The Code Of Morality In The Lottery By Shirley Jackson

853 Words 4 Pages
A phenomena of the Nazi extermination of European Jews has raised plenty of controversial dilemmas regarding a human morality. From 1933 to 1945 millions of innocent Jews were systematically slaughtered on command and shoved into gas chambers. The Germans soldiers were brought up in the most rigorous code of obedience by assisting in the most hideous and large scale murders in the history of the world. Even though, this inhuman and cruel decision has emerged in the mind of a single person, it could not have been implemented unless a large willingness to obey orders. Consequently, these historical events prove a tendency of a society to obey authorities’s instructions despite their’s immorality, referring to the factors of a heard instinct, …show more content…
The herd instinct also can be interpreted as a social influence or pressure, in which person is unconsciously persuaded or tensioned on his assumption or perception of a particular theme. «The Lottery» by Shirley Jackson is a relevant illustration of the herd instinct. A plot of this story was set up in a small village, where a lottery was conducted by all habitants. An obvious outcome was expected, in which someone would be randomly chosen to win. However, a victory for participants was not desirable because a point of the lottery has been implied in stoning a winner to death by people. A fate turned tragically to Tessie Hutchinson, who had won in this lottery. Despite her plea for mercy, people along with children ignored her implications and followed instructions of a lottery’s host. It can be inferred that society tends to cross a line of morality because of a fear to rebel against a larger group of people. Also, people are more likely to follow an established level of standards or policies in order to fit in …show more content…
In «The Lottery» by Shirley Jackson, it can be assumed that the majority of people had known that it was wrong to murder someone but no one dared to rebel against everyone because of a scare to be punished or followed the same destiny with a winner. Moreover, in an article about Milgram’s social experiment it was implied:»Later experiments conducted by Milgram indicated that the presence of rebellious peers dramatically reduced obedience levels». When a protest has expressed, 36 out of 40 participants refused to deliver the maximum shocks. This fact stressed a concept in which people are not likely to take any actions against until someone’s support will

Related Documents