12. Philbrick shows that the English, as well as the American Indians, engaged in barbaric practices like torturing and mutilating their captives, as well as taking body parts as souvenirs. Could either side in King Philip’s War make any legitimate claim to moral superiority? Why or why not?
Neither side can truly make a claim to moral superiority, at least not in my eyes. But then again, I have been tainted by many different modern philosphies and lifestyles that making a moral judgement call on these people would be a farcry from being fair. So, with that said, if forced to make any judgement at all, I would say the Native Americans because they act out of tradition (a tradition that does not depend on the adversary) while the Europeans act in each and every way that they seem to see fit. I find it totally appalling that English settlers would just totally massacre defenseless Indians asking for safety or to enslave them without good reason. I would absoltuely side with the Native Americans if prompted to make a decision.
No comments:
Post a Comment