Summary

In Module Three, titled The Value of Life, we read

about two different perspectives on how important
human life truly is. In Hamlets Soliloquy,
Shakespeare writes of a man who is contemplating
the value of life. The main question he is pondering is
whether or not he should continue living. Throughout
the text, he discusses the pros and cons of both
options. This is very different from the next story
which was about the movie critic Roger Ebert who
lost his ability to eat and drink as well as his ability to
talk due to thyroid cancer. Unlike Hamlet, suicide was
never an option but instead he focused on the bright
side of life even when no one else could see it.

Hamlets Soliloquy

Shakespeares Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, Act

III Scene i.

Hamlets Soliloquy
(Continued)

As we read Hamlets Soliloquy, we saw that a

young man had suffered from a traumatic
situation. Not only had his father been killed
but the murderer was his uncle who was
marrying his mother. Throughout the text,
Hamlet is contemplating suicide, weighing the
pros and cons of both options. Obviously, his
value for human life isnt very high.

The Essential Man

By Chris Jones

Roger Ebert: The Essential Man

Esquire, February 16, 2010

The Essential Man

(Continued)

In the article, The Essential Man, Chris Jones

interviewed the famous movie critic Roger Ebert. In
2006, Ebert had lost his ability to talk along with his
ability to eat and drink due to thyroid cancer. In
comparison to Hamlet, they both had suffered from
traumatic situations yet Ebert decided to look to the
bright side of life, regardless of what happened. One
thing they didnt have in common was what they
believed was the value of life. While Hamlet was
contemplating suicide, Ebert was focused on smiling,
laughing, and enjoying life.

What is a Life Worth?

By Amanda Ripley

Time, February 11, 2002

What is a Life Worth?

(Continued)

In Amanda Ripleys article, she discusses the

issues families are facing when it comes to
receiving compensation for the loss of their
loved ones. After the process is done, many
families receive close or equal to zero dollars.
In their view, they see this as the government
saying that their family members life was
worth nothing. Needless to say, court cases
started popping up all over the country. People
wanted to fight for the value of life.

Above is a chart that shows the statistics of how much

families actually receive in compensation. After filling
out the proper information, the government decided
how much a human life was worth. Unfortunately, those
who made more money also received more money.

Conclusion

Each of the texts that we read had valid

information and strong arguments except none
stated everything we believed. After discussion
and analysis, we decided that one cannot put a
value on life. We believe that a human life
shouldnt be determined by a computer or a
group of unbiased officials. A life is valuable
regardless and shouldnt just be thrown away,
nor should one try to replace it or make up for
it with money.

Questions

In Hamlets Soliloquy, would you say that

Hamlet valued life or saw it as something that
could just be thrown away?

True or False: Even though Ebert suffered a

traumatic loss, he still focused on being happy.

Do you think that it is acceptable for a

test/computer survey to be the only factor that
determines ones worth?

Questions (Continued)

Although no clear opinion was stated, do you

think that Amanda Ripley agreed or disagreed
with Feinberg and his plan of action?

Which of the three articles do you agree with

the most?

Work Cited

http://www.nosweatshakespeare.com/quotes/hamlet-to-beor-not-to-be/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Ebert

http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,198866,0
0.html

http://kara.allthingsd.com/files/2010/04/hamlet-and-friend1223x300.jpg

https://image-cdn.zap2it.com/images/ROBERTEBERT-BEFORE-AFTER.jpg

The End