This Blog is a resource tool for the students taking the "FACING HISTORY AND OURSELVES" elective at Westborough High School, Westborough, Massachusetts.
Thursday, December 20, 2012
PERIOD 7 - SOPHIE'S CHOICE
What would you have done if you had been in Sophie's shoes and why? Please do not comment on anyone else's post.
33 comments:
Alyssa Los
said...
If I were Sophie I would have unfortunately sacrificed both of my children. I don't think it would be possible to pick one over the other and I would NEVER choose favorites. Honestly, if I had to choose this in real life I would have wanted myself to die as well. I feel like I would have gone psychologically insane if I had to make that choice. It's hard to even understand how someone would be put in such a horrendous situation. At such a horrible point your living to support your children, so once their gone, what would be the point of being continually tortured? Either all of my family would live together or die together.
If I was in this situation, I think I would have chosen to give both of my children up. I cannot imagine looking at the surviving child everyday just to see the child I sacrificed and face those questions everyday as to whether I made the right decision or not. It would also put a huge burden on the child that I kept because he or she would possibly have survivors guilt or wonder why he or she was chosen over the other one. I don't think there is a right decision in this problem because there is no clear cut answer or guide. Every result is horrible in its own way. Because of this, I cannot say for sure that I would give both my children up, but I think that the best solution in this situation is just that given the circumstances.
If I were Sophie, I would have chosen to keep one of my children. I'll at least be able to save one of my children and give him or her a chance to survive. It doesn't matter whether I chose to save one or chose to have them take both children, the guilt I would have would be the same. I wish that no one would have to face this situation.
Being Sophie, I would have decided to give up one of my children. Now, how I would decide which one to give up, I'm really not sure. Like Nancy said, there will be that guilt that I'll carry afterwards, and it'll be the same amount for whatever child I give up. It's obviously a brutal choice, but it's either this or give up both of my kids. By giving up just one, I can at least keep the other, and have him or her have a chance at survival, whereas giving both of them up ensures they have no chance at survival.
If I were Sophie I would have chosen to save one of my children. Although I would be unable to live with the repercussions of both situations, when given the chance to save a life, as opposed to losing two, I think that one live should be saved. Lives are valuable and should not be simply tossed away when there is a slight chance of saving it. Letting both children die would be allowing them to escape the horrors of the death camps instead of living through day to day torture, but I still think that the possibility of saving one child is enough to make me choose to keep one. I hope that both myself and everyone else are never forced to make such a horrific and sadistic choice but if forced to make the choice I, like Sophie, would have chosen to save one of my children.
I agree with Mia. I would have chosen to give up both of my children. I could never make a choice between the both of them, let alone live with that decision for the rest of my life. I wouldn't want that one child I had given up to think I loved them less than my other child. So I'd rather their last thoughts be that I loved them enough to let them both go.
If I were Sophie, I would have saved one of my children. Although it is an extremely difficult decision to make but I would rather save one of my children than lose both of them. Not matter what decision I make whether I give up both of my children or save one, I’m going to be living with guilt and the repercussions of both situations. At least I get the chance to make the life of one child better and give them a chance of surviving.
If I were Sophie, I would have saved one of my children. Although it is an extremely difficult decision to make but I would rather save one of my children than lose both of them. Not matter what decision I make whether I give up both of my children or save one, I’m going to be living with guilt and the repercussions of both situations. At least I get the chance to make the life of one child better and give them a chance of surviving.
If I were Sophie, I would have saved one of my children. Although it is an extremely difficult decision to make but I would rather save one of my children than lose both of them. Not matter what decision I make whether I give up both of my children or save one, I’m going to be living with guilt and the repercussions of both situations. At least I get the chance to make the life of one child better and give them a chance of surviving.
If I were Sophie, I would have saved one of my children. Although it is an extremely difficult decision to make but I would rather save one of my children than lose both of them. Not matter what decision I make whether I give up both of my children or save one, I’m going to be living with guilt and the repercussions of both situations. At least I get the chance to make the life of one child better and give them a chance of surviving.
I would have chosen to sacrifice both of my children because I don't think that I could live with the fact that I chose one child over the other. There would be too much guilt even if I knew I saved someone. It would either be both or none saved. not just one
If I were in Sophie’s shoes, I would have had an extremely tough time deciding which child the officer would take. I probably wouldn’t have been able to choose, but if I really had to pick one of them, I would’ve probably chosen the boy because he would have the best chance of surviving, opposed to the girl, because men could be useful in the camp.
