Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays analysing the use of metaphors
Metaphor in essay
Essays analysing the use of metaphors
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The main concept of Doubt: A Parable is the development of doubt and certainty. The preface plays an important role, because it depicts the role doubt can play in people’s lives. John Shanley tells the audience that “we are living in a culture of extreme advocacy, of confrontation, of judgement, and of verdict.” (Shanley, 2005) The preface outlines the various ways of dealing with doubt and how some people can recognize what doubt really is. The theme of doubt vs. certainty is shown throughout the story. Doubt: A Parable follows Sister’s Aloysius, the principal in a Catholic School, as she investigates Father Flynn, who she suspects of molesting a student, Donald. Sister Aloysius is certain that Father Flynn is guilty, but does not have any evidence to prove that guilt. Shanley is depicting that one does not need evidence to be certain of one’s guilt. Sister Aloysius enlists in the help of a younger nun, Sister James to gather evidence and confront Father Flynn. However, Sister James finds difficulty in believing Father Flynn’s guilt, and harbors doubt and uncertainty. The characters’ position on doubt vs. certainty divides their personalities. Sister Aloysius is a strict and strong-willed character, while Sister James has an insecure and innocent …show more content…
Father Flynn tells Sister Aloysius, “Even if you feel certainty, it is an emotion and not a fact.” I think he means that without concrete evidence, you cannot rely on your emotions for the truth. In Father Flynn’s sermon he discusses doubt and truth. He says, “Doubt can be a bond as powerful and sustaining as certainty.” Sister Aloysius treats her doubt as the truth, and ignores any uncertainty she has. Throughout the story, Father Flynn denies and wrong doing and cites that there is no evidence of any misconduct. Doubt becomes battle with two viewpoints. When questions are asked, they are answered with more questions, leading to more
John Patrick Shanley creates a movie as a whole I feel was more informative than the play. In the play you have 4 characters Sister Aloysius, Father Flynn, Sister James, and Mrs. Muller. While the movie introduces a few other characters, for instance the children. For me the children made a difference because they for one made me understand what kind of kids Sister James was dealing with. I really thought that being able to see the way Father Flynn interacted with all of the young boys including Donald Muller was really helpful when trying to draw your conclusion of Father Flynn versus when reading it your left to imagine for instance; what some of the kids are like. The way the book sets you up your left leaning to Father Flynn being exactly what Sister Aloysius accuses him to be. We also get to see how sister James interacts with the kids and how Sister Aloysius influences her to change the way she deals with and teaches her class.
A reputation can be so well established that if one person in power does a wrongdoing people will not believe it. For example when Mrs. Muller says, “Let me ask you something. You honestly think that priest gave Donald that wine to drink?” (47). Donald’s mother is questioning sister Aloysius because she does not believe Father Flynn would do something like that. He has a reputation of being a great priest and his reputation is better than Sister Aloysius’. Mrs. Muller states, “You’re not going against no man in a robe and win, Sister. He’s got the position.” (47). Just by Father Flynn being a male he has a higher reputation than a nun, which he knows and can accumulate for his actions. In the hierarchy of the Church, the head male priest is the most dominant. Therefore, nobody questions what he is doing; he has a reputation of being this influential priest who gives great sermons. He knows that he has the power to do what he wants and has his fellow Monsignor and other men in the ...
... Nonetheless, the signs also point to Father Flynn hurting him, because he was violating him. People’s assumptions are based upon personal experience and gut feeling, also on their upbringing; nature and nurture. Shanley uses inference in this play to create doubt in the audience’s minds'. The verdict is never in, on Flynn; guilty or not guilty. Shanley’s audience is left to be the jury.
It is important that every challenge life gives us should be encountered and resolved. Challenges are given to every human being, whether it be a dysfunctional family or a uniquely vibrant family we must face all that comes our way. We must face the daunting challenge of attempting to understand, forgive and to take responsibility, which is brilliantly attempted to do in the novel The Glass Castle.
Unlike Sarty Snopes of “Barn Burning”, the narrator of The Unvanquished leads a somewhat existential life. Sarty takes an objectively moral stance when abandoning his abusive father. Conversely, Bayard Sartoris is faced with the “ambiguity and absurdity of the human situation” and is on a search for subjective truth (Kierkegaard). Though he acts on behalf of his family, he does things that he knows can be considered wrong. Additionally, he is asked to believe new information and take in experiences that are foreign to him. For him, it seems that “existence precedes essence” in his childhood. During this journey, Bayard describes instances in which his apprehension of information is primary, as is his need for empirical evidence.
