Forced Mercurial Character Analysis

A common phrase in numerous elementary classrooms across the United States is “..a man’s character is what he does when no one is watching,” (Good Reads, 2015). This short phrase is used to teach individuals the “right” and “wrong” way to behave. The implications of this phrase suggest that you are responsible for your character. But, what exactly is character and where does this sense of responsibility stem from? Is this view valid? Character is how you treat other living beings based upon your own innate moral and ethical traits. That which is innate is unchangeable and is not influenced by pressures from outside groups or individuals and is only effected by you. You are responsible for that which is only effected by you. An individual’s …show more content…
Character is something that cannot be changed by outside forces. The “forced mercurial” is responsible for their character, but this does not necessarily translate to responsibility for actions. It may be argued that the “forced mercurial” is straying from their “good” character by stealing, however, further analysis of the situation is needed before this assumption is made. Although the “forced mercurial” is responsible for their character which they showed to be good by limiting the damage that was done, they are not responsible for their actions due to the fact that they do not have freedom of the will. Freedom of the will is the ability to act voluntarily. The “forced mercurial” is unable to act freely, shown by the limitation of his actions to saving his loved one and stealing money or allowing his loved one to be hurt and not stealing the money. The “forced mercurial” is actually doing all that they can to act according to their “good character” and limit the harm caused by their actions. Their character is unchanged but their actions are altered. Faced with only two options, the “forced mercurial” with good character chooses the option that causes the least amount of harm. By choosing to steal the money, which is merely a materialistic societal construct instead of allowing physical harm to come to a living being the “forced mercurial” shows their good character. Although the individual, if seen from an outside perspective, may seem to have a bad character, the inability of the “forced mercurial” to act upon their innate character and the bullying of the individual into exhibiting opposing actions shows how they are responsible for their character but not necessarily fully responsible for their actions. The character of an individual always remains