For climbers, ‘challenge’ is a purpose of their lives. Everyone wants to tackle something new, and grab fame of ‘the venture’. Since the first climber was born, many people have built records of spectacular adventures, and a virginal place has become smaller so the climbers have to risk more dangers. Now there is controversy as to whether people go to those virginal parts because they like risks, or people like virginal places so they can take risks.
There was a climbing group trying out Mount Cook. That was a well-organized party with many experienced climbers.
One night, they had a meeting to talk about route selecting on Mt. Cook, and a captain suggested a route D, which was situated only the map and no one had succeeded yet. A success on the route D would give them a prize for the best climbers. However, a climbers’ goal is to reach the top somehow. The method is not the most important problem as long as they can get to the top, and if they could not, they would have nothing but disappointment. An experienced climber opposed him to change the plan to route A, which everyone knew well. They would not get respect but they would still be able to achieve the top, and they could try another course after they had prepared well. Thus, the route D was the delight of the captain, who also had much experience and had spent a long time on groundwork. They started arguing with each other. Both opinions were very logical and significant estimations. So, even when another person came in to block the conflict, the majority of them could not decide. Finally, the oppositions left the meeting room and the captain’s group stayed there. After he asked everybody who dislikes his plan to leave the room, he started talking about his roadmap. He reorganized his party and took them to Mt. Cook. A group, who left there, could not find a way to arrange another party to climb route A, so they stayed at their houses.
They were relaxing at their houses and watching television. On a timely news programme, a newscaster started talking about an accident on Mt. Cook. Some climbers had not come back to a their base on the proposed day. It was obviously about their ex-members. As they had warned, those members failed passing route D and got nothing. They expected others to apologize for their arguments and felt confident about themselves. Their predictions were right and the others had to consider the importance of these. However at the next moment, the caster mentioned a casualty of the disaster, which meant they could not see all of their friends anymore.
This story shows the importance of not doing wrong things and forcing other people to do it as well. It is significant that people should not do wrong things, but people cannot force others to anything especially when it is not completely wrong. However, they might have to take a step forward to prevent heartbreaking results.
First, they could have stayed in the meeting room longer to try and persuade more members not to go. At least, they could have provided more information for each other. Even if they might not have been able to stop the decision at all, members could have been able to have knowledge to make the decision that they are responsible for. Moreover, they knew the route D, and how dangerous it was. Even if they had gone together they may not have been able to pass through, but they could have supported each other in returning safely. If this was the case, they would understand their mistakes and others would not have had to regret that they could not stop them.
There was a climbing group trying out Mount Cook. That was a well-organized party with many experienced climbers.
One night, they had a meeting to talk about route selecting on Mt. Cook, and a captain suggested a route D, which was situated only the map and no one had succeeded yet. A success on the route D would give them a prize for the best climbers. However, a climbers’ goal is to reach the top somehow. The method is not the most important problem as long as they can get to the top, and if they could not, they would have nothing but disappointment. An experienced climber opposed him to change the plan to route A, which everyone knew well. They would not get respect but they would still be able to achieve the top, and they could try another course after they had prepared well. Thus, the route D was the delight of the captain, who also had much experience and had spent a long time on groundwork. They started arguing with each other. Both opinions were very logical and significant estimations. So, even when another person came in to block the conflict, the majority of them could not decide. Finally, the oppositions left the meeting room and the captain’s group stayed there. After he asked everybody who dislikes his plan to leave the room, he started talking about his roadmap. He reorganized his party and took them to Mt. Cook. A group, who left there, could not find a way to arrange another party to climb route A, so they stayed at their houses.
They were relaxing at their houses and watching television. On a timely news programme, a newscaster started talking about an accident on Mt. Cook. Some climbers had not come back to a their base on the proposed day. It was obviously about their ex-members. As they had warned, those members failed passing route D and got nothing. They expected others to apologize for their arguments and felt confident about themselves. Their predictions were right and the others had to consider the importance of these. However at the next moment, the caster mentioned a casualty of the disaster, which meant they could not see all of their friends anymore.
This story shows the importance of not doing wrong things and forcing other people to do it as well. It is significant that people should not do wrong things, but people cannot force others to anything especially when it is not completely wrong. However, they might have to take a step forward to prevent heartbreaking results.
First, they could have stayed in the meeting room longer to try and persuade more members not to go. At least, they could have provided more information for each other. Even if they might not have been able to stop the decision at all, members could have been able to have knowledge to make the decision that they are responsible for. Moreover, they knew the route D, and how dangerous it was. Even if they had gone together they may not have been able to pass through, but they could have supported each other in returning safely. If this was the case, they would understand their mistakes and others would not have had to regret that they could not stop them.