The Count of Monte Cristo
Jessica Harvey May 11, 2011 Mr Craine Philosophy To seek revenge is to inflict injury, harm, and embarrassment, on an individual by another who has been harmed by that person. In the motion picture The Count of Monte Cristo, Edmond seeks vengeance on Fernand Mondego for many reasons. All of which were warranted due to the fact that of the dreadful treatment Edmond received while he was in jail. Not only did that make Edmond angry, but also when he discovered the Fernand Mondego had wed his other half to be only 1 month after being locked away.
Being that they were good friends once before made it that much harder for Edmond to believe whatever that Fernand had actually done to him behind his back. There were lots of lies, betrayal, and false hoods regarding why Edmond was even imprisoned. Throughout the entire motion picture everybody was informed that he was dead. Edmonds technique to become revengeful towards Fernand might be slammed due to the fact that many think that vengeance has no validation no matter how the other individual has actually harmed you. If society is not going to strike back versus a criminal activity in your place it is not all right to take matters into your own hands.
Many people would state that it would all depend on the circumstance, however I believe that there is no situation that is so serious to where there would be validation for those actions. The Golden Rule mentions to do unto others as you would have them do to you. If you are dealt with wrongfully it does not offer you the right to turn around and do the very same or even worse back to them. Otherwise the cycle will keep entering a circle and people will get injured and they will get no place in life with that thought procedure.
Before somebody looks for vengeance they require to consider the utilitarianism theory which mentions that everyone ought to carry out that act or follow that ethical rule which will bring about the greatest helpful for everyone. Paying someone back for a wrong doing that they did to you is not ethical or ethical at all under any scenarios. Mentioning that revenge and retributive have resemblances would be a true declaration. Revenge is the exact penalty or amends for a wrong on behalf of, particularly in a resentful or vindictive spirit.
Whereas retributive theory states that penalty should be provided only when it is should have and only to the extent that it is been worthy of, is worried about the past instead of the future. It is likewise mentioned that penalty needs to be imposed by some individual or group that has “task made up” ethical or legal authority. Both are a type of punishment, but retributive is a kind of punishment that has to be imposed by a legal authority. Revenge is an act of penalty but not by a legal authority.
It is troubled a person who has incorrect someone else whether it was intentional or not. Overall revenge is a highly discussed subject that everybody has their own opinions on. It is something that is discredited in numerous circumstances. Harming someone because they have mistreated you is not the response. The declaration an eye for an eye and tooth for and a tooth for a tooth might be an extreme when murder is the scenario. To each his own opinion, but I think that no matter the situation there is never ever reason for revenge.