Mr. Bombard
English 1102
3/1/2016
Morality: 1600s Austria vs the Current World
The world is full of activities, some of which leave a lot to wonder whether individuals value the concept of morality. Morality refers to the ability to do that, which is perceived right and universally acceptable. Morality plays a critical role in a person’s decision-making process. In Mark Twain’s story, “The Mysterious Stranger”, morality remains a common theme emphasized among the characters and forms much of the conversation in the story. The book gives a clear picture of the moral standards during the 1600s in Austria seen through the narration. In a way, the world has different, people falling in diverse groups. Much of what happens in the world …show more content…
First, a hereditary king from the Habsburg dynasty ruled the government during the period (Twain 77). In such as setup, many moral issues exist where the inhuman acts find themselves thriving among the chief officials. Kings are famous for a lavish living at the expense of their subjects who toil with little or no pay. Despite their awareness of the act as negative, they persistently go on, stay alike, and please the ruling class. However, morals have changed in the modern world despite the existence of a little moral issue among individuals. For instance, the modern Austria no longer practices a traditional system of leadership but rather has a democratic nation where the citizens have the mandate to elect their preferred …show more content…
In the first place, Satan tells Theodor that man has the gift of moral sense that empowers his logical reasoning (Twain 66). However, he terms the ability as an impairment rather than a blessing to man. Further, he explains how man misuses the gift within him by choosing to participate in inhuman acts that degrade others and the environment at large. In support of the fact, Satan offers explanations and examples of how a man makes no use of the gift referring to the cause of poverty in the French village (Twain 78). Human beings still make improper decisions despite having the power to make the right decisions. The case explains the situation during the 1600s with the leaders having the freedom to choose from good and evil