Have you seen examples of herd mentality in your community, between friends and at school ? Discuss this. Do you think it is a good thing or a bad thing? Explain why.

Answer and Explanation:

Have you seen examples of herd mentality in your community, between friends and at school ? Discuss this.

Yes, I have. As we know, herd mentality refers to the influence peers can have over others' behaviors. That is, people will do things because others are or seem to be doing them. Those decisions are highly based on emotion instead of rational thinking. I believe I see examples of herd mentality all the time, not only at school, but in society in general. The need to buy the latest phone, for instance, without duly taking the time to consider the investment made when buying the previous phone - which, by the way, still works just fine.

Do you think it is a good thing or a bad thing? Explain why.

Because herd mentality leads to irrational behavior, I believe it is, in general, a bad thing. Herd mentality is often behind aggressive behavior seen at stadiums, or bullying at schools, for example. People do not take the time to reflect, but simply act impulsively. However, there are examples of cases when herd mentality works for the good. For instance, when several people will stand in a circle around someone who has suffered an accident in order to prevent vehicles from hurting that person even more. This is an irrational behavior - people are giving up their own safety -, but it is done with a beautiful, selfless purpose. However, to my mind, examples such as this one are a minority when it comes to herd mentality.

"character is what you are in the dark." dwight lyman moody, in this very witty quotation of his, states we act and think differently when we are "in the dark", that is, when the spotlight is not on us and everyone can see us and consequently judge us. when reading, we tend to be sympathetic to some characters and their dilemmas. by being so, we are saying to ourselves that we agree with those characters' acts and choices, even if they are morally questionable if we have common sense in mind. dwight lyman moody's quotation applies very well to "crime and punishment", by   19th century russian writer fiodor dostoyevsky. raskolnikov, the main character, a former law student who spends his days reflecting upon life and its misery, draws a fatal conclusion: mankind is divided in two main categories: ordinary and extraordinary people. the first are the ones who lead a run-of-the-mill existence and are full of imperfections; the latter are the ones who are spiritually superior, the ones who always know better, and have the right to judge the ordinary ones, as well as eliminate them if for common good. raskolnikov considers himself as belonging to the extraordinary category and decides to kill an old lady who is a money lender and in whose house he rents a small room. raskolnikov compares himself to napoleon, who had the undeniable right to execute tons of people during the war in order to save his nation. of course what the main character decides to do is a horrendous crime, but as readers we feel it is the right thing for him to do, since the victim is a mean old woman who only thinks about money and keeps humiliating her younger sister. what one experiences is a mixture of sympathy and empathy for the character, even though he decides to commit homicide, which is not at all accepted or tolerated by civilized citizens. however, since readers are "in the dark", they allow themselves to feel in ways they would probably never dare to confess to anyone, no matter how nasty or vicious a character can be. after all, they are just reading and doing no harm. in other words, readers are in the dark and can be who they are without being judged.

i also think it is d (sorry if it's not)