Thursday, May 17, 2007
DUE FRIDAY 5/18 Apology Reading pp. 61-70
Indicate one sentence that you highlighted or underlined (give page number and section number) and write a short paragraph (at least 4 sentences) that explains why you underlined it or highlighted it. Be prepared to share this in discussion.
DUE THR 5/17 The Apology pp. 51-61
Indicate one sentence that you highlighted or underlined (give page number and section number) and write a short paragraph (at least 4 sentences) that explains why you underlined it or highlighted it. Be prepared to share this in discussion.
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
DUE WED 5/16 The Apology
Indicate one sentence that you highlighted or underlined (give page number and section number) and write a short paragraph (at least 4 sentences) that explains why you underlined it or highlighted it. Be prepared to share this in discussion.
The proper course for me, gentlemen of the jury, is to deal first with the earilest changes that have been falsely brought against me, and with my earilest accusers; and then with the later ones. I make this distinction because i have already been accused in your hearing by a great many people for a great many years, though without a word of truth;and i am more afraid of those people than i am on Anytus and his colleagues, although they are formidable enough
The proper course for me, gentlemen of the jury, is to deal first with the earilest changes that have been falsely brought against me, and with my earilest accusers; and then with the later ones. I make this distinction because i have already been accused in your hearing by a great many people for a great many years, though without a word of truth;and i am more afraid of those people than i am on Anytus and his colleagues, although they are formidable enough
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Due Wed 4/25 "Jigsaw Activity"
1) Give a quick explanation of the topic and propose a debate resolution of the topic. (a couple of sentence)
This topic is about the Patriot Act increasing censorship in the United States. “The Patriot Act violates the right of Americans to freely express their opinions”
2) Explain why it is an important topic. You choose what to write about, but here are some suggestions if you are stuck: How does it impact your constitutional rights? Can it impact your daily life? Does it empower or disempowered you as an individual? Does it promote or inhibit public discussion? Does it help or hurt people getting along with one another? (short paragraph)
The Patriot Act is allowing the government to request information from libraries and book stores about reading material of American citizens. The Patriot Act was created to “help” the government predict any terrorist attacks. First FBI and police had to show probable cause that some one had committed a crime to receive information, but the Patriot Act now allows them to receive information on people with no probable cause at all of any crime. Another down side is that bookstores or libraries cannot tell or warn anyone the investigation, including suspects. The punishment for violators is jail.
3) Write one or two sentences that explain a good point made by the con side and one or two sentences that explain a good point made by the pro side (2-4 sentences total).
“‘Right after 9/11, American s seemed eager to learn more about the world,’ says Larry Siems, director of International Programs at the PEN American Center. ‘They were reading, buying and checking out books on Islam…But the administration’s overall approach discourages people form seeking information. It is counterproductive. We end up with a society that is more isolated, less able to respond to the rest of the world.’”
This topic is about the Patriot Act increasing censorship in the United States. “The Patriot Act violates the right of Americans to freely express their opinions”
2) Explain why it is an important topic. You choose what to write about, but here are some suggestions if you are stuck: How does it impact your constitutional rights? Can it impact your daily life? Does it empower or disempowered you as an individual? Does it promote or inhibit public discussion? Does it help or hurt people getting along with one another? (short paragraph)
The Patriot Act is allowing the government to request information from libraries and book stores about reading material of American citizens. The Patriot Act was created to “help” the government predict any terrorist attacks. First FBI and police had to show probable cause that some one had committed a crime to receive information, but the Patriot Act now allows them to receive information on people with no probable cause at all of any crime. Another down side is that bookstores or libraries cannot tell or warn anyone the investigation, including suspects. The punishment for violators is jail.
3) Write one or two sentences that explain a good point made by the con side and one or two sentences that explain a good point made by the pro side (2-4 sentences total).
“‘Right after 9/11, American s seemed eager to learn more about the world,’ says Larry Siems, director of International Programs at the PEN American Center. ‘They were reading, buying and checking out books on Islam…But the administration’s overall approach discourages people form seeking information. It is counterproductive. We end up with a society that is more isolated, less able to respond to the rest of the world.’”
Due Tuesday 4/24 - The press in times of crisis
Assume that our next debate will have the resolution, "The press should be censored in times of crisis."
1) Indicate wheter your reading selection is pro or con for the above resolution and write three things that support the pro or con position on this issue.
I read the second part of the reading and it was con against the quote above. and i would definatly have to agree because the press shouldnt be censored becaus ie think the public needs to stay informed. But i understand why the military and goverenment want the press to be censored, its because they have everything to hide.They dont want the public to see some of the things they doa nd turn against them. SO thats why they want the media to be censored. Yes the truth can either help people a lot or hurt them, but at least its the truth and they know there not being lied to. And i think that if you tell the truth it will hurt but, it will hurt a lot less then if you lied and then someone found out.because then a trust issue comes into the picture.
AND
2) Write a paragraph where you state your opinion on the issue. It should include some evidence from the reading, but it does not have to follow each viewpoint to the letter. You can also include ideas and evidence from other sources or individuals.
I agree with the article i read. The media should not be censored during a time of crisis.The people need to be informed, i dont know how many times i can say that to get my opinion across. It is much worse to lie to someone then tell them the truth. It frustrates me when people lie and when they get caught they try to cover it up or blame it on other epople. which happens a lot.
1) Indicate wheter your reading selection is pro or con for the above resolution and write three things that support the pro or con position on this issue.
I read the second part of the reading and it was con against the quote above. and i would definatly have to agree because the press shouldnt be censored becaus ie think the public needs to stay informed. But i understand why the military and goverenment want the press to be censored, its because they have everything to hide.They dont want the public to see some of the things they doa nd turn against them. SO thats why they want the media to be censored. Yes the truth can either help people a lot or hurt them, but at least its the truth and they know there not being lied to. And i think that if you tell the truth it will hurt but, it will hurt a lot less then if you lied and then someone found out.because then a trust issue comes into the picture.
AND
2) Write a paragraph where you state your opinion on the issue. It should include some evidence from the reading, but it does not have to follow each viewpoint to the letter. You can also include ideas and evidence from other sources or individuals.
I agree with the article i read. The media should not be censored during a time of crisis.The people need to be informed, i dont know how many times i can say that to get my opinion across. It is much worse to lie to someone then tell them the truth. It frustrates me when people lie and when they get caught they try to cover it up or blame it on other epople. which happens a lot.
Sunday, April 22, 2007
DUE MONDAY 4/23 Viewpoints
1) For chapter 1, write three things based on the reading that supports the above resolution. This is the "pro" argument.
