'The Moral Logic Of Survivor Guilt'

I truly feel the Seventh man has done nothing wrong. I understand the logic of survivor guilt, however truth is, he couldn’t have saved K. Stuff happens, it wasn’t his responsibility to save K, even if it was he would have potentially put himself in harm as well. I see no reason for the Seventh man to be held responsible by himself or others for K’s death. The wave killed K, not the Seventh man’s decision. It by default has nobody to claim responsibility for. It is for these reasons and prior evidence that I don’t think it is fair that the Seventh man feels guilty for something he couldn’t control.
The main reason I don’t think he should feel guilty is because of how well he always treated K and how strong their relationship was. K trusted the seventh man and knew he would never harm him. As stated In the book “K would get involved with things to the …show more content…
Objective or rational guilt, by contrast—guilt that is “fitting” to one’s actions—accurately tracks real wrongdoing or culpability: guilt is appropriate because one acted to deliberately harm someone, or could have prevented harm and did not.” (Murakami, pg.154). By this statement, the seventh man should not feel guilty that his friend died in a storm which he had no control over. “As with so many types of guilt that arise in grief, some survivor guilt is rational and some is not. There are circumstances in which our action (or lack of action) did impact the death of another. In these cases, there is a rational source of the guilt. In other cases, the guilt isn’t tied to something a person did or didn’t do. Instead, the person feels guilty about what they perceive they could or should have done.” (Whatsyourgrief.com). As you can see from this passage the Seventh man has no reason to feel