Human beings are different than other living creatures on Earth not only because of intelligence, but also different values of humanity. Every individual of mankind is independent and unique due to their different values and beliefs. A person’s values are an important component that makes him who he is today. Different Values are also a significant guideline when an individual has to make a choice on a life event. Amazingly, a person can have two different values that can come into conflict. As a student of human behaviour and an expert on values in conflict, this essay will be discussing how an individual’s values can come into conflict and further affecting their decision-making and how these values shape their future. This essay will seek
…show more content…
In the story, the old French police officer, Balducci asked Daru to deliver the prisoner, Arab to Tingui for trial at the police headquarter. Daru agreed to escort the prisoner but he does not want to hand him to the French authority and this is where Daru’s two values comes into conflict. The main character’s first value is his loyalty to the French and his friend, Balducci. Although Daru was born in Algeria, he is of European descent. Daru’s loyalty is shown in his quote that says, “every bite of this disgust me, and first of all you fellow here. But I won’t hand him over. Fight, yes, If I have to. But not that” (Camus 7). From the quote, the main character is willing to fight for the French but he does not want to hand Arab over to the authority because it contradicts his second value, which is a philosophical belief named “Existentialism”. This philosophical belief states that although human existence has no ultimate meaning, all men have the freedom and the need to create meaningful lives for themselves. In addition, Daru’s behaviour of letting Arab choose his path is the embodiment of his main value, free will. In between Daru’s two values, he is clearly more inclined to the value of Existentialism which is evident because he introduced the freedom path that …show more content…
Due to external factors, one of their conflicting values would become stronger and they would make a choice based on the strong value. In the story, “Shooting an Elephant”, the option of killing the elephant was in line with Orwell’s value of fulfilling his duty as an police officer and more importantly, his desire of wanting to fit into the Burmans social circle. Other scenario is when a person trying to reconcile the two conflicting values and come up with a plan that satisfy both of the values. For example, in the story, “The Guest”, Daru gave Arab the road of freedom and the road of death to choose was because one side, he did not want to failed his loyalty to the French and on the other side, he did not want to send Arab to the death road by himself because it contradicted to his value of free will. The last scenario is where one of the conflicting value is vague so the person has to follow another relative value. For instance, in my personal story, Friend A and Friend B both have done something wrong so, my value of right and wrong was vague. Therefore, I made the choice of standing on Friend A’s side based on my second value, the depth of friendship. Overall, when people’s values are in conflict, they would make choices based on the above three
In the story, the old French police officer, Balducci asked Daru to deliver the prisoner, Arab to Tingui for trial at the police headquarter. Daru agreed to escort the prisoner but he does not want to hand him to the French authority and this is where Daru’s two values comes into conflict. The main character’s first value is his loyalty to the French and his friend, Balducci. Although Daru was born in Algeria, he is of European descent. Daru’s loyalty is shown in his quote that says, “every bite of this disgust me, and first of all you fellow here. But I won’t hand him over. Fight, yes, If I have to. But not that” (Camus 7). From the quote, the main character is willing to fight for the French but he does not want to hand Arab over to the authority because it contradicts his second value, which is a philosophical belief named “Existentialism”. This philosophical belief states that although human existence has no ultimate meaning, all men have the freedom and the need to create meaningful lives for themselves. In addition, Daru’s behaviour of letting Arab choose his path is the embodiment of his main value, free will. In between Daru’s two values, he is clearly more inclined to the value of Existentialism which is evident because he introduced the freedom path that …show more content…
Due to external factors, one of their conflicting values would become stronger and they would make a choice based on the strong value. In the story, “Shooting an Elephant”, the option of killing the elephant was in line with Orwell’s value of fulfilling his duty as an police officer and more importantly, his desire of wanting to fit into the Burmans social circle. Other scenario is when a person trying to reconcile the two conflicting values and come up with a plan that satisfy both of the values. For example, in the story, “The Guest”, Daru gave Arab the road of freedom and the road of death to choose was because one side, he did not want to failed his loyalty to the French and on the other side, he did not want to send Arab to the death road by himself because it contradicted to his value of free will. The last scenario is where one of the conflicting value is vague so the person has to follow another relative value. For instance, in my personal story, Friend A and Friend B both have done something wrong so, my value of right and wrong was vague. Therefore, I made the choice of standing on Friend A’s side based on my second value, the depth of friendship. Overall, when people’s values are in conflict, they would make choices based on the above three