America as a whole is falling apart because everyone wants to express there opinions so much.Many people break the rules of the law. Explicit things are availible to many children very early on so they are getting these ideas in there head very young.
AND
2) For chapter 2, write three things based on the reading that goes against the above resolution. This is the "con" arguement.
Without the freedom to express ourselves through speech, things that have an opinion would never reach the world without being heavily screened, and probably heavily edited. If you strangle someone with rules about what they can say, all it will lead to is rebellion. It took a long time for America to develop into the society of today, many wars and consequences to create our laws, and those laws which we based our country on should be upheld
AND
3) Write a paragraph where you state your opinion on the issue. It should include some evidence from the reading, but it does not have to follow each viewpoint to the letter. You can also include ideas and evidence from other sources or individuals.
In addition to posting this on your blog you should print it out and put it in your notebook. You should have a section in your notebook devoted to the upcoming censorship debate and this should be in there.
America as a whole is falling apart because everyone wants to express there opinions so much.Many people break the rules of the law. Explicit things are availible to many children very early on so they are getting these ideas in there head very young.
AND
2) For chapter 2, write three things based on the reading that goes against the above resolution. This is the "con" arguement.
Without the freedom to express ourselves through speech, things that have an opinion would never reach the world without being heavily screened, and probably heavily edited. If you strangle someone with rules about what they can say, all it will lead to is rebellion. It took a long time for America to develop into the society of today, many wars and consequences to create our laws, and those laws which we based our country on should be upheld
AND
3) Write a paragraph where you state your opinion on the issue. It should include some evidence from the reading, but it does not have to follow each viewpoint to the letter. You can also include ideas and evidence from other sources or individuals.
In addition to posting this on your blog you should print it out and put it in your notebook. You should have a section in your notebook devoted to the upcoming censorship debate and this should be in there.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
DUE THUR 4/19 Don Imus Controversy
1. According to the NAACP, why should Imus be silenced?
They quote "needed to eradicate such hurtful speech from out popular culture."
2. According to Frank Rich, why should Imus not be silenced?
He think Imus shouldnt be censored becauser he isnt the first person in the media to use racial slurs.
3. Do you think Imus should be silenced? Why?
I personally, STRONGLY agree with Frank Rich because was Imus said wasnt racist or any different from the things some music artists say in thier lyircs. And if you think about it if a rap artist were to say 'nappy headed ho's' in his/her song they probley would have a number one hit. I dont think it makes okay to say a certain thing just because your ethinicity.
So maybe Imus did say mean or hurtful things about the basketball players BUT it is no different then what some people sing about. And i dont think the statement he said was racist, i think it was percieved of being a racist comment because he was not black or african american. Also, if you take out the part 'nappy headed' is that racist?? No, it isnt.
I dont think that the basketball players should be passed as innocent non-celebrities without opinions, because everyone has opinions. I think that the NAACP are completely blowing the whole issue out of preportion. I can understand if they followed thru with thier origional plan to suspend his talk show for a couple months or the rest of the season but to completey fire him is not reasonable.
In conclusion, im not agreeing with Frank Rich as in supporting what Imus said. Im just saying I understand why Frank RIch is supporting Imus. And i do as well because i dont think...I KNOW that Imus was NOT the first person to say hurtful things thru the media. So if they want to erase racist and sexist slurs then they probley need to earse one whiole genre of music. As well as a few channels.
They quote "needed to eradicate such hurtful speech from out popular culture."
2. According to Frank Rich, why should Imus not be silenced?
He think Imus shouldnt be censored becauser he isnt the first person in the media to use racial slurs.
3. Do you think Imus should be silenced? Why?
I personally, STRONGLY agree with Frank Rich because was Imus said wasnt racist or any different from the things some music artists say in thier lyircs. And if you think about it if a rap artist were to say 'nappy headed ho's' in his/her song they probley would have a number one hit. I dont think it makes okay to say a certain thing just because your ethinicity.
So maybe Imus did say mean or hurtful things about the basketball players BUT it is no different then what some people sing about. And i dont think the statement he said was racist, i think it was percieved of being a racist comment because he was not black or african american. Also, if you take out the part 'nappy headed' is that racist?? No, it isnt.
I dont think that the basketball players should be passed as innocent non-celebrities without opinions, because everyone has opinions. I think that the NAACP are completely blowing the whole issue out of preportion. I can understand if they followed thru with thier origional plan to suspend his talk show for a couple months or the rest of the season but to completey fire him is not reasonable.
In conclusion, im not agreeing with Frank Rich as in supporting what Imus said. Im just saying I understand why Frank RIch is supporting Imus. And i do as well because i dont think...I KNOW that Imus was NOT the first person to say hurtful things thru the media. So if they want to erase racist and sexist slurs then they probley need to earse one whiole genre of music. As well as a few channels.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
DUE WED 4/18 Plato Reading and Blog
1. Why should plays, and acting in them, be regulated? What is potentially beneficial or harmful from acting in a play?
Personally i dont think there is anything is coming out beneficial when Plato is censoring his republic. Because children actually might LEARN froim seeing the bad guys.And i think by censoring the people and not leting hte perform in a certain play because of the character they are playing is going to create a huge problem because i think that will just make people want to play that character.
Personally i dont think there is anything is coming out beneficial when Plato is censoring his republic. Because children actually might LEARN froim seeing the bad guys.And i think by censoring the people and not leting hte perform in a certain play because of the character they are playing is going to create a huge problem because i think that will just make people want to play that character.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
DUE TUE 4/17- Helpful Blog Comments
Kit Haggard said...
Lauren,
I REALLY like this peice. I chose this one to comment on for two reasons. One, I think that acting justly is HELP the community, not hurt it. If eveyone acted justly and honsetly, there would be far fewer problems in this world today.
Second, I agree with what you said about happiness. I think that it IS diffrent for every peson.
My recomendaition would be to reread things before you post them, thi one for example, was a little inchoherent.
I know that you were feeling baad today, so I hope that you are feeling better!!
Kit
Kits comment really helped me because she told me her opinion on how she felt about my blog i had written and also, told me what she agreed with and what her opinions were on the particular subject.
JulianGrijalva said...
Lauren, i can see that you put a lot of thought into this, does this have to do with your parents? friends? a bit confused on that but i can relate, I've been treated like I'm five, sometimes by teachers. i think though the first sentence "your stupidity enrages me" is a little much, sort of out of the blue, otherwise i like this whole blog, good job.
Julian just as Kit's helped me because he gave me contstructive critism. He told me what he liiked and what worked, and what he thought wasnt very good.
Paige! said...
