Can Mercy co-exist with Justice

Yes Mercy can co-exist with Justice. Mercy, is to act with compassion, and be willing to forgive as compared to Justice, whereby what must be done will be done. In my opinion, although they can co-exist, but mercy should still come above Justice. In a example of the law, a person is a victim of a crime, but if he chooses to forgive the person, the person should be cleared of all charges. Also, if the person deserves mercy, then the judge can be lenient. Mercy can also bring salvation to the person and benefiting both parties, while Justice will benefit none. Thus it is better to have Mercy.

Mercy can only bring about good, and bring salvation for both sides, thus benefiting. Mercy can be seen practiced in many areas, for example, a case in Iran, whereby a woman was splashed with acid from another man, but she chose to forgive him, and he was released of all charges and the punishment which was to blind himself. As the quote from Ghandi, an eye for an eye can only make us blind.

So I feel that Mercy can co-exist with Justice, it is just that Mercy should come over Justice. Mercy is at a much higher level.

He is making the argument that in current times, it is no longer enough to raise a kid that is according to the old standards. It is now important to raise a kid that fits a global level. I can only partially agree with his statement. This is due to the fact that nowadays, everything is getting globalised, everything is becoming international. It is common to be sent to foreign countries to work nowadays. By not allowing the children to be able to adapt in foreign countries, understand their cultures, allowing them to prepare for the future. Also, if a person were to look for a job, and if he has experience abroad for a long time, he would stand a better chance. Also, being able to adapt, would show that, the person is stronger, and is probably a independent person, who can take care of themselves. Also, by being more "global" it adds to the diversity of the person. Also, this allows the person to not only be educated in the normal academics, and sports and other activities, but this allows the person to have experience of how other people from other countries work. Thus not constraining the person to only a certain country. But, must the child get educated when they are still young? Can they take this training to be come more "global" when they grow up. Yes it is possible, but it would take some time to train this, but if the person is grown up, the parents would probably be less worried. I think the deciding factor is the choice of the child and parent when to take this experience.

I think that Shakespear's intention of creating Shylock was to show how bad the Jews were. This is because Shylock was displayed and portrayed as the villain in the book always scheming and up to no good. He was someone who only cared about money and revenge. He even cares more about money then his own daughter. This can be seen from the part where he says that he would rather having his money bury with his daughter, then give it to someone else. He is portrayed to be someone who was always scheming, which is brought out from the deal he made with Antonio, that if he did not pay by the time, Shylock would be allowed to cut a pound of flesh from anywhere he likes. And in the trial scene, even though Antonio is able to pay Shylock, but he still wants that amount of flesh he wants from his bond.

In my opinion, I feel that her view of the education system is somewhat right, although I still partially disagree in some parts. Firstly, I strongly agree with her that the education system focuses a lot on just plain remembering and factual memorising. And this is all for the reason to get the A1 that we need to have better grades. For example, we should understand the theory behind the geometry that we learn, as a lot of the rules relate to each other. So I feel that the education system should focus more on trying to make the students why is it done this way. The system should encourage study deeper into our subjects. As with understanding comes knowledge and also bringing us to use it. But I would just disagree with her comparing of the metals. This is due to the fact to understand this, it would take a lot more of studying, and at a too high level for the students as of now. I also agree with her about the point about students voicing their views and opinions about the education system. This will help the education system continually improve and allow the students to better in education. Also, this will improve creativity, which is very important in the society today. I also like the point about that education is supposed to give a voice, to make better decisions, and not merely blindly following. Also, another point I agree with her that the education system should not be trying to teach us what is CME and to have character is not just to be able to know what is right or what we should do, but it should be the act itself of doing it. But still, we cannot blame the education system for this, this is due to the fact that, is it possible for the system to always be there and supervising the students and telling them that they should do this? Instead it should be cultivated from both the parents and the system from young, this will allow the students to understand what is character and build a good one, as a good character takes a long time to develop. I feel that the education system should educate parent and child about good character, and how to achieve it.

To achieve a perfect education system and an ideal one, would be really hard to achieve. This is due to the always changing ways of education. But to achieve one that is close would be much easier, but we should always strive achieve one that is ideal. This is due to the fact that the needs of education are always changing. It will need the help of those getting educated, and the educators.