Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Satan as hero by literary devices
Good and evil in literature
Good and evil in literature
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Satan as hero by literary devices
In Out of the Silent Planet, Professor Weston is a prominent evil character. He wishes to take the human race to live on Malacandra, the planet that we learn is Mars. Weston originally went to Malacandra thinking there were no life forms living on the planet. He learns of life there and is summoned by the Oyarsa which is the “god” of that planet. Thinking they want to kill him, Weston returns to earth and abducts Ransom to take back to Malacandra as a sacrifice.
First, we notice that Weston has very little value placed on individual rights. If it is for a greater scientific discovery, Weston believes he may break rules to get to that point. In the book he tells Ransom, “You cannot be so small-minded as to think that the rights of an individual or of a million individuals are of the slightest importance in comparison with this.” His knowledge overpowers his heart and care for other people.
…show more content…
It is satanic how little he cares about other people. He even goes so far as to killing innocent Hrossa and doesn’t think twice about what he had done. He has no respect for human life or rights and views himself above all others.
Dick Devine is the sidekick to Professor Weston. It was Devine who chose Ransom to be the person they would abduct and take to Malacandra. Devine was a kind of background character in Out of the Silent Planet. He was always there but there was not a main focus on his character. Devine was mostly interested in finding Gold on Malacandra and not on Weston’s plan for the human race.
Devine doesn’t appear to be as blinded as Weston on the reality around them. Although he abducted Ransom in plan that he would be given as a sacrifice (and possibly killed) even though that was not the case. All Devine cares about is wealth and he does not seem to care about the human race. He is simply a man driven by his own desires and wants in
These experiences have stripped his love for humanity from him and left him in a mentality of near hatred for anyone willing to cause unnecessary death of animals. The two characters have both lost their personal wars purely through having things done to them that no man or woman should be forced to go through.
The Belmont Report identifies three core principles that are to be respected when using human subjects for research. The three ethical principles are: respect for persons, beneficence and justice. In the case of Henrietta Lacks each of these fundamental components are violated. The consent that Henrietta provided was not sufficient for the procedures that were conducted.
By common sense, people are said to have freedom to choose their actions. If people would like to donate their tissues and help scientists voluntarily, they can help only based on their free will. Naturally, they can choose to donate their tissues for science development. Also people have attachment to their tissues. The fact makes it possible for people to think that they lost their body parts even though it is a tissue. According to “Taking the Least of You” written by Rebecca Skloot, Andrews says that autonomy and personal freedom are easily overlooked. (The $3 Billion Man) Another example from The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks is that Dr. George Gey tried to hide the real name of the person from which the HeLa cells came, because the Lacks family was unaware of the fact that HeLa cell was still alive even after Henrietta Lacks had died. (ch. 14) If Dr. Gey and Lacks family held such notion that cell and the original person are totally separated, then ‘Helen Lane,’ a fake name for Henrietta Lacks, would not exist, because there is
Soyinka suggests that one of the most important ideas in history is the belief that every individual is born with certain fundamental human rights. His essay does not specifically delineate what those rights are; but one can judge from examination of the essay that they include freedom from slavery, freedom to live without anxiety or fear, and the right to knowledge. He postulates that throughout history, the primary struggles have been between those who wish to suppress the rights of others, and those who desire free...
Bioethics is the use of morals in science. If there had been more bioethics in Henrietta Lacks’s case, her doctors may have used their morals to not take the cells from her body without her permission or at least let her family know they had. Sixteen years before her case, the Nuremberg Code had been created which stated 10 codes of ethics to be used during human experimentation. However, it was not a law and few doctors even knew it existed.The issue of informed consent was also brought up in 1957 but doctors testified it was unnecessary. However on June 30th, 1974,17 years later, a law was passed requiring informed consent for all federally funded research. The issue of bioethics affected HeLa and many began to doubt if the doctors at Johns Hopkins had really been ethical. In conclusion, Henrietta Lacks and her “immortal” cells helped the field of science and its future
...through society and enacting that awareness as a vehicle for change we are left to repeat these same injustices. Henrietta's cells gave society the ability to cure diseases, fight cancer, vaccinate children, and by leaps and bounds further our knowledge of biology at large. At what price does this progress come and who reaps these benefits? Henrietta's children do not have access to the advancements their mother's body is responsible for and nor do countless other individuals on this planet. Where is the line drawn? The extraction of HeLa cells without consent from Henrietta did not mark the exploitative end or the cells would have remained a communal property within the science community. The story of Henrietta and her cells is one small act of a greater play that showcases the exploitative nature of capitalism and the forlorn society it perpetuates indefinitely.
What is privacy? Well, it’s the state or condition of being free from being observed or disturbed by other people. In terms of information, it is the right to have some control over how one’s own personal information is collected and used. This is a right that has been inherently protected by the U.S Constitution, agreed upon by the Supreme Court, and yet, issues around this very topic arise every day. In The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, the author Rebecca Skloot, addresses this issue in her story of the women behind the infamous HeLa cells. Her story shows that although privacy is a right that is inherently protected by the law, situations of injustice can still occur. Examples of this in the book include when Henrietta’s cells were given to Dr. Gey without any consent from Day, the situation in which Mr. Golde’s spleen was sold without his permission, as well as when the Lacks family were recontacted and mislead about the reasons they were tested years after Henrietta’s death.
In this novel, Shelley focuses on the debate between scientific discoveries, religion and the moral ethics of how far man should pursue his desire for knowledge, which reflects the society of the 19th century’s concern of where the scientific advancements were going similarly to the present day debate on whether stem cell research is valid.
Originally, Frankenstein had planned to use the results of his investigations to help mankind, but this focus soon transformed into an exhausting obsession; he became only concerned with the means, rather than the ends of his ambitious adventures. Therefore, Frankenstien did not take into account that he would be responsible for the outcome of his studies, namely the mothering, protecting and caring for the creation.
...r, he must be given the death penalty. Romans 13:1-7 clearly teaches that human government is given to us and commanded by God. We must to obey and respect government because government does not bear the sword in vain, as we would.
In Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, the concept of "discovery" is paradoxical: initial discovery is joyful and innocent, but ends in misery and corruption. The ambitions of both Walton and Frankenstein (to explore new lands and to cast scientific light on the unknown, respectively) are formed with the noblest of intentions but a fatal disregard for the sanctity of natural boundaries. Though the idea of discovery remains idealized, human fallibility utterly corrupts all pursuit of that ideal. The corruption of discovery parallels the corruption inherent in every human life, in that a child begins as a pure and faultless creature, full of wonder, but hardens into a self-absorbed, grasping, overly ambitious adult. Only by novel's end does Walton recognize that he must abandon his own ambition (the mapping of previously uncharted land), out of concern for the precious lives of his crew.
...e after all, he is the most sinister. The irony of this situation is compelling once we are told that Satan is in fact the “…soul that suffers the most.” (Canto XXXIV. Line 61).
He cares about the wellbeing of others. Furthermore,
all of his other shady practices, he allows himself to be worshipped as a god.
...ings that he does are so not human-like which makes him evil. Another instance that