I am from 1I3 and my name is Loh Wei Kiat. I disagree with Aristotle's view that "Change in all things is sweet." in reference to Flowers for Algernon. I will be using two elements of Paul's Wheel of Reasoning to make my argument. They are evidence and point of view.
From the story of Flowers for Algernon, we know that Charlie was a mentally challenged person until he took the operation to become smart. Although changing and becoming smarter is a good thing, there are some personalities of Charlie that had changed. An example would be his social skills.
Before the operation, although he was dumb, he was able to socialize and communicate very well with both the doctors and his "friends" in the factory. Even though his "friends" at the factory were not really his "friends", Charlie would still talk to them and exercise his social skills. However, after the operation, Charlie hardly talks to anyone anymore. Most of his time is dedicated to research studies. This was probably due to him much ignored by his friends after the operation. Thus, we could say that not all change in things is good.
From different points of view and perspective, there are many reasonings to whether change in things is good or bad. From the viewpoints of the two doctors, I suppose they feel Charlie changing smarter is a good thing as it proves their experiment a sucess. From the viewpoint of Miss Kinnian, we can see that although she was glad that Charlie became smart, but she was worried that would bring harm to him as his brain would deteriorate. From Charlie's "friends" actions, we can see that they preferred the old and innocent Charlie to the smart Charlie. From this 3 examples, we can see three different perspectives to the issue of Charlie becoming smart, the good, the bad, and the neutral. Thus, we cannot say that change in all things is good.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment