Summary Of Roger Ebert: The Essential Man

490 Words1 Page

Who decides how much someone's life is worth? Is it even morally right to put a price tag on someone's life? I believe that there should never be a price tag for how much someone's life is worth. Every life is unique and cannot simply be replaced. Every life should be treated the same no matter what the circumstance. In “Roger Ebert: The Essential Man” by Chris Jones, Ebert displays an astonishing amount of optimism despite the many hard obstacles physically and emotionally, that he has gone through. Ebert Values life differently from the rest of us because he knows what it's like to lose someone close to you. Ebert focuses on what makes him happy like his work and the good memories of his life. Ebert writes about death saying “I know it is coming, and I don not fear it”. Ebert has comes to terms with his inevitability and chooses to look on the brightside. Ebert is the type of person to not agree with putting a price tag on life. He knows that life is unique. Someone who might value life a little differently is Hamlet. In Hamlet by Shakespeare, Hamlet's “To be, or not to be” soliloquy, demonstrates how much Hamlet values his own life while contemplating whether or not to commit suicide. He does not value …show more content…

Feinberg as a lawyer must determine the amount by looking at the income of the victims and how much money they would have made if the disaster never happened. This made some people angry on both sides.Victims families felt that the money was not enough to replace their loved one. While other people thought that the amount of money was too much compared to what victims of regular deaths would receive. I believe that the victims of the tragedy should not see the money as a replacement for their loved one but as just a way to get passed the hard time. Feinberg himself recognized this, but couldn't do anything about

Open Document