably felt that they simply should carry out orders; regardless of how they felt and that the consequences of not were too risky. Some may have felt that Nolan, yes, did receive fair punishment. However, with time, this governmental presence and idea that the sentence was fair started to fade away. The only thing that held the men’s tongues was conformity; if hundreds of others had refused to talk to Nolan about America, why should his current captors either? In the movie, many times the men express a sorrow for Nolan’s pains, but when the conversations with Nolan reach topics about America, they sit silently, looking at another, hoping the other would be courageous enough to test the waters of Nolan’s orders. But no one can speak, in fear that he would be the one condemned first, so no one ever speaks a word to Nolan. Frankly, they just were trying to do the right thing without causing any trouble.
If I were aboard a ship with Nolan, I admit I would be guilty of the same crime of continuing his sentence. No person wants to sacrifice his honor, his freedom, or anything for a condemned man, regardless of the severity of the punishment. It is analogous to a prison guard to a murderer. Even if the prisoner was wrongly accused, the guard isn’t going to lose his head over saving the man. I just would not be able to break my code of honor to tell a person how many states there are in the US. Selfish as it may seem, my life means a lot more than someone else’s, as I am human.
2. There are always times where one must break the rules. Working backwards logically, rules are made by some form of authority, which is always a person or a group of people responsible for laying down these rules. But humans aren’t perfect, nor are we objective, as times have proven again and again that our logic isn’t the same one-day, as it is the next. Therefore, laws aren’t perfect or objective either. Most of the time, these imperfections and subjectivity are negligible, but a few times they are outrageously out of mark. And when it is found impossible to correct such errors, it is necessary to seek justice in the least law bending way possible. Sometimes when two views on something are too different, trying to become the other only in-humanizes us, because humans are supposed to think for themselves. Thus, maybe one view may be in opposition to law, but if one believes in it enough, I believe he/she should attempt it. Thus, I think there will be cases when it is necessary to break the rules.
Post a Comment