The Consequences Of Revenge And Revenge

The article “Revenge: will you feel better,” author Karyn Hall (2013) claims that while the temptation of revenge may be convincing, acting upon these urges is not always worth the consequences after. Hall contemplates the idea of revenge being “self destructive” and being harmful to both those giving and receiving revenge. Furthermore the article states People who have been hurt seem to believe that if the other party suffers, then they will feel better and that their emotional pain will lessen. This idea is later touch on towards the end of the article when author explains the idea of the “understanding hypothesis”, which is when the offender knows the connection between the original insult and the retaliation. In contrast, the author also

Do you think revenge is always misguided, or is it justified in some cases? In some cases I feel that revenge can be justified, but is usually caused by misguided care from the past. Although there are many instances where revenge is misguided, it can also be justified in some cases. The right or wrong opinion is always blind sides someone else’s side of the story which can sometime make it impossible to tell if the actions of revenge were justified or if they were a result of being misguided.

Morals are principles which help people to behave rightly. Also, they need to protect the rules. However, in Agatha Christie’s novel, Murder on the Orient Express, the characters act dishonestly: twelve passengers on the Orient Express murder Cassetti, they lie to the Belgian private detective, Hercule Poirot and the protagonist overlooks the passengers. Agatha Christie wrote these intensions fairly. From Murder on the Orient Express, the readers can learn that some set of morals are endorsed.

Murder on the Orient Express by Agatha Christie is a murder-mystery novel that takes place on a train headed toward Calais. In the middle of the 2nd night aboard, the train comes to a halt, and the passengers are stuck in a snowstorm. It is then discovered that a man has been murdered, and everyone in the train is now a suspect. The novel follows Hercule Poirot as he examines the evidence and tries to piece together the story behind the murder. Throughout the novel, the theme of justice is very important because it is repeatedly mentioned, it was initially evaded by the victim, and is revealed to be the inspiration behind the murder.

Guilt is a central theme that makes us feel vulnerable and makes us mistrust the society we live in. He develops his claim with vulnerability in paragraph 5. He says “…most of us see ourselves as powerless cogs in a greater machine…”. He explains that people these days see themselves as unworthy and insignificant and because of this some people are pushed to read crime stories, People’s vulnerability comes from feeling insignificant and interplays with our guilt which causes our interest in crime fiction. Finally, Mosley develops his claim by showing our fascination with stories of crime in paragraph 13. He says “…they can offer escape through a fantasy where even a common everyday Joe (or Jane) can be saved.” This shows that people mainly look for crime fiction in order to escape from reality and the problems they’re facing in their daily lives. Without crime stories we wouldn’t be able to explore our own guilt.

The main point of this article is that this story has most classic Christie themes including an enclosed setting (oriented express) and loose associates among suspects. In a detective novel, the suspects usually is much closer to the dead person. But in Murder On The Orient Express, the readers are aware that one after another passengers is connected with the Armstrong kidnapping case. In the end it turns out that everyone has something to hide; however, the criminals are let off scot-free because they have got rid of the world of a monster that law cannot reach,

The four goals of punishment in the American criminal justice system are retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation. The purpose of the four goals of punishment is to ensure that the sentence the criminal is receiving is reasonable and just. It is difficult to satisfy all of the components to the highest degree for all criminals. All of the goals serve a different purpose and are significant in their own way, but when combined together they create a very complex sentencing policy for criminals.

The four goals of punishment are retribution, incapacitation, deterrence and rehabilitation. Retribution is a punishment that when a person gets a punishment for something that they have done and to get back at them. An example for a retribution would when someone gets a death penalty for commenting a murder. Incapacitation is when a person is trying to prevent a person who already had a sentenced felony from committing any other future offenses. For example, say a person has robbed a bank multiple times and he is trying to commit it again but the authorities are preventing him doing that because they don’t want him to be sentenced a longer than what he is already sentenced for. Deterrence is a punishment for any criminal activity that is involved