Im glad that youre not confused with anything. greatt job.
paiges was encouraging but did help me at all at improving what i had done.
Lauren,
I REALLY like this peice. I chose this one to comment on for two reasons. One, I think that acting justly is HELP the community, not hurt it. If eveyone acted justly and honsetly, there would be far fewer problems in this world today.
Second, I agree with what you said about happiness. I think that it IS diffrent for every peson.
My recomendaition would be to reread things before you post them, thi one for example, was a little inchoherent.
I know that you were feeling baad today, so I hope that you are feeling better!!
Kit
Kits comment really helped me because she told me her opinion on how she felt about my blog i had written and also, told me what she agreed with and what her opinions were on the particular subject.
JulianGrijalva said...
Lauren, i can see that you put a lot of thought into this, does this have to do with your parents? friends? a bit confused on that but i can relate, I've been treated like I'm five, sometimes by teachers. i think though the first sentence "your stupidity enrages me" is a little much, sort of out of the blue, otherwise i like this whole blog, good job.
Julian just as Kit's helped me because he gave me contstructive critism. He told me what he liiked and what worked, and what he thought wasnt very good.
Paige! said...
Im glad that youre not confused with anything. greatt job.
paiges was encouraging but did help me at all at improving what i had done.
Monday, March 26, 2007
DUE TUE 3/27 Republic Assignment
1. Short Paragraph – Personal Reflection: Before reading the selection from Plato write at least one full paragraph on this question: Why do you think Plato (or anyone else) would want to censor Hesiod? Remember that Hesiod was the poet who wrote about the fight between the gods and the titans.
I think that PLato wantes to censor Hesiod because Hesiod's philosophy is against his. And of course if someones idea was against yours wouldnt you want to censor it? He doesn't want any competition for his philosophy. He wants everyone to believe him and to do that their must no be any other option to believe in.
a. What are Homer and Hesiod guilty of?
Hesiod is guilty of misrepresenting the nature of the gods and ancient heroes.
b. What are the two main characteristics of “god” and what are the laws/principles of story telling based on those characteristics?
God is the cause of all things good, and does not cause anything bad. Gods must be represented as they are in reality, which is good and just
4. Compare what you wrote in your personal reflection above (#1) with what Plato wrote. How close were you to what Plato wrote?
I think that PLato wantes to censor Hesiod because Hesiod's philosophy is against his. And of course if someones idea was against yours wouldnt you want to censor it? He doesn't want any competition for his philosophy. He wants everyone to believe him and to do that their must no be any other option to believe in.
a. What are Homer and Hesiod guilty of?
Hesiod is guilty of misrepresenting the nature of the gods and ancient heroes.
b. What are the two main characteristics of “god” and what are the laws/principles of story telling based on those characteristics?
God is the cause of all things good, and does not cause anything bad. Gods must be represented as they are in reality, which is good and just
4. Compare what you wrote in your personal reflection above (#1) with what Plato wrote. How close were you to what Plato wrote?
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
DUE WED 3/21 Republic Assignment
In your opinion, how can acting “right” (i.e. justly) help or harm the achievement of happiness? In your answer you need to first establish, in true Socratic fashion, what you mean by "right" (justice) and what you mean by happiness. What do you think Socrates would say about what you wrote and/or what do you think Thrasymachus would say?
‘Happiness depends on conformity to our nature as active beings. What active principles that nature comprises, and how they are organized into a system we learn in the immediately following books’.
I think that acting justly will hurt the community and people very much because it causes all the people to think alike. Meaning there is no room for change because everyone acts the way they are suppose to act.
Although in my opinion now, I think that happiness to each person, because what could make on person happy could not make another person happy. I think to live happy, you should do what you like. Also I think living ‘happy’ is living by your own standards and no one else’s. Personally that’s what I do. I used to live my life trying to please the people that surrounded me. I was always upset and extremely sensitive because I was so self conscious and felt as though I needed to be accepted by my peers. Not until recently did I start to live my life, because I realized there is a difference between being considerate of other people and putting them before myself. Meaning I would do anything to make the other person happy at my own expense.
‘Happiness depends on conformity to our nature as active beings. What active principles that nature comprises, and how they are organized into a system we learn in the immediately following books’.
I think that acting justly will hurt the community and people very much because it causes all the people to think alike. Meaning there is no room for change because everyone acts the way they are suppose to act.
Although in my opinion now, I think that happiness to each person, because what could make on person happy could not make another person happy. I think to live happy, you should do what you like. Also I think living ‘happy’ is living by your own standards and no one else’s. Personally that’s what I do. I used to live my life trying to please the people that surrounded me. I was always upset and extremely sensitive because I was so self conscious and felt as though I needed to be accepted by my peers. Not until recently did I start to live my life, because I realized there is a difference between being considerate of other people and putting them before myself. Meaning I would do anything to make the other person happy at my own expense.
Due Tuesday, 3/20 Republic Assignment
1. Notice that our reading on Thrasymachus is divided into two parts. The first part is entitled – “First Statement and Criticisms”. In this first part, what are Socrates’ main argument(s) against the idea that justice is whatever the strong (i.e. the government) says it is?
Socrates states that it would be a foolish way for things to be. Most politicians and leaders are always making decisions for their best interest, meaning what is in their best interest is the law, and anything else is against the law. But, if a leader gives an order by accident that hurts them, then it is against the law, but the leader gave the order so the people must obey it. It is cryptic talk of how backwards things would be in that case.
2. In the second part – “Second Statement and Final Refutation” – what are Thrasymahcus’ two main points and what are Socrates’ two main points in response?
Thrasymachus' two main points are that 'justice is the interest of the stronger party' and that 'injustice is the interest and profit of oneself'.
Socrates respondes with the points that 'no one really wants authority and with it the job of righting other people's wrongs, unless paid for it' and also that 'all wise men would prefer the benefit of this service at the hands of others rather than the labor of affording it to others themselves'.
3. In your opinion, is it ever right to harm somebody? Why or why not?
I dont think there is EVER an appropiate time to hurt someone. Unless you must, like if you are being attacked. But i dont think that it is right to hurt someone because of what they said to you or your friend. I think most things can be solved with talking it out. I wish this is how things would be solved, unfortunatly i dont think that anyone could never harm anyone. Because if you think about it you can harm someone without ever laying a finger on them.
Socrates states that it would be a foolish way for things to be. Most politicians and leaders are always making decisions for their best interest, meaning what is in their best interest is the law, and anything else is against the law. But, if a leader gives an order by accident that hurts them, then it is against the law, but the leader gave the order so the people must obey it. It is cryptic talk of how backwards things would be in that case.
