Sophie’s temptations win over her patience to follow the path in the forest to where the philosopher may be living. She intrudes into the cabin she comes across which is an action I can never relate to—moreover a sketchy cabin in the woods across a swampy lake. Even whilst trespassing, she steals something from the property. It was a letter and although her name had been written on it, it doesn’t make it any better of a reason to steal it because it had not been given to her yet. She is unsure of who or what may be living in the cabin but she is hoping it is the philosopher’s even after he’d informed her that “one day [they] will meet, but [he] shall be the one to decide when and where.” (44) But then again, it also meant that she had been eager enough to trespass private property in order to “meet [him] and discuss some of the philosophic problems.” (85) If it had been Sophie at the beginning of the book, she definitely wouldn’t have done this because her passion for philosophy wasn’t large enough, which really displays how her character had developed over time. Although her behaviour in this scene is almost entirely something I’d be against, I think I’d likely go exploring in the woods as well to see if there was actually a habitable place for the philosopher to stay. I would not however, have trespassed private property and moreover stolen something from his home. As for the BC curriculum’s Social Responsibility Competency overview, she really is not socially responsible in this scene at all, as she had trespassed private property and stolen something.