If I were in Sophie's shoes, I would have said that either all three of us willdie together or survive together. I would not be able to takethe fact that I sacrificed one child to keep another. It would psychologically destroy me. The guilt and anger and sadness would never leave and I'd never be able to live with myself if I had to chose a child to be killed. That is why either we'd all go or we'd all die together.
if i were in sophie's shoes i would try to save one of my children. either way the damage inflicted would be extremely harsh. i would hate to have to choose between my own children, but i feel that it would be even worse to have to lose both of them. but because of the extremeness of this situation im not sure that would be my final decision but thats what i would think to go with
I think that if I had to make Sophie’s choice, I would have given up one of the children. I have no idea how I would choose which one, but I know that I would not want to allow anyone to take both of my children. If there was the chance to protect and save at least one of their lives, I would do take it. As others have said, I think that the guilt would be similar either way, but saving a child would be worth it to me in the end.
I think if i was Sophie i would have given both my children. This is because it is a hard decision and i dont rhink i could feel the guilt for taking one over the other.
If I had been Sophie, I would have saved one of my children and myself. knowing that at least one of my children will survive would keep me going. I would not allow both children to die. It is not an easy choice, I would not know how to explain to my kid, how his brother was killed, while he was not. but it is better that one survives,than both die.
If I was Sophie, I wouldn't have been able to pick one of my children to die. Living with the guilt of only picking one child would have eaten away at me. Also, the child that I chose to live would have had to live with the guilt of being chosen over their brother/sister. If I was Sophie, I would have chosen to either live together or die together.
If i were Sophie i would have chosen to keep one of the children. I would have chosen the boy because he would have a better chance than a girl. Girls during that time were being raped and killed. They were many times seen as targets for attack. I would rather the girl just be killed, not raped then killed. That makes it much worse. A boy wouldn't have to face rape in these situations. He would have a better chance to live than a girl.
It's really hard to say what I would have done in Sophie's shoes. To make a decision that quick that would effect not just that moment, but years to come, would take so much more time than the amount she was given.
After having thought about it though I think the best solution would have been to keep both children together. It would be hard to live knowing that I had sent my child to his or her own death. At least if I chose neither than I could die in peace with them as a family and not put them through the trama of dying alone. Although the man said that Sophie could chose one child there were no promises saying that the child would live. Therefore I think it would be best to stay a family as long as we could and stick together. That's a big part of what family means to me. I don't think I would be able to live with myself if I had to make a decision like that.
If I were Sophie, I would probably choose to save one child. I feel as if the decision I would make in that moment would be more impulsive than anything. It's possible I would sacrifice myself in order to save both children, but that would lead to harm by leaving both children alone.
If I were Sophie, I would probably choose to save one child. I feel as if the decision I would make in that moment would be more impulsive than anything. It's possible I would sacrifice myself in order to save both children, but that would lead to harm by leaving both children alone.
If I were Sophie, I would probably choose to save one child. I feel as if the decision I would make in that moment would be more impulsive than anything. It's possible I would sacrifice myself in order to save both children, but that would lead to harm by leaving both children alone.
If I were Sophie, I would probably choose to save one child. I feel as if the decision I would make in that moment would be more impulsive than anything. It's possible I would sacrifice myself in order to save both children, but that would lead to harm by leaving both children alone.
If I were Sophie, I would probably choose to save one child. I feel as if the decision I would make in that moment would be more impulsive than anything. It's possible I would sacrifice myself in order to save both children, but that would lead to harm by leaving both children alone.
If I were Sophie, I would probably choose to save one child. I feel as if the decision I would make in that moment would be more impulsive than anything. It's possible I would sacrifice myself in order to save both children, but that would lead to harm by leaving both children alone.
I would like to think that I would do the logical thing and choose one to save, but in reality, I probably wouldn't have been able to do it. Although it makes more sense for one to live over neither of them living, the actual act of choosing, of picking one life over another, would psychologically be too hard. Also, even if I did make myself choose, I would probably be so overcome with guilt, the saved child would probably end up with survivor's guilt, and in the end everyone loses. So I guess in conclusion, there is no good choice. All three of their lives are ruined no matter what.
If I were Sophie, I would probably choose to save one child. I feel as if the decision I would make in that moment would be more impulsive than anything. It's possible I would sacrifice myself in order to save both children, but that would lead to harm by leaving both children alone.
If I were Sophie, I would probably choose to save one child. I feel as if the decision I would make in that moment would be more impulsive than anything. It's possible I would sacrifice myself in order to save both children, but that would lead to harm by leaving both children alone.
If I were Sophie, I would probably choose to save one child. I feel as if the decision I would make in that moment would be more impulsive than anything. It's possible I would sacrifice myself in order to save both children, but that would lead to harm by leaving both children alone.
If I were in Sophie's situation I would have saved one of the children,I think living with one child saved is far better then living with both children lost. Though with that said I would have no idea how I would determine which child to save.