2. In the second part – “Second Statement and Final Refutation” – what are Thrasymahcus’ two main points and what are Socrates’ two main points in response?
Thrasymachus' two main points are that 'justice is the interest of the stronger party' and that 'injustice is the interest and profit of oneself'.
Socrates respondes with the points that 'no one really wants authority and with it the job of righting other people's wrongs, unless paid for it' and also that 'all wise men would prefer the benefit of this service at the hands of others rather than the labor of affording it to others themselves'.
3. In your opinion, is it ever right to harm somebody? Why or why not?
I dont think there is EVER an appropiate time to hurt someone. Unless you must, like if you are being attacked. But i dont think that it is right to hurt someone because of what they said to you or your friend. I think most things can be solved with talking it out. I wish this is how things would be solved, unfortunatly i dont think that anyone could never harm anyone. Because if you think about it you can harm someone without ever laying a finger on them.
Monday, March 19, 2007
DUE FRI 3/16 Personal Reflection and Plato Assignment
1. Blog entry: “Personal Reflection 3/16” – Since Socratic philosophy is largely about definitions, lets start with some of our own. In one paragraph (or more) define what a friend is and how you should act towards a friend. Instead of that, you can write a paragraph (or more) that defines what an enemy is and how you should act towards an enemy. Of course you can also write about both if you like. These are topics that you will read about in the assignment below.
A friend is someone you can rely on. Someone you can tell your feelings to, and be yourself without worrying what they think about you.A friend is someone who will tell you the truth even if it will hurt your feelings. A friend is someone who will let you cry on thier shoulder as you would they yours.A friend is someone who can leave your life for a while but once htey are bac in it , it seems like they were there the whole time.I love all my friends. and i have a many of them, but only a handfull i know that will stick with me through everything. There the friends that i get in fights with but know my life would never be the same without them in my life.
A friend is someone you can rely on. Someone you can tell your feelings to, and be yourself without worrying what they think about you.A friend is someone who will tell you the truth even if it will hurt your feelings. A friend is someone who will let you cry on thier shoulder as you would they yours.A friend is someone who can leave your life for a while but once htey are bac in it , it seems like they were there the whole time.I love all my friends. and i have a many of them, but only a handfull i know that will stick with me through everything. There the friends that i get in fights with but know my life would never be the same without them in my life.
Thursday, March 15, 2007
DUE FRI, 3/16 Republic Assignment
Read: Part I Introduction, Prelude pp. 2-8 (all of the Prelude)
Post answers on your blog and also print them out and keep them in your binder so you can reference them in class. Don’t forget to put the questions in bold print and write the answer in regular print.
Answer all of the questions, this time you have to do both sections.
I. Answer the following questions – short answer (about a couple of sentences or more)
Who are Cephalus and Polemarchus?
They are Socertes friends. Cephalus is Polemarchus's dad or to be proper father.
What is the profession of Cephalus?
bussiness man
What was Cephalus doing right before the discussion that took place?
Cephalus was taking part in the daily sacrafice.
According to Cephalus, what are the virtues of old age?
Because an old man has expierianced more, he is mich wiser then a young man who has just begun his journey on the road of life.Only the thing about being old is that you know death is near, so many men are afraid that what they have heard in their many years about the afterlife (the horrors and the judgments) are true and or false.
What are Cephalus’ view of justice?
Cephalus believes that justice is paying back your debts and not lying.
What is Socrates response?
socertes proposes a situation where you have borrowed a weapon from a friend, but then that friend is deemed mad, at which point you shouldn't return the weapon (paying back the debt). So basically, there are situations where you have to lie or not pay back debts, all Socrates is doing is exposing a flaw in Cephalus' idea.
AND
II. Write a one paragraph response to the following question:
Do you agree with Cephaus or with Socrates? Why? If you don't agree with either of them, write about which one you think makes the stronger arguement - even if you think it is not "right" - and why?
AND
III. Try to give this a shot, if you can’t answer it that’s okay: What do you think Cephaus represents? What is particular or unique about his view of justice compared to the others you have discussed in class?
Post answers on your blog and also print them out and keep them in your binder so you can reference them in class. Don’t forget to put the questions in bold print and write the answer in regular print.
Answer all of the questions, this time you have to do both sections.
I. Answer the following questions – short answer (about a couple of sentences or more)
Who are Cephalus and Polemarchus?
They are Socertes friends. Cephalus is Polemarchus's dad or to be proper father.
What is the profession of Cephalus?
bussiness man
What was Cephalus doing right before the discussion that took place?
Cephalus was taking part in the daily sacrafice.
According to Cephalus, what are the virtues of old age?
Because an old man has expierianced more, he is mich wiser then a young man who has just begun his journey on the road of life.Only the thing about being old is that you know death is near, so many men are afraid that what they have heard in their many years about the afterlife (the horrors and the judgments) are true and or false.
What are Cephalus’ view of justice?
Cephalus believes that justice is paying back your debts and not lying.
What is Socrates response?
socertes proposes a situation where you have borrowed a weapon from a friend, but then that friend is deemed mad, at which point you shouldn't return the weapon (paying back the debt). So basically, there are situations where you have to lie or not pay back debts, all Socrates is doing is exposing a flaw in Cephalus' idea.
AND
II. Write a one paragraph response to the following question:
Do you agree with Cephaus or with Socrates? Why? If you don't agree with either of them, write about which one you think makes the stronger arguement - even if you think it is not "right" - and why?
AND
III. Try to give this a shot, if you can’t answer it that’s okay: What do you think Cephaus represents? What is particular or unique about his view of justice compared to the others you have discussed in class?
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
DUE WED 3/14 - Personal Reflection (Plato)
I wasn't in class for this discussion, well I'm actually not sure if this was an in class discussion, but the question interested me so i decided to write about my feelings...because this is a blog.
Recall a time that you heard a statement of “fact” that was later found to be untrue. It can be from a parent, a teacher, a friend, a government official, a book, or a film. How did you find out it was untrue and how did it make you feel? Did it change your outlook on anything?
One time i went to my grandpa and grandmas house, and as i pulled into the drive way i noticed my grandmas car was dented on one side. So i was got worried, i thought my grandma had been in a crash. So i ran inside to ask my grandma what happened, but i saw my grandpa before her. I asked him what had happened and he said she backed into a wall or pole or something like that. After he told me i asked if she was okay, and he said yes. So, after my grandpa had told me what happened i was just like okay im glad my grandma isnt hurt. A couple days later i was talking to my grandma and i told her i was all concerned about her getting hurt from the crash. Then i asked her where she ran into the wall, and she said, no i didnt run into a wall your grandpa was back out of the drive way and forgot to take the car out of reverse.
