The banker and lawyer make the bet for the same reason that most people make a bet. They each believe that their opinion is right and best, and they are willing to risk something to prove it.
Initially, the banker makes the bet for 5 years. He believes that the lawyer would not be able to endure 5 years of voluntary imprisonment. In the heat of the moment, the lawyer raises the stakes to fifteen years. He probably does this to prove how serious he is, and how much he believes that he is in the right.
answer choices The lawyer questions whether or not the banker has the money to make a worthwhile bet with him. The lawyer suggests that the banker doesn’t have the courage to place such a risky bet against him. The lawyer offers to give the banker two million if he cannot stay in solitary confinement for the agreed upon years.
Sep 09, 2015 · This realization has an important effect on the lawyer: it prompts him to forfeit the bet (and his right to the money) because he no longer values material wealth. Similarly, on learning that the...
Mar 13, 2009 · “The Bet” proves that if a person achieved the highest human wisdom he wouldn’t care about money or material things at all. He would be like Buddha or Jesus or Gandhi or Socrates, all of whom owned...
Terms in this set (10) The banker wants to prove his point that the death penalty is more humane than life imprisonment. What is the banker's motivation for suggesting the bet? The lawyer wants to prove that life imprisonment is more human than the death penalty and collect $2,000,000.
The lawyer states that the life sentence would be preferable, but the banker calls his bluff, saying that he couldn't stand five years in prison. The decision by the lawyer to raise the stakes is meant to prove his point that a life sentence would be preferable to a death sentence.Sep 12, 2019
How does the lawyer decide to conclude the bet, and why? At the end of the fifteen years, five hours before he would have gotten the 2 million rubles, the lawyer chooses to run away and revoke his right to the money, leaving a letter explaining himself. He has come to hate people and rejects the money on principle.Dec 16, 2021
The banker is motivated only by the need for entertainment and by boredom. Two million means nothing to him because as a young man, he had inherited millions.
Ans. The lawyer was confined for long period of fifteen years. The bankers was very rich but his economic condition had become weak by the fourteenth-fifteenth year of lawyers confinement. So, he was being afraid of honouring the bet.
When the banker opens the door into the cell, he discovers the lawyer now looking like a skeleton. He discovers a letter and reads it, but soon realizes the lawyer plans to lose. Five hours before the lawyer's time is complete, he runs away and terminates his eligibility to win the bet.
The banker comes to realize that he was wrong about his stance on life imprisonment. The banker mourns the life and experiences that he has deprived the lawyer of. The banker regrets placing the bet and thinks it was a stupid idea in the first place.
Answer: An agreement was signed between the banker and the lawyer. According to the agreement, the young lawyer had to stay in solitary confinement for fifteen years beginning from twelve o'clock of November 14, 1870, and ending at twelve o'clock of November 14, 1885.Nov 16, 2017
The Evil-Will-Always-Triumph-Over-Good Ending Possibility number two is that the banker cries from plain old relief. He's just so psyched he doesn't have to kill anyone and still gets to keep his money and everything is hunky-dory again. Yay.
Succumbing to the power of greed, the banker resolves to kill the lawyer to avoid losing his fortune, but changes his mind after finding a letter written by the lawyer where he renounces “the stuff of the earth” and declares he will break the terms of the bet.
I'm sorry, there is not a character by the name of Voldyrev in the story, The Bet.
From the text you have included: I think the lawyer has evolved to a more enlightened state while the banker is still stuck in the ways of greed an...
Are you giving me choices here?
Yet, Leo Tolstoy gave a good review of “The Bet” by Anton Chekhov. He wrote, “… his story is full of life.”. The story also reveals Chekhov’s attitude towards death penalty as something utterly immoral. At the end of the 19 th century, there was a heated dispute on the abolition of capital punishment in Russia.
Anton Chekhov was writing this short story for the magazine “Novoe Vremya”. Initially, it had been entitled “The Fairy Tale”, since a described situation was clearly fictional. Its characters and their actions had little in common with a real life.
By writing this story, Anton Chekhov tried to make people think about the point of their life and the meaning of money. His story points a certain moral and therefore resembles Russian fairy tales. However later, the title “The Fairy Tale” was replaced by “The Bet”. The first edition of this satirical story had another ending.
The The Bet quotes below are all either spoken by The Lawyer or refer to The Lawyer. For each quote, you can also see the other characters and themes related to it (each theme is indicated by its own dot and icon, like this one: ).
The timeline below shows where the character The Lawyer appears in The Bet. The colored dots and icons indicate which themes are associated with that appearance.
The The Bet quotes below are all either spoken by The Banker or refer to The Banker. For each quote, you can also see the other characters and themes related to it (each theme is indicated by its own dot and icon, like this one: ).
The timeline below shows where the character The Banker appears in The Bet. The colored dots and icons indicate which themes are associated with that appearance.
The banker is one of the two characters in the story. The story discusses the change a man undergoes when exiled to solitary confinement.
The lawyer is initially presented as a young man who attended the banker's party fifteen years before the story is told. He opposes the banker's arguments in a heated discussion about death penalty vs. imprisonment for life.
The other guests at the party are not named, nor do we know what their occupations are–except that some are journalists and intellectual men. (6)