What would you have done if you had been in Sophie's shoes and why? Please do not comment on anyone else's post.
33 comments:
If I were Sophie I would have unfortunately sacrificed both of my children. I don't think it would be possible to pick one over the other and I would NEVER choose favorites. Honestly, if I had to choose this in real life I would have wanted myself to die as well. I feel like I would have gone psychologically insane if I had to make that choice. It's hard to even understand how someone would be put in such a horrendous situation. At such a horrible point your living to support your children, so once their gone, what would be the point of being continually tortured? Either all of my family would live together or die together.
If I was in this situation, I think I would have chosen to give both of my children up. I cannot imagine looking at the surviving child everyday just to see the child I sacrificed and face those questions everyday as to whether I made the right decision or not. It would also put a huge burden on the child that I kept because he or she would possibly have survivors guilt or wonder why he or she was chosen over the other one. I don't think there is a right decision in this problem because there is no clear cut answer or guide. Every result is horrible in its own way. Because of this, I cannot say for sure that I would give both my children up, but I think that the best solution in this situation is just that given the circumstances.
If I were Sophie, I would have chosen to keep one of my children. I'll at least be able to save one of my children and give him or her a chance to survive. It doesn't matter whether I chose to save one or chose to have them take both children, the guilt I would have would be the same. I wish that no one would have to face this situation.
Being Sophie, I would have decided to give up one of my children. Now, how I would decide which one to give up, I'm really not sure. Like Nancy said, there will be that guilt that I'll carry afterwards, and it'll be the same amount for whatever child I give up. It's obviously a brutal choice, but it's either this or give up both of my kids. By giving up just one, I can at least keep the other, and have him or her have a chance at survival, whereas giving both of them up ensures they have no chance at survival.
If I were Sophie I would have chosen to save one of my children. Although I would be unable to live with the repercussions of both situations, when given the chance to save a life, as opposed to losing two, I think that one live should be saved. Lives are valuable and should not be simply tossed away when there is a slight chance of saving it. Letting both children die would be allowing them to escape the horrors of the death camps instead of living through day to day torture, but I still think that the possibility of saving one child is enough to make me choose to keep one. I hope that both myself and everyone else are never forced to make such a horrific and sadistic choice but if forced to make the choice I, like Sophie, would have chosen to save one of my children.
I agree with Mia. I would have chosen to give up both of my children. I could never make a choice between the both of them, let alone live with that decision for the rest of my life. I wouldn't want that one child I had given up to think I loved them less than my other child. So I'd rather their last thoughts be that I loved them enough to let them both go.
If I were Sophie, I would have saved one of my children. Although it is an extremely difficult decision to make but I would rather save one of my children than lose both of them. Not matter what decision I make whether I give up both of my children or save one, I’m going to be living with guilt and the repercussions of both situations. At least I get the chance to make the life of one child better and give them a chance of surviving.
If I were Sophie, I would have saved one of my children. Although it is an extremely difficult decision to make but I would rather save one of my children than lose both of them. Not matter what decision I make whether I give up both of my children or save one, I’m going to be living with guilt and the repercussions of both situations. At least I get the chance to make the life of one child better and give them a chance of surviving.
If I were Sophie, I would have saved one of my children. Although it is an extremely difficult decision to make but I would rather save one of my children than lose both of them. Not matter what decision I make whether I give up both of my children or save one, I’m going to be living with guilt and the repercussions of both situations. At least I get the chance to make the life of one child better and give them a chance of surviving.
If I were Sophie, I would have saved one of my children. Although it is an extremely difficult decision to make but I would rather save one of my children than lose both of them. Not matter what decision I make whether I give up both of my children or save one, I’m going to be living with guilt and the repercussions of both situations. At least I get the chance to make the life of one child better and give them a chance of surviving.
I would have chosen to sacrifice both of my children because I don't think that I could live with the fact that I chose one child over the other. There would be too much guilt even if I knew I saved someone. It would either be both or none saved. not just one
If I were in Sophie’s shoes, I would have had an extremely tough time deciding which child the officer would take. I probably wouldn’t have been able to choose, but if I really had to pick one of them, I would’ve probably chosen the boy because he would have the best chance of surviving, opposed to the girl, because men could be useful in the camp.
