So my professor taught us the ethics surrounding the legal system in the United States in particular. He made several references to Huck Finn, criminal sentencing, and an illustration of the "ethics octopus." The ethics octopus is meant to help us memorize and distinguish between objectivism and relativism. However, he also made note that intolerant cultures prevent us from objecting to any sort of oppressive values. The reason may be due to those values being so ingrained to that culture, that it would require the dismantling of said culture. Put simply, culture shock. ## weakness of will There are four kinds of characters, which all correlate to the strength of our wills. As an example, in Huckleberry Finn, we might use this to determine weakness of will: - *Reason*: I want to turn Jim in. - *Will*: I will turn him in. - *Emotion*: I want to help Jim escape now. In this example, the user's emotions won. Therefore when emotions win, we speak of weakness of will. In Huck's case, his conscience was distorted by religious miseducation. Our conscience is what helps us distinguish from right and wrong. From Huckleberry Finn, we study the main themes that include weakness of will, friendship, morality and religion, and innate morality and moral education. Now for a mental challenge: [[the study on infants.]]. > [!NOTE] Logical inferencing > - Are humans by nature good? > - Are we natural-born altruists? This leads to the question of [[is attorney-client privilege moral?]]