Analysis Of Lackoff And Berger

776 Words 4 Pages
2015 Lackoff and Berger clearly are equal rights hippies who are anti-war. To make matters worse, neither essay is making an argument to not kill but rather soldiers should have killed or should kill in different manner. To paraphrase both essays, apparently I’m supposed to call my enemy by his name to show respect while taking his life in the most comfortable way possible. War is hell plain and simple. But war is necessary. Believe it or not, mankind was not created equal nor was it ever meant to be. The human race was built to achieve great things. But there’s no such thing is winning without someone losing. One country cannot be on top of the world if another cannot serve at the bottom. One of the cruel realities this world is that people have to die in order for others to live. I am not saying this is right and I’m not saying that I agree with how it works. However this is the reality that exists today and has existed since beginning of time. Hiroshima, regardless of how horrific and evil that act may have been, what’s …show more content…
She believes that “bullets and bombs are not the only tools for war” (Lackoff). Believing that humans are genetically social animals I feel compassion she seems to think people find it difficult to take a life. Apparently calling the enemy fire nickname provide the psychological effect that allows me soldier to make indecision that would normally be affected if did enemy what’s thought to be on a personal level. Lackoff sites terms and nicknames the date back to ancient Greece, stating that this is an old tactic that seemingly works. To me it does make sense. Obviously I would have a hard time killing “James” within wife and four kids from Germany who collects vintage baseball cards. Alright no issue taking the life of “Jerry” the German born kraut who wants to kill me and Destroy everything my country stands

Related Documents

Related Topics