If I were in Sophie's shoes, I would have said that either all three of us willdie together or survive together. I would not be able to takethe fact that I sacrificed one child to keep another. It would psychologically destroy me. The guilt and anger and sadness would never leave and I'd never be able to live with myself if I had to chose a child to be killed. That is why either we'd all go or we'd all die together.
if i were in sophie's shoes i would try to save one of my children. either way the damage inflicted would be extremely harsh. i would hate to have to choose between my own children, but i feel that it would be even worse to have to lose both of them. but because of the extremeness of this situation im not sure that would be my final decision but thats what i would think to go with
I think that if I had to make Sophie’s choice, I would have given up one of the children. I have no idea how I would choose which one, but I know that I would not want to allow anyone to take both of my children. If there was the chance to protect and save at least one of their lives, I would do take it. As others have said, I think that the guilt would be similar either way, but saving a child would be worth it to me in the end.
I think if i was Sophie i would have given both my children. This is because it is a hard decision and i dont rhink i could feel the guilt for taking one over the other.
I was absent for this assignment.
If I had been Sophie, I would have saved one of my children and myself. knowing that at least one of my children will survive would keep me going. I would not allow both children to die. It is not an easy choice, I would not know how to explain to my kid, how his brother was killed, while he was not. but it is better that one survives,than both die.
I am in agreement with Nancy, I would want to give at least one of my children a chance
If I was Sophie, I wouldn't have been able to pick one of my children to die. Living with the guilt of only picking one child would have eaten away at me. Also, the child that I chose to live would have had to live with the guilt of being chosen over their brother/sister. If I was Sophie, I would have chosen to either live together or die together.
If i were Sophie i would have chosen to keep one of the children. I would have chosen the boy because he would have a better chance than a girl. Girls during that time were being raped and killed. They were many times seen as targets for attack. I would rather the girl just be killed, not raped then killed. That makes it much worse. A boy wouldn't have to face rape in these situations. He would have a better chance to live than a girl.
It's really hard to say what I would have done in Sophie's shoes. To make a decision that quick that would effect not just that moment, but years to come, would take so much more time than the amount she was given.
After having thought about it though I think the best solution would have been to keep both children together. It would be hard to live knowing that I had sent my child to his or her own death. At least if I chose neither than I could die in peace with them as a family and not put them through the trama of dying alone. Although the man said that Sophie could chose one child there were no promises saying that the child would live. Therefore I think it would be best to stay a family as long as we could and stick together. That's a big part of what family means to me. I don't think I would be able to live with myself if I had to make a decision like that.
If I were Sophie, I would probably choose to save one child. I feel as if the decision I would make in that moment would be more impulsive than anything. It's possible I would sacrifice myself in order to save both children, but that would lead to harm by leaving both children alone.
If I were Sophie, I would probably choose to save one child. I feel as if the decision I would make in that moment would be more impulsive than anything. It's possible I would sacrifice myself in order to save both children, but that would lead to harm by leaving both children alone.
If I were Sophie, I would probably choose to save one child. I feel as if the decision I would make in that moment would be more impulsive than anything. It's possible I would sacrifice myself in order to save both children, but that would lead to harm by leaving both children alone.
If I were Sophie, I would probably choose to save one child. I feel as if the decision I would make in that moment would be more impulsive than anything. It's possible I would sacrifice myself in order to save both children, but that would lead to harm by leaving both children alone.
If I were Sophie, I would probably choose to save one child. I feel as if the decision I would make in that moment would be more impulsive than anything. It's possible I would sacrifice myself in order to save both children, but that would lead to harm by leaving both children alone.
If I were Sophie, I would probably choose to save one child. I feel as if the decision I would make in that moment would be more impulsive than anything. It's possible I would sacrifice myself in order to save both children, but that would lead to harm by leaving both children alone.
I would like to think that I would do the logical thing and choose one to save, but in reality, I probably wouldn't have been able to do it. Although it makes more sense for one to live over neither of them living, the actual act of choosing, of picking one life over another, would psychologically be too hard. Also, even if I did make myself choose, I would probably be so overcome with guilt, the saved child would probably end up with survivor's guilt, and in the end everyone loses. So I guess in conclusion, there is no good choice. All three of their lives are ruined no matter what.
If I were Sophie, I would probably choose to save one child. I feel as if the decision I would make in that moment would be more impulsive than anything. It's possible I would sacrifice myself in order to save both children, but that would lead to harm by leaving both children alone.
If I were Sophie, I would probably choose to save one child. I feel as if the decision I would make in that moment would be more impulsive than anything. It's possible I would sacrifice myself in order to save both children, but that would lead to harm by leaving both children alone.
If I were Sophie, I would probably choose to save one child. I feel as if the decision I would make in that moment would be more impulsive than anything. It's possible I would sacrifice myself in order to save both children, but that would lead to harm by leaving both children alone.
If I were in Sophie's situation I would have saved one of the children,I think living with one child saved is far better then living with both children lost. Though with that said I would have no idea how I would determine which child to save.
Post a Comment