Asked by des
You have read "from Harriet Tubman: Conductor on the Underground Railroad". Using the text answer the following question, "Would you consider Harriet Tubman a hero or a fugitive?" Write a persuasive essay to support your claim. Use evidence from the text and have a counter. Essay should contain at least 6 sentences. Tell what you will talk about in the introductory paragraph. Have two paragraphs to support your claim, one paragraph thats a counterclaim, and a conclusion
All Answers 1
Answered by
GPT-5 mini
AI
Claim: Harriet Tubman was a hero. In this essay I will explain how the text portrays Tubman’s brave leadership and self-sacrifice as a “conductor on the Underground Railroad,” give examples of her repeated rescues and the risks she took, consider the opposing view that she was legally a fugitive in her time, and show why the moral case for heroism is stronger.
First, the text shows Tubman acting out of courage and care for others rather than self-interest. According to the selection, after winning her own freedom she returned to the South many times to guide enslaved people to safety; the author calls her a “conductor on the Underground Railroad,” emphasizing her leadership. The narrative describes her planning, knowledge of safe routes, and steady calm under danger, all qualities we associate with a hero. The text also highlights how she put herself in harm’s way again and again, refusing to stay safe after her own escape so that others could be free.
Second, the book gives concrete examples of Tubman’s sacrifice and skill that support calling her a hero. It recounts the hardships she endured — long night journeys, hiding from slave catchers, and the constant threat of capture — and it shows how she used courage, cunning, and care to bring people to freedom. The account stresses that she did this out of a deep commitment to justice and family, repeatedly risking punishment and death to help others. Those actions, as narrated in the text, fit the definition of heroism: selfless, brave, and aimed at securing rights and safety for people treated as property.
Counterclaim: some readers might argue that Tubman was a fugitive rather than a hero because she broke the laws of her time and led enslaved people away from their legal owners. The text itself acknowledges that slaveholders and the authorities considered her a criminal and that the Fugitive Slave laws made such escapes and rescues punishable. From a strictly legal-historical perspective of that era, it is accurate to call her a fugitive.
Conclusion: despite the legal label of “fugitive” in her historical context, the text supports the stronger, more enduring judgment that Harriet Tubman was a hero. Her repeated, self-sacrificing missions to free others, her bravery in the face of violent danger, and her leadership as a “conductor on the Underground Railroad” show moral courage that outweighs the fact that she broke unjust laws. The book presents her as someone who risked everything to do what was right, and on that basis she should be remembered as a hero.
First, the text shows Tubman acting out of courage and care for others rather than self-interest. According to the selection, after winning her own freedom she returned to the South many times to guide enslaved people to safety; the author calls her a “conductor on the Underground Railroad,” emphasizing her leadership. The narrative describes her planning, knowledge of safe routes, and steady calm under danger, all qualities we associate with a hero. The text also highlights how she put herself in harm’s way again and again, refusing to stay safe after her own escape so that others could be free.
Second, the book gives concrete examples of Tubman’s sacrifice and skill that support calling her a hero. It recounts the hardships she endured — long night journeys, hiding from slave catchers, and the constant threat of capture — and it shows how she used courage, cunning, and care to bring people to freedom. The account stresses that she did this out of a deep commitment to justice and family, repeatedly risking punishment and death to help others. Those actions, as narrated in the text, fit the definition of heroism: selfless, brave, and aimed at securing rights and safety for people treated as property.
Counterclaim: some readers might argue that Tubman was a fugitive rather than a hero because she broke the laws of her time and led enslaved people away from their legal owners. The text itself acknowledges that slaveholders and the authorities considered her a criminal and that the Fugitive Slave laws made such escapes and rescues punishable. From a strictly legal-historical perspective of that era, it is accurate to call her a fugitive.
Conclusion: despite the legal label of “fugitive” in her historical context, the text supports the stronger, more enduring judgment that Harriet Tubman was a hero. Her repeated, self-sacrificing missions to free others, her bravery in the face of violent danger, and her leadership as a “conductor on the Underground Railroad” show moral courage that outweighs the fact that she broke unjust laws. The book presents her as someone who risked everything to do what was right, and on that basis she should be remembered as a hero.
Submit Your Answer
We prioritize human answers over AI answers.
If you are human, and you can answer this question, please submit your answer.