the most dangerous game

Richard Connell's "The Most Dangerous Game" is a very exciting story of a manhunt. This story made me think about the morality of hunting: Humans are the cleverest creatures on earth, but does it give them a license to kill the other animals and even human beings weaker than themselves? I give below a short summary of the story to set the scene and then I will explore the ethics involved in hunting as a sport. "The Most Dangerous Game" presents the story of a hunter, General

Zaroff, who finds hunting human beings as the most dangerous and fascinating sport. He likes hunting humans because human beings, unlike the other animals, can reason better and so provide a richer thrill for the hunter. He does not think hunting human beings is an immoral act because he believes in the theory of might is right and that the strong have the right to kill the weak. However in the story General Zaroff fails to hunt down Rainsford, who had the ill fortune to accidentally slip overboard a yacht and swim to the shore, seek shelter in the

General's chateau in the midst of a jungle, and become General

Zaroff's quarry for three days. Nevertheless, Rainsford, who believes it is immoral to hunt human beings, was clever and desperate--he gave

General Zaroff the slip in the manhunt and killed the General. So

The hunter who craved to pit his wits against the victim's wits for the

Sake of excitement met his end. In my opinion Rainsford, who was also a great hunter, learnt ...