When i found out what really happened, i wasnt mad just annoyed. Because why would my grandpa not tell me that HE did it and it wasnt just an accident. Well obviously he didn't crash into her car intentionally but it was just frustrating because he felt embarrassed to tell me that he didn't. That is something that bugs me, when people lie about little mistakes. Theres nothing wrong with making mistakes because everyone does it.
Recall a time that you heard a statement of “fact” that was later found to be untrue. It can be from a parent, a teacher, a friend, a government official, a book, or a film. How did you find out it was untrue and how did it make you feel? Did it change your outlook on anything?
One time i went to my grandpa and grandmas house, and as i pulled into the drive way i noticed my grandmas car was dented on one side. So i was got worried, i thought my grandma had been in a crash. So i ran inside to ask my grandma what happened, but i saw my grandpa before her. I asked him what had happened and he said she backed into a wall or pole or something like that. After he told me i asked if she was okay, and he said yes. So, after my grandpa had told me what happened i was just like okay im glad my grandma isnt hurt. A couple days later i was talking to my grandma and i told her i was all concerned about her getting hurt from the crash. Then i asked her where she ran into the wall, and she said, no i didnt run into a wall your grandpa was back out of the drive way and forgot to take the car out of reverse.
When i found out what really happened, i wasnt mad just annoyed. Because why would my grandpa not tell me that HE did it and it wasnt just an accident. Well obviously he didn't crash into her car intentionally but it was just frustrating because he felt embarrassed to tell me that he didn't. That is something that bugs me, when people lie about little mistakes. Theres nothing wrong with making mistakes because everyone does it.
DUE THUR, 3/15 Similie of the Cave Reading Questions
Answer ALL of these questions with short answers (3 - 5 sentences).
1. Socrates asks Glaucon to suppose that one of the prisoners is freed and leaves the cave (p. 242 section 515d). What happens to the prisoner when he gets outside? Why does this happen to the prisoner?
The prisoner can’t look up because he is so used to being in the cave with no light. Socrates and Glaucon said it would be the easiest for the prisoner to see shadows because that is what he was used to seeing. Then he will move up to being able to see the reflections of himself and other people in the water. After he would be able to see the actual objects. The prisoner would move up slowly to see the actual objects and be able to live like the normal people. Then he would be able to look at the sun itself without blinking.
AND
2. Socrates states that the prisoners would try to kill anyone who tries to liberate them and lead them out of the cave (pp. 243 – 244 section 517a). Why would the prisoners kill someone who is trying to lead them outside?
The prisoners are happy with the way they are. They don’t want to hear the truth because they don’t want to realize that what they thought was the truth is a lie. So the prisoners didn’t want to be led out of the cave in fear that they didn’t know anything else other then pointing at the shadows and knowing what they were.
AND
3. While reading pages 243-244 (section 517) keep in mind that the cave represents the way society actually is, while the sun (visible outside the cave) represents knowledge that could make for a better society. Don't let the wording confuse you, Socrates sometimes calls the outside "the intelligible region" and associates it with "the divine."
What is special about "the intelligible region" and why is it important for public servants/political leaders (p. 244 section 517 b and e)?
It is very important for the higher power because that is how they control the prisoners or the people below them. Because without it it would give the prisoners and people below the higher power room to think for themselves.
AND
3. What is wrong with having uneducated people run society? What is wrong with having intellectuals (i.e. well-educated people) run society (p. 323 section 519c)?
Socrates says that things will never be properly governed if the uneducated dictact. The reason being that they would have no clue what to do or say. Because they are uneducated they need directing in everything they do.
And Socrates says the problem with having intellectuals govern would be that they know many things. So they would think they were godly and just want everyone to serve beneath them. And the people would be too controlled.
AND
4. On pp. 323 – 324 (section 519 section d – section 520) Socrates tells Glaucon what the "job" of a lawmaker is. What is the job of a lawmaker and how is a lawmaker supposed to influence the best minds?
What the law makers do is they listen to Socrates and Glaucon tell them about what is good and what is bad. They then take that and they spread to the people what they heard what is good and what is bad. This is how they control they people even more.
1. Socrates asks Glaucon to suppose that one of the prisoners is freed and leaves the cave (p. 242 section 515d). What happens to the prisoner when he gets outside? Why does this happen to the prisoner?
The prisoner can’t look up because he is so used to being in the cave with no light. Socrates and Glaucon said it would be the easiest for the prisoner to see shadows because that is what he was used to seeing. Then he will move up to being able to see the reflections of himself and other people in the water. After he would be able to see the actual objects. The prisoner would move up slowly to see the actual objects and be able to live like the normal people. Then he would be able to look at the sun itself without blinking.
AND
2. Socrates states that the prisoners would try to kill anyone who tries to liberate them and lead them out of the cave (pp. 243 – 244 section 517a). Why would the prisoners kill someone who is trying to lead them outside?
The prisoners are happy with the way they are. They don’t want to hear the truth because they don’t want to realize that what they thought was the truth is a lie. So the prisoners didn’t want to be led out of the cave in fear that they didn’t know anything else other then pointing at the shadows and knowing what they were.
AND
3. While reading pages 243-244 (section 517) keep in mind that the cave represents the way society actually is, while the sun (visible outside the cave) represents knowledge that could make for a better society. Don't let the wording confuse you, Socrates sometimes calls the outside "the intelligible region" and associates it with "the divine."
What is special about "the intelligible region" and why is it important for public servants/political leaders (p. 244 section 517 b and e)?
It is very important for the higher power because that is how they control the prisoners or the people below them. Because without it it would give the prisoners and people below the higher power room to think for themselves.
AND
3. What is wrong with having uneducated people run society? What is wrong with having intellectuals (i.e. well-educated people) run society (p. 323 section 519c)?
Socrates says that things will never be properly governed if the uneducated dictact. The reason being that they would have no clue what to do or say. Because they are uneducated they need directing in everything they do.
And Socrates says the problem with having intellectuals govern would be that they know many things. So they would think they were godly and just want everyone to serve beneath them. And the people would be too controlled.
AND
4. On pp. 323 – 324 (section 519 section d – section 520) Socrates tells Glaucon what the "job" of a lawmaker is. What is the job of a lawmaker and how is a lawmaker supposed to influence the best minds?
What the law makers do is they listen to Socrates and Glaucon tell them about what is good and what is bad. They then take that and they spread to the people what they heard what is good and what is bad. This is how they control they people even more.
Thursday, March 1, 2007
PRIDE!
PRIDE!!!!!!!!!
