Conflict: External example of the degradation of morality??

[TimewaveZero]

I'm doing Galileo as a text, and a prominent event is Galileo recanting and abandoning his views due to being tortured... I'm finding it hard to find any external evidence I could use for this... anyone have any suggestions?

[literally lauren]

Careful with that text. Yes, Galileo recants publically, but he keeps working in secret and ends up smuggling out his work through Andrea in the last scene (ie. when they're crossing the border.) So whilst you can discuss him being a "man of flesh" fearful of his own mortality, it's not the best example of abandoning one's values; it was more of a compromise.
Also he was never actually tortured, only threatened.

Pssoble avenues of exploration:
- POWs who chose to confess/aid the enemy, vs. those who would rather die for their country --> which is more admirable? The traditional Hollywood hero is the one who spits in the face of the enemy when asked to surrender, but doesn't this counteract our self-preservationist instincts? How might the situation change if it was to protect someone we loved, rather than ourselves?
- More modern context/ closer to home: consider all the 'Good Samaritan' stories in the news about people intervening in fights outside nightclubs/ pubs etc. and getting themselves seriously injured or killed. These people are obviously incredibly brave, but what makes a person defy their intrinsic need to keep themselves safe for the sake of someone else?
- Perhaps look at the idea of advocacy; people whose lives are almost totally defined by one cardinal belief. Evangelical preachers are probably a good example of this (for better and for worse: people who devote their lives to charity, moral codes and helping others vs. ISIS and other extremist groups) Orr you might go for a political angle; what makes someone to commit to a 'Liberal' or 'Greens' ideology for their entire career? What happens when party politics come into conflict with personal views. --> the 'vote of conscience' might be interesting here; often in the form of a secret ballot, parliamentarians are allowed to put forth their view independent of their 'party line' eg. a Liberal senator would be able to vote Yes to gay marriage despite his party collectively asserting 'marriage should be between a man and a woman.' There are some good examples in the US of people standing by their views in spite of their constituents --> should we applaud these people for remaining true to themselves, or does having someone whose views do not represent the people corrupt democracy?

Hopefully that should get you started. When in doubt, I'd recommend narrowing it down to a certain area you want to look at (eg. politics, history, fictional representations) then go from there.

[TimewaveZero]

Pssoble avenues of exploration:
- POWs who chose to confess/aid the enemy, vs. those who would rather die for their country --> which is more admirable? The traditional Hollywood hero is the one who spits in the face of the enemy when asked to surrender, but doesn't this counteract our self-preservationist instincts? How might the situation change if it was to protect someone we loved, rather than ourselves?
- More modern context/ closer to home: consider all the 'Good Samaritan' stories in the news about people intervening in fights outside nightclubs/ pubs etc. and getting themselves seriously injured or killed. These people are obviously incredibly brave, but what makes a person defy their intrinsic need to keep themselves safe for the sake of someone else?
- Perhaps look at the idea of advocacy; people whose lives are almost totally defined by one cardinal belief. Evangelical preachers are probably a good example of this (for better and for worse: people who devote their lives to charity, moral codes and helping others vs. ISIS and other extremist groups) Orr you might go for a political angle; what makes someone to commit to a 'Liberal' or 'Greens' ideology for their entire career? What happens when party politics come into conflict with personal views. --> the 'vote of conscience' might be interesting here; often in the form of a secret ballot, parliamentarians are allowed to put forth their view independent of their 'party line' eg. a Liberal senator would be able to vote Yes to gay marriage despite his party collectively asserting 'marriage should be between a man and a woman.' There are some good examples in the US of people standing by their views in spite of their constituents --> should we applaud these people for remaining true to themselves, or does having someone whose views do not represent the people corrupt democracy?

Hopefully that should get you started. When in doubt, I'd recommend narrowing it down to a certain area you want to look at (eg. politics, history, fictional representations) then go from there.

Thankyou! That helps a lot

Careful with that text. Yes, Galileo recants publically, but he keeps working in secret and ends up smuggling out his work through Andrea in the last scene (ie. when they're crossing the border.) So whilst you can discuss him being a "man of flesh" fearful of his own mortality, it's not the best example of abandoning one's values; it was more of a compromise.
Also he was never actually tortured, only threatened.

And yeah, I should have probably actually read the text... amiright ahah