The single most destructive force in this world is revenge. An immense amount of wars, murders, division, and hatred is due to the evil that is revenge. There are many famous forms of literature that discuss revenge. One is “Of Revenge” by Sir Francis Bacon. In this essay Bacon explains the evil of revenge and why it shouldn’t be taken. Also, down-playing revenge, Robert Kennedy gave a speech called “A Eulogy for Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.” Immediately following the death of Dr. King, Kennedy pleads with the African American community and America to forgive this offense instead of taking revenge for King’s murder. The final piece of media that discusses revenge does it in a different manor. Edgar Allen Poe writes about revenge in a short story called “The Cask of Amontillado.” The plot of this story is that of a man named Montresor desperately seeks revenge upon a colleague and eventually murders him by trapping him in catacombs deep underground. No matter what the circumstances, revenge should never be taken because men become controlled and destroyed by revenge, and revenge creates division among people.

In order for us to understand the moral theories surrounding the justification of punishment we must first accept that punishment exists to benefit the society we live in. Punishment as a whole should protect a community by sanctioning crimes to a significant degree whilst preventing them from reoccurring. If a punishment does not protect a community it is believed that that punishment is unjust and will be unfair to both the criminal and the community members. I believe that a retributivist style of punishment only focuses on the treatment of the singular rather than that of the masses. It is for this reason that I will argue why a consequentialist or utilitarian theory best allows us to understand the justification of punishment.

Murder on the Orient Express is more than just a murder mystery. It is a novel that utilizes a great deal of existing social issues of the era in which it was written and formed a commentary on those issues while giving the reader an intriguing yet approachable narrative. Through this approach, Agatha Christie has given the reader an opportunity to see the world through the eyes of the seasoned private investigator Hercule Poirot. In this world, nothing is at it seems and apparent coincidence belies a hidden truth, a world in which the geographical connections created by passenger railways allowed people of different nationalities and classes to rub elbows.

Though set in entirely dissimilar countries at different points in history, Margaret Atwood’s ‘Alias Grace’ and Hannah Kent’s ‘Burial Rites’ possess significant comparisons. Both for instance, are fictionalized historical novels following the tribulations of a female protagonist convicted of murder and both have been widely acclaimed for their incredible literary style which merges classic poetry, epigraphs, folklore and historical articles with fiction. The most striking parallel between each novel that can be drawn, however, is the way in which authors masterfully craft the stories of untrustworthy, cunning and deceptive criminals to elicit sympathy from their audiences. Readers of the novel and secondary characters alike are gradually pulled into sympathising with ambiguous and untrustworthy female leads, Grace Marks (Alias Grace) and Agnes Magnusdottir (Burial Rites). Despite the heavy suspicions of others and a lack of evidence to support their claims of innocence, these characters present artfully manipulated features of their defence stories to provoke empathy, sympathy and trust from those within the novel, and those reading it.

Punishment is defined as “the infliction or imposition of a penalty as retribution for an offense” (“Punishment”). Some prominent theories of punishment include retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, and the moral education theory. Although retribution, deterrence, and rehabilitation are all crucial components of punishment justification, independently the theories have weaknesses that avert the moral rationalization of punishment. I believe that Jean Hampton’s moral education theory is the best justification for punishment because it yields the most sympathetic and prudent reasons for punishment, while simultaneously showing that punishment cannot be justified by solely

In Evil Under the Sun, Agatha Christie explores several different facets of good and of evil. Murder is presented as the ultimate evil: taking the life of a human being is an act that cannot be reversed. The act of murder is made especially grim when it is committed in cold blood. However, there are also other layers of what can be called "evil" from an ethical framework. Each of these layers pertain to the machinations of the human mind when it seeks to do something counter to ethics or moral righteousness. For example, the two murderers weave a web of deceit and lies. Each of the lies is designed to steer the detective away from the truth about the murder, therefore revealing the way evil compounds itself.

Theories of why we punish offenders are crucial to the understanding of criminal law; in fact it is not easy to define legal punishment, however one thing is clear within the different theories of punishment is that they all require justification.[1] There are many theories of punishment yet they are predominantly broken down into two main categories. The utilitarian theory seeks to punish offenders to discourage, or “deter,” future wrong doing. The retributive theory seeks to punish offenders because they deserve to be punished due to their behaviour upsetting the balance of society[2].