: the quality or state of being proud: as a: inordinate self-esteem : conceit b: a reasonable or justifiable self-respect c: delight or elation arising from some act, possession, or relationship
: the quality or state of being proud: as a: inordinate self-esteem : conceit b: a reasonable or justifiable self-respect c: delight or elation arising from some act, possession, or relationship
3/2 Iliad Assignment
Patrocolus is killed by Hector. And Before Patroclus dies he says that Hector will be killed by Achilles.
thats basically all that happened.
thats basically all that happened.
3/1 Iliad Reading
What does Patroclus propose to Achilles and what is Achilles’ response? Why does Achilles grant Patroclus’ request?
Protroclus tells achilles he wants to fight. because it will help the achean to incerease theier moral value if they see achilles body armor. even if it isnt achilles in the armor.Achilles gives patrocolus his armor and he guards the ships.
On p. 413 line 35 (approximately), Patroclus tells Achilles that Achilles is “cursed in [his] own courage.” What does Patroclus mean by that and do you agree with him?
mental or moral strength to venture, persevere, and withstand danger, fear, or difficulty
synonyms COURAGE, METTLE, SPIRIT, RESOLUTION, TENACITY mean mental or moral strength to resist opposition, danger, or hardship.
I think he means that Achilles has too much courage and he is cursed wiht it because he belives too much in himself. this goes back to pride.
Protroclus tells achilles he wants to fight. because it will help the achean to incerease theier moral value if they see achilles body armor. even if it isnt achilles in the armor.Achilles gives patrocolus his armor and he guards the ships.
On p. 413 line 35 (approximately), Patroclus tells Achilles that Achilles is “cursed in [his] own courage.” What does Patroclus mean by that and do you agree with him?
mental or moral strength to venture, persevere, and withstand danger, fear, or difficulty
synonyms COURAGE, METTLE, SPIRIT, RESOLUTION, TENACITY mean mental or moral strength to resist opposition, danger, or hardship.
I think he means that Achilles has too much courage and he is cursed wiht it because he belives too much in himself. this goes back to pride.
2/28 Iliad Assignment
Write a question you have about the text, either an interpretive question that you have an opinion on, or something that you don't understand. You don't need to write the answer.
My question is: Why did Achilles travel all the way to Troy to fight and not?
What was your opinion of Achilles before reading Book 9? Does it change after reading Book 9? Explain why or why not.
My opinion of Achilles hasnt really changed since book 1. I still jsut dont understand why Achilles would come to Troy and not fight. I am happy that he wasnt stupid and didnt take the prizes that Agamemnon was offering him. But i wish he would fight. Not with Agamemnon but with his soliders.
My question is: Why did Achilles travel all the way to Troy to fight and not?
What was your opinion of Achilles before reading Book 9? Does it change after reading Book 9? Explain why or why not.
My opinion of Achilles hasnt really changed since book 1. I still jsut dont understand why Achilles would come to Troy and not fight. I am happy that he wasnt stupid and didnt take the prizes that Agamemnon was offering him. But i wish he would fight. Not with Agamemnon but with his soliders.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Achilles Questions Book 9
Lauren Poblete
Humanities
Jana Peter
27 February 2007
Iliad Notes
Write a question. It can be an interpretive question that you have an opinion on or something about the text that you don't understand. You do not need to write the answer.
Agamemnon is using lots of things to get Achilles to fight for him and with his men. My question is, does Achilles realize that if he accepts Agamemnon’s offer that he won’t really get any of it? Meaning, Agamemnon knows that Achilles will die in war, so he wont have to give Achilles anything. The land his daughters. Nothing.
What was your opinion of Agamemnon before reading this section? Does your opinion of him change after reading it? Why or why not? A one paragraph reply is fine, minimum of 6 solid setneces, but you are encouraged to write more.
In class we discussed Agamemnon’s traits and personality. He was selfish, greedy and cowardly among many other things. Those were all the things I associated with Agamemnon when I was reading the first tablet of the Iliad. So far, what I have read in book nine, my feelings about Agamemnon has NOT changed. Agamemnon is still being very cowardly; he is trying to persuade Achilles to fight for him, by offering him all these nice things which no man in his right mind wouldn’t accept. In the first book, Agamemnon thinks highly of himself and in book nine as Agamemnon offers Achilles prizes, he tells Achilles he is a great fighter but he is still better no matter how good of a fight Achilles is. The only thing that surprised me about Agamemnon was that he was offering Achilles prizes for him to fight with his troops , but then again, this goes back to cowardliness because Agamemnon is only doing that because it will benefit him.
Sometimes it is hard to sort out weather or not the things Agamemnon does are good or bad.
At various points in the text some characters attempt to persuade other characters to take a course of action. Examples of characters using persuasion include Nestor, Odysseus, and Ajax. Make a list of the persuasive strategy used by these characters, following this format
1. Appeal to reason (logic - does it “make sense” to do what the speaker says)
2. Appeal to emotion (does it try to make you happy, sad, angry etc… in an attempt to get you to act or think a certain way)
3. Appeal to ethics (right and wrong, moral principals - does it get you to think that a particular thought is morally right or wrong to get you to act or think a certain way)
Diomedes trys to persuade the counsel not to loose hope in winning over troy. Me this seemed like it appealed to emotion because Diomedes was talking about honor, and honor connects to emotions.
Odyseuss tries to persuade Achilles to stay and fight for Agamemnon. He was sent from Agamemnon with a message but he doesn’t say exactly was Agamemnon says. I think this appeals to ethics. Because he is trying to get Agamemnon to fight, but he is talking in such a way that it sounds more appealing to Achilles.
Also, the one thing that stuck out to me the most was when Agamemnon was trying to persuade Achilles to fight with him by giving him many things. I think that Agamemnon is appealing to logic because he is trying to manipulate things the way that he wants them. But if Achilles would really think about it he would realize that he wouldn’t be getting any of the things that Agamemnon said he would give him AFTER the war because Achilles is going to die in battle, like his mother had told him before he left for Troy.
Humanities
Jana Peter
27 February 2007
Iliad Notes
Write a question. It can be an interpretive question that you have an opinion on or something about the text that you don't understand. You do not need to write the answer.
Agamemnon is using lots of things to get Achilles to fight for him and with his men. My question is, does Achilles realize that if he accepts Agamemnon’s offer that he won’t really get any of it? Meaning, Agamemnon knows that Achilles will die in war, so he wont have to give Achilles anything. The land his daughters. Nothing.
What was your opinion of Agamemnon before reading this section? Does your opinion of him change after reading it? Why or why not? A one paragraph reply is fine, minimum of 6 solid setneces, but you are encouraged to write more.