Most people have had some sort of conflict affect their lives at least once. That conflict could alter a person’s views of the world around them. In the play Doubt by John Patrick Shanley, conflict is used to grasp the reader’s emotions and cause the reader to rethink their preconceived notions about the characters in the play. Doubt takes place in 1964 in St. Nicholas, which is a school and Catholic Church in New York. The play focuses on a priest named Father Brendan Flynn and a nun named Sister Aloysius Beauvier. The conflict highlighted in this play is between these two characters. After Father Flynn starts taking an African American student under his wing, named Donald Muller, Sister Aloysius suspects Father Flynn is up to no good. She
In the play Doubt, by John Patrick Shanly, Sister Aloysius is treating Father Flynn unfairly. Sister Aloysius is the principal of St. Nichols School, who is suspicious and always doubt everyone, especially Father Flynn. She thinks that Father Flynn is guilty, but has no proof. Sister Aloysius doesn’t like Father Flynn in the school and his ideas. She treats him unfairly. Sister Aloysius treats Father Flynn unfairly when she still accuses Father Flynn of giving the altar wine to Donald Muller after Father Flynn tells her the truth. She treats him unfairly by forcing him to request the transfer without proving if Father Flynn is guilty or not and also makes him resign by lying about his past.
In The Parable several characters are presented to the reader. Each one has their own behavioral characteristics which one may or my not approve of. The two characters whose behaviors I most approve of are Lee Pai and Hernando. The characters whose behaviors I do not approve of are Sven and John. There are several reasons why I approve of the behaviors of Lee Pai and Hernando and do not approve of the behaviors of Sven and John. All of these reasons I have based on my interpretation of the story, The Parable.
In ‘unreliable narration’ the narrator’s account is at odds with the implied reader's surmises about the story’s real intentions. The story und...
...is oftentimes tinged with skepticism – but his skepticism is also tinged with fear. However, for all the skepticism and exaggeration, fear always prevails.
To believe something is to know it so in order to know something, it is not enough to believe it- you have to learn it or have a good reason to believe it. Skepticism talks about two types of position: knowledge and justification. The skeptic argues that we do not know what we think we do it is only a thought. Skepticism of knowledge says there is no such thing as knowledge, and justification denies the belief of justified belief existing. These two are closely related which depends on the relationship between the factors of knowledge and justification: if knowledge entails justified belief, as theorists say, then justification skepticism entails knowledge skepticism. Gettier and Nozick broke down the subject and explain their point of views of it. To defend these views, skeptics lay out many requirements for knowledge or justified belief, and try to show that these requirements are not met. It still stand that’s why if I know something and I believe it that which I claim knowledge then why do I need a reason to believe it? Is black white?
-the read must put more trust in the narrator in this type of situation in believing what they say is the truth
... dispel the myths but he only ends up amplifying the interest in the man. The man never intended for the story to be believable. He even tried to make it so farfetched that the people dismissed it on their own but they still believed. The character then must carry on with the story so that he does not look like a complete liar. The philosophical reasoning behind the story is that no one should lie in any sort of scenario because the results of the lie may end by blowing up in their face.
At a young age, we're all told to trust our guts and put trust in our superiors. But trust can be misleading. Trust in people, a large movement, or in oneself can cloud ones judgment. Similarly, mistrust can blind one from logic. Ironically so, the just mistrust of another can also protect one from deception or manipulation. These two instances can be labeled as skepticism and gullibility, themes frequently used by author Charles Dickens in A Tale of Two Cities in order to establish the chaos and misguidance of the revolution and characters described in the reading.
It depicts people living as having the ability to learn, gain knowledge, have righteous character, moral, or religious belief, or values, yet have profound doubts about reality. As stated by Dew and Foreman (2014), “…the degrees of certainty arise from the nature of the objects, entities or issues that we inquire about” (Dew & Foreman, 2014, p. 162). Each individual character in some way or the other is seeking understanding about true or healthy cognitive development. Although shown in different ways, each story makes an attempt to capture the human’s natural ability to distinguish between the real world and personal discernment. In Plato’s excerpt, he depicts a similar skeptical way of experiencing life vicariously through restricted life experiences, possibly with fewer given choices, or even less edifying opportunities. His skepticism about the levels of life experiences pertains to the level of knowledge a person accomplishes. Skepticism is also the basis of Descartes’s story, his doubtfulness about attained natural knowledge or education. His point of view shows that his concern is based on a person’s learned behavior during childhood that later in life can be mistaken as “false opinions for true” (p.