Directions: Write a 5 pg. research paper on the following topic. Be persuasive in outlining your criticism/interpretation. One must incorporate 2-3 sources from scholarly journals. You must adhere to MLA guidelines. 

  1. We saw  the absurdity that was The Metamorphosis. In what way did this help us understand      the narrative? What does this story      tell us about human compassion? What is existentialism? Given his state, could Gregor had done      anything differently? Explain.

*** this is the paper for my final grade, please let me know if you have any questions ***

***one of the documents is a plot summary of the novella:  The Metamorphosis***

References

  

Copleston, F. C. “Existentialism.” Philosophy, vol. 23, no. 84, 1948, pp. 19–37. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/3747384. Accessed 20 Apr. 2021.

Rhodes, Carl, and Robert Westwood. “The Limits of Generosity: Lessons on Ethics, Economy, and Reciprocity in Kafka’s The Metamorphosis.” Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 133, no. 2, 2016, pp. 235–248., www.jstor.org/stable/24703689. Accessed 20 Apr. 2021 

The Metamorphosis plot summary

Gregor Samsa, a traveling salesman, wakes up in his bed to find himself transformed into a large insect. He looks around his room, which appears normal, and decides to go back to sleep to forget about what has happened. He attempts to roll over, only to discover that he cannot due to his new body—he is stuck on his hard, convex back. He tries to scratch an itch on his stomach, but when he touches himself with one of his many new legs, he is disgusted. He reflects on how dreary life as a traveling salesman is and how he would quit if his parents and sister did not depend so much on his income. He turns to the clock and sees that he has overslept and missed his train to work.

Gregor’s mother knocks on the door, and when he answers her, Gregor finds that his voice has changed. His family suspects that he may be ill, so they ask him to open the door, which he keeps locked out of habit. He tries to get out of bed, but he cannot maneuver his transformed body. While struggling to move, he hears his office manager come into the family’s apartment to find out why Gregor has not shown up to work. He eventually rocks himself to the floor and calls out that he will open the door momentarily.

Through the door, the office manager warns Gregor of the consequences of missing work and hints that Gregor’s recent work has not been satisfactory. Gregor protests and tells the office manager that he will be there shortly. Neither his family nor the office manager can understand what Gregor says, and they suspect that something may be seriously wrong with him. Gregor manages to unlock and open the door with his mouth, since he has no hands. He begs the office manager’s forgiveness for his late start. Horrified by Gregor’s appearance, the office manager bolts from the apartment. Gregor tries to catch up with the fleeing office manager, but his father drives him back into the bedroom with a cane and a rolled newspaper. Gregor injures himself squeezing back through the doorway, and his father slams the door shut. Gregor, exhausted, falls asleep.

Gregor wakes and sees that someone has put milk and bread in his room. Initially excited, he quickly discovers that he has no taste for milk, once one of his favorite foods. He settles himself under a couch and listens to the quiet apartment. The next morning, his sister Grete comes in, sees that he has not touched the milk, and replaces it with rotting food scraps, which Gregor happily eats. This begins a routine in which his sister feeds him and cleans up while he hides under the couch, afraid that his appearance will frighten her. Gregor spends his time listening through the wall to his family members talking. They often discuss the difficult financial situation they find themselves in now that Gregor can’t provide for them. Gregor also learns that his mother wants to visit him, but his sister and father will not let her.

The Limits of Generosity: Lessons on Ethics, Economy, and Reciprocity in Kafka’s The
Metamorphosis

Author(s): Carl Rhodes and Robert Westwood

Source: Journal of Business Ethics , January 2016, Vol. 133, No. 2 (January 2016), pp.
235-248

Published by: Springer

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/24703689

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at

Terms and Conditions of Use

Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of
Business Ethics

This content downloaded from
�������������71.206.65.166 on Tue, 20 Apr 2021 02:37:26 UTC�������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

J Bus Ethics (2016) 133:235-248
DOT 10.1007/sl0551 -014-2350-1 I ■ 1 CrossMark

The Limits of Generosity: Lessons on Ethics, Economy,
and Reciprocity in Kafka’s The Metamorphosis

Carl Rhodes • Robert Westwood

Received: 25 September 2013/Accepted: 30 August 2014/Published online: 14 September 2014
© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Abstract This paper interrogates the relation between
reciprocity and ethics as it concerns participation in the

world of work and organizations. Tracing discussions of
business and organizational ethics that concern themselves,

respectively, with the ethics of self-interest, the ethics of

reciprocity, and the ethics of generosity, we explore the

possibility of ethical relations with those who are seen as
radically different, and who are divested of anything worth

exchanging. To address this we provide a reading of Franz
Kafka’s famous novella The Metamorphosis and relate to it

as a means to extend our understanding of business and
organizational ethics. This story, we demonstrate, yields
insight into the unbearable demands of ethics as they relate

to reciprocity and generosity. On this basis, we draw
conclusions concerning the mutually constitutive ethical

limitations of reciprocity and generosity as ethical touch

stones for organizational life while simultaneously
accepting the seemingly insurmountable difficulties of
exceeding those limits. In such a condition, we ar

Existentialism

Author(s): F. C. Copleston

Source: Philosophy , Jan., 1948, Vol. 23, No. 84 (Jan., 1948), pp. 19-37

Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Institute of Philosophy

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3747384

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at

Terms and Conditions of Use

and Cambridge University Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Philosophy

This content downloaded from
�������������71.206.65.166 on Tue, 20 Apr 2021 02:29:26 UTC�������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

EXISTENTIALISM

The Rev. F. C. COPLESTON, S.J., M.A.

To treat existentialism as a philosophy is no more possible than to
treat idealism as a philosophy. The reason is obvious. Jean-Paul
Sartre is an existentialist and Gabriel Marcel is also an existentialist;
but the philosophy of Sartre is not the same as the philosophy of
Marcel. One can no more speak of the philosophy of Kierkegaard,
Jaspers, Heidegger, Sartre, Marcel and Berdyaev, as though they
maintained the same system, than one could speak of the philosophy
of Plato, Berkeley and Hegel, as though one philosophy was common
to the three thinkers. Of course, if one took idealism in the sense in
which the Marxist uses the term, as meaning the doctrine that mind
is prior to matter, i.e. as opposed to materialism (with the suggestion
that realism and materialism are equivalent), one would have a
definite theme to consider; but one would be forced to recognize as
idealists thinkers who would never call themselves by that name and
who would not be generally recognized as such. Similarly, if one said
that existentialism is the doctrine that man is free and that what he

makes of himself depends on himself, on his free choices, one would
doubtless have mentioned a doctrine which is common to the exis-

tentialists and which they insist upon; but one would at the same
time be forced to include in the ranks of the existentialists philo-
sophers whose inclusion would be manifestly absurd. It is very
difficult, then, to assign to existentialism any doctrinal content which
would be co