In class we discussed Agamemnon’s traits and personality. He was selfish, greedy and cowardly among many other things. Those were all the things I associated with Agamemnon when I was reading the first tablet of the Iliad. So far, what I have read in book nine, my feelings about Agamemnon has NOT changed. Agamemnon is still being very cowardly; he is trying to persuade Achilles to fight for him, by offering him all these nice things which no man in his right mind wouldn’t accept. In the first book, Agamemnon thinks highly of himself and in book nine as Agamemnon offers Achilles prizes, he tells Achilles he is a great fighter but he is still better no matter how good of a fight Achilles is. The only thing that surprised me about Agamemnon was that he was offering Achilles prizes for him to fight with his troops , but then again, this goes back to cowardliness because Agamemnon is only doing that because it will benefit him.
Sometimes it is hard to sort out weather or not the things Agamemnon does are good or bad.
At various points in the text some characters attempt to persuade other characters to take a course of action. Examples of characters using persuasion include Nestor, Odysseus, and Ajax. Make a list of the persuasive strategy used by these characters, following this format
1. Appeal to reason (logic - does it “make sense” to do what the speaker says)
2. Appeal to emotion (does it try to make you happy, sad, angry etc… in an attempt to get you to act or think a certain way)
3. Appeal to ethics (right and wrong, moral principals - does it get you to think that a particular thought is morally right or wrong to get you to act or think a certain way)
Diomedes trys to persuade the counsel not to loose hope in winning over troy. Me this seemed like it appealed to emotion because Diomedes was talking about honor, and honor connects to emotions.
Odyseuss tries to persuade Achilles to stay and fight for Agamemnon. He was sent from Agamemnon with a message but he doesn’t say exactly was Agamemnon says. I think this appeals to ethics. Because he is trying to get Agamemnon to fight, but he is talking in such a way that it sounds more appealing to Achilles.
Also, the one thing that stuck out to me the most was when Agamemnon was trying to persuade Achilles to fight with him by giving him many things. I think that Agamemnon is appealing to logic because he is trying to manipulate things the way that he wants them. But if Achilles would really think about it he would realize that he wouldn’t be getting any of the things that Agamemnon said he would give him AFTER the war because Achilles is going to die in battle, like his mother had told him before he left for Troy.
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Disagreements
In your blog write about a time when you had a big disagreement with a friend - or other person - that led you or the other person to regret things that were said or done. Focus on the negative consequences of the disagreement and decisions that you or the other person made that might have made things needlessly worse. You can also write about something similar from literature or the movies, or even about other people that you know. Remember this is a public forum so be careful what you write. You can change names and fictionalize details.
I am not very big about confrontation but sometimes i think that people just need to know when they are doing something that is bugging me or tha ti dont agree with. When i say i dont agree with them, i mean big issues not something little like i dont like that you eat meat, or i dont agree that you dont eat meat. I think there are differences between personal disagreements and more open ones...if that makes sense. I believe in no regrets, but sometimes i do. I know a lot of people who have that sam type of outlook, but i dont think that any one person could ever NOT regret something.Because to live without regrets ,at least in my opinion, is to never second guess anything or to never genuanly feel bad about something you said or did. It would be like not having a concious, which i thin everyone unless you murder someone, which even THEN i still think that you would regret that.When i say things i usually wont say it unless i mean it or unless i want it to be heard. When i do actually am bothered enough to want to tell someone that im bothered by something they did or i dont agree with them, im very nice about it, meaning i am very fake i guess you would say.
sorry that my writing is so mixed and confusing. this is just a little look at what its like in my noggin.
thanks for reading if anyone even did.
I am not very big about confrontation but sometimes i think that people just need to know when they are doing something that is bugging me or tha ti dont agree with. When i say i dont agree with them, i mean big issues not something little like i dont like that you eat meat, or i dont agree that you dont eat meat. I think there are differences between personal disagreements and more open ones...if that makes sense. I believe in no regrets, but sometimes i do. I know a lot of people who have that sam type of outlook, but i dont think that any one person could ever NOT regret something.Because to live without regrets ,at least in my opinion, is to never second guess anything or to never genuanly feel bad about something you said or did. It would be like not having a concious, which i thin everyone unless you murder someone, which even THEN i still think that you would regret that.When i say things i usually wont say it unless i mean it or unless i want it to be heard. When i do actually am bothered enough to want to tell someone that im bothered by something they did or i dont agree with them, im very nice about it, meaning i am very fake i guess you would say.
sorry that my writing is so mixed and confusing. this is just a little look at what its like in my noggin.
thanks for reading if anyone even did.
Monday, February 12, 2007
RAGE
Write about a time when you were angry. Focus on the cause of your anger. In other words, what made you angry? This should be a minimum of one full paragraph with an easily understood topic sentence. For example, “I was angry when …” The key to doing well on this type of writing is to provide explanations.
YOUR STUPIDITY ENRAGES ME. I hate when you treat me like im five, like i have no atettion span. When you say something I listen, you dont have to repeat it 5 times. I know how to use a knife to cut a piece of chicken or a carrott.I dont need to you treat me like im five. I dont want you to completely cut me off but i wish you would treat me like a growing adult. and i wish you would realize that everything you point out that i do wrong, you do the same things. I just dont think you realize it,if i mention anything you start to freak out and yell. I want to scream and shout and punch everything in sight, but i cant i contain myself because i cant let my anger get the best of me!!!!!
YOUR STUPIDITY ENRAGES ME. I hate when you treat me like im five, like i have no atettion span. When you say something I listen, you dont have to repeat it 5 times. I know how to use a knife to cut a piece of chicken or a carrott.I dont need to you treat me like im five. I dont want you to completely cut me off but i wish you would treat me like a growing adult. and i wish you would realize that everything you point out that i do wrong, you do the same things. I just dont think you realize it,if i mention anything you start to freak out and yell. I want to scream and shout and punch everything in sight, but i cant i contain myself because i cant let my anger get the best of me!!!!!
Thursday, February 8, 2007
Descriptive Writing PART dos!
Lauren Poblete
Jana Peter
Humanities
9 February 2007
Montag
I look at that thing Mildred now lives in, has lived in ever since I can remember. I wish
she would realize I'm here and that the script of life isn't her life. I pick this horrible thing,
I'm just waiting for some vortex to shoot open and suck me in, like it had done to Mildred and all
her other clones. I read these words, but they mean nothing. Line after line, nothing after nothing
Mildred reads this nothingness day after day and lives her life like she is suppose to, not
questioning anything. Sometimes I wish Mildred would talk to men when I brought up important things,
like Clarisse.Clarisse would never buy into this stuff, she would know right away. Thru my thoughts
of Clarisse and Mildred I still continue to read on. The more I read the more angry i get. I wish
that it was these books us firemen burned, not the ones filled with limitless knowlodge.
