While both Zaroff and Rainsford believe that hunting is morally permissible based on the concept of "survival of the fittest," Rainsford thinks that hunting humans is morally and ethically wrong.
At first glance, Zaroff and Rainsford have similar philosophies about hunting. They both believe it's okay to hunt animals, because animals have "no understanding" or ability to reason, as shown in the opening conversation between Rainsford and Whitney; but Zaroff takes this concept of reasoning a step further. He feels hunting animals is far too easy, because they can't reason. Animals cannot make decisions the same way people do. They merely rely on the concept of fear to drive them.
Zaroff decides to create his own "game" where he can have a true challenge by hunting humans. While Rainsford scoffed at Whitney for his comments about animals having feelings, he is ironically in the same position as the "huntees." While he has no problem killing a helpless animal, he vehemently opposes Zaroff's...
(The entire section contains 4 answers and 935 words.)
Unlock This Answer Now
Start your 48-hour free trial to unlock this answer and thousands more. Enjoy eNotes ad-free and cancel anytime.
Already a member? Log in here.