Our beliefs are challenged in times of conflict

Plan:: The belief in the need for the preservation of life by the monks in Phat Diem and how this is juxtaposed by their inability to allow everyone into their quarters The beliefs held by Pyle about being engage and the juxtaposition of this with Fowlers views on remaining degage how this is contrasted with Fowler then becoming engage and have Pyle killed one day you will become involved Tourin the pilot The belief of Robespierre in France and how his stance on the death penalty and the punishing of those seen to be counter-revolutionaries changed Fowler the literary foil to Pyle believes himself degage and immune from the conflicts that occur around him, whilst Pyle believes the Vietnamese in need of a Third Force and instillation of democracy. During elections and debates, politicians must lie in order to appease the people and win votes. The action of a politician though perhaps noble to their party, though perhaps in complete agreement with a doctrine or dogma, is not always seen in a favourable light by the public.

Statement of intention:: Ran out of time, sorry that I did not finish this (were not marked on it, are we?) Audience: The markers Purpose: To achieve a high mark and to present my contention that beliefs within conflict and out of it are two separate entities my plan presents a number of my arguments Form: Expository What is the main point/argument that you tried to make: Is this not the same as the purpose? How did you try to achieve this: Through clear, succinct and imaginative writing. I attempted to use many examples and philosophise to a greater extent than I had previously done so as to present a macro view-point

Prompt: : Our beliefs are challenged in times of conflict

When conflict occurs we may act differently to how we perceive ourselves acting before the event. Philosophical notions and actual actions are two separate entities and events. When faced with conflict our beliefs are challenged and we cannot always act in accordance with how we would aspire to. Whether our belief be that the death penalty is immoral, that all individuals are equal or that we would help those in need. When faced with these issues or when faced with a conflict that endangers both ourselves and our beliefs, we may not always act in accordance with them. We may not act at all like we desire to. Beliefs and values within conflict are different to those out of it. We may dogmatically believe in the preservation of life though when faced with a loved one who is stripped of all living, comatose and unaware, our beliefs may change. The conflicts we face challenge our beliefs and our beliefs cannot always survive through conflict.

Conflict is caused by incongruence and the differentiation of opinions among people. When two parties or people hold differentiating views and are placed in proximity to one another, conflict will occur. When conflict occurs our beliefs are challenged. In times of conflict our beliefs may however be challenged in a number of ways. Whether this be by discourse and debate or by a physical testing through battle, our beliefs will be challenged. Within Greenes novel The Quiet American two central characters exist, Fowler and Pyle. When Fowler is faced with the realisation that Pyle is not as innocent as he seems and that he has been the cause of innumerable deaths within Vietnam and that he will continue to go on killing in the name of democracy, Fowlers beliefs are challenged. Fowlers moral compass proves too strong and he decides that due to the conflict he has encountered that he must become engage and deal with Pyle. Such beliefs as that of the ability to remain degage or to not take sides within a conflict are, as with all beliefs challenged in times of conflict. To remain detached would be to ignore the conflict and nullify your beliefs. Beliefs are what make us human and to ignore them is to ignore ourselves, something which cannot be done. When conflict occurs, our beliefs are challenged and we must respond. We cannot remain as we previously were and must take sides, for our ability to remain disconnected from all becomes impossible. The belief does not matter in times of conflict, it is the fact that the belief is challenged that matters. No matter the beliefs we may hold, they will be challenged, they will be placed under the lime-light.

Actions and values are two things which cannot always coexist. When individuals are faced with the issue of self-endangerment or their beliefs are challenged, they cannot and will not always react exactly as they would like to. When faced with a situation we are unprepared for we may not always react as would like to. When confronted merely philosophically about the issue of homelessness, many individuals would state that they feel bad for those enduring it and that they would help them if ever asked to. These beliefs, these values that all people are equal and that we would like to help

those in situations worse than our own are not always practical or followed through with when they become more than philosophical debates. Our ability to act as we would like to, to act in accordance with the beliefs we hold in times of conflict is not always possible. A homeless person confronting you may illicit fear or disgust at the times and these same feelings though in total disparity with how you would like to act are how and what you act on. The ability of the individual to act in accordance with their beliefs or values in times of conflict is not always possible. Our values and our actions are two separate entities. Thus it is apparent that when challenged by or faced with conflict, our beliefs may not be always be the same as our actions. We may act in total juxtaposition to the actions that our beliefs entail.

Actions within conflict and those outside of it are separate. Though an individual may hold the best of intentions, when faced with conflict, these same intentions may not eventuate. Our philosophical intentions may not match the conflict and thus our values may be impractical or too difficult to act on in times of conflict. Human nature is king in conflict and thus when faced with options within a conflict the individual will often take the easier or more satisfying route. Our beliefs outside of conflict may be honourable, we may believe in the preservation of human life. Though when faced with the actual conflict of a loved one being comatose or unable to function without significant support, our beliefs may change. When we are not engaged in or facing conflict we can hold our honourable viewpoints, we can say what we wish and pretend that we are honourable beings but when conflict does occur we may find our beliefs to be in total disaccord with our previous beliefs. In Greenes novel The Quiet American the monks of Phat Diem are forced to segregate their congregation and keep themselves healthy, least they become sick and both parties perish as one. This action of the monks caring for their own needs before that of the people they are tasked to shows the inability of individuals to act in accordance with their beliefs at all times during conflict. The principles of the monks, before the conflict may well have been honourable and caring, that despite circumstances they would stay true to their congregation. However during the conflict of war the monks beliefs change and they are forced to keep the civilians at arms-length and prioritise their own well-being. Regardless of intentions or philosophies we are judged on our actions and our actions are not always as we wish they were. When conflict occurs we act as best we can, we do what little we can and we strive to survive. The abandonment of philosophies is sometimes necessary. Our actions and inactions are what define us, not our beliefs or wishes.

When conflict occurs we are not always able to act as we wish. Our values are changed, our beliefs altered and our dogma ceases to exist. The degree of a conflict and the strength of a belief matters not it can be a mere case of a homeless person asking you for spare change , when faced with conflict we do not always act in accordance with our beliefs. They are challenged. The individual may believe themselves just and good but when faced with conflict they may find themselves acting in total disaccord with how they aspire to act. Greene illustrates this within the novel The Quiet American, he demonstrates how characters such as Fowler, a journalist with a dogmatic sense of

detachment, a feeling that he must not take sides, still acts in juxtaposition to that of his beliefs when faced with conflict. Our beliefs are challenged in conflict and we cannot always act as we previously thought we would. Values within conflict and out of it are two separate things; they do not always follow the same trajectory or line of thinking.