Jana Peter
Humanities
9 February 2007
Montag
I look at that thing Mildred now lives in, has lived in ever since I can remember. I wish
she would realize I'm here and that the script of life isn't her life. I pick this horrible thing,
I'm just waiting for some vortex to shoot open and suck me in, like it had done to Mildred and all
her other clones. I read these words, but they mean nothing. Line after line, nothing after nothing
Mildred reads this nothingness day after day and lives her life like she is suppose to, not
questioning anything. Sometimes I wish Mildred would talk to men when I brought up important things,
like Clarisse.Clarisse would never buy into this stuff, she would know right away. Thru my thoughts
of Clarisse and Mildred I still continue to read on. The more I read the more angry i get. I wish
that it was these books us firemen burned, not the ones filled with limitless knowlodge.
Descriptive writing part one
THIS IS MY FIRST DESCRIPTIVE PARAGRAH, PLEASE TELL ME ANY SUGGESTIONS YOU HAVE OR JUST COMMENTS. THANKS AND KEEP ROCKING THE FREE WORLD
Lauren Poblete
Jana Peter
Humanities
8 February 2007
Descriptive Writing
I look at the thing that Mildred lives in. Why doesn’t she realize I’m here and that that it isn’t real life. I pick up the book and read from it. There is nothing, but people like Mildred wouldn’t know that because she lives like she is suppose to live. Clarisse would know. Clarisse would know right away, she would never read this. I read more and the more I read the more frustrated I get. I wish that it was these books we burned not the ones filled with limitless knowlodge. I know that if I try to explain to Mildred that the book is really about nothing she won’t understand.
Lauren Poblete
Jana Peter
Humanities
8 February 2007
Descriptive Writing
I look at the thing that Mildred lives in. Why doesn’t she realize I’m here and that that it isn’t real life. I pick up the book and read from it. There is nothing, but people like Mildred wouldn’t know that because she lives like she is suppose to live. Clarisse would know. Clarisse would know right away, she would never read this. I read more and the more I read the more frustrated I get. I wish that it was these books we burned not the ones filled with limitless knowlodge. I know that if I try to explain to Mildred that the book is really about nothing she won’t understand.
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
Descriptive Writing - page 125
ON YOUR BLOG:
1. Find the scene in the book
Page 125 second paragraph.
2. Make a list of the descriptive words in that scene – minimum of 3, but you should be able to find a lot
-whirling whisper
-flurried
-plummeting
3. Write a short paragraph of why you think that scene and the words Bradbury used were effective in representing fear. This is like the assignment from last night expect with Bradbury.
I think one of the may reasons Ray Bradburys books are so good is because he is so descriptive.
...'and then they were plummeting down to land,one by one,here there'...
the words he uses are very helpful in making a great scene in the readers head, at least for me.
1. Find the scene in the book
Page 125 second paragraph.
2. Make a list of the descriptive words in that scene – minimum of 3, but you should be able to find a lot
-whirling whisper
-flurried
-plummeting
3. Write a short paragraph of why you think that scene and the words Bradbury used were effective in representing fear. This is like the assignment from last night expect with Bradbury.
I think one of the may reasons Ray Bradburys books are so good is because he is so descriptive.
...'and then they were plummeting down to land,one by one,here there'...
the words he uses are very helpful in making a great scene in the readers head, at least for me.
Hesiod
One of these questions might appear on a quiz.
1. What do you think this myth tells about the ancient Greeks? What values did they have? Why would a story like this develop?
1. What do you think this myth tells about the ancient Greeks? What values did they have? Why would a story like this develop?
Tuesday, February 6, 2007
Descriptive Writing!!!
write down 3-5 of your own words that you thought were particularly descriptive and for at least one of your words give a reason why you thought if was effective. Be specific: Don't just say, "it's a scary word," but tell us why it is scary. Maybe it is related to a particular image or smell, emotion, or something from your past.
The words can be from any part of speech – subject, verb, adverb, adjective, noun etc…
For this particular blog assingment, i didnt use any descriptive powerful words. Its the way that i used the words that made people think
'First things first. squirt squirt. I see the blue liquid hit the surface and trickle down. I quickly wipe the liquid from the surface until its free of any smearing. "Are you almost finshed?", someone says. I am just trying to do my job. I walk out and wait until the person is finished. squirt squirt, I am back to where I was before. Squirting and wiping, my arm feels like an engine, and engine that just lost all its power, but i continue to do my work because I want to see Britney Spears this weekend. This is the only way I will be able to. SQUIRT, WIPEEEE. ah...it's finally over.'
The words can be from any part of speech – subject, verb, adverb, adjective, noun etc…
For this particular blog assingment, i didnt use any descriptive powerful words. Its the way that i used the words that made people think
'First things first. squirt squirt. I see the blue liquid hit the surface and trickle down. I quickly wipe the liquid from the surface until its free of any smearing. "Are you almost finshed?", someone says. I am just trying to do my job. I walk out and wait until the person is finished. squirt squirt, I am back to where I was before. Squirting and wiping, my arm feels like an engine, and engine that just lost all its power, but i continue to do my work because I want to see Britney Spears this weekend. This is the only way I will be able to. SQUIRT, WIPEEEE. ah...it's finally over.'
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
F451 138-154
How has Montag changed from the beginning of the novel to this part? In writing about this you might want to notice that the environment has changed from the city to nature. Is this a coincidence or is the author trying to say something by contrasting the city to nature in relation to the ways Montag has changed.
In the begining of the story Montag was just another part of society. He went to work as a fireman, he came home every night to his wife Mildred. He had the same routine everyday and was 'happy'. But then everything changed when he met Clarisse, she asked him questions about life and about the history of things that made Montag really think.This is when Montag stopped being just abother part of society, he questioned things. Montag BIGGGEST change was when he got toghther with Farber and they made the plan to get back at the government for getting rid of all the books. Montag started to look at thing differently and didnt just do was he was 'suppose' to do.
I defianatly think that Ray Bradbury is saying something;the old Montag and the New Montag.
In the city(old Montag), everything and everyone did was it was suppose to do. No one really stopped to think about the way things worked or how things got to be how they were. They just lived there lives like they were suppose to.
In the forrest(new Montag), Montag had to chance to stop and absorb the world around him. He could have his own thoughts with out getting in trouble or being afriad.
In the begining of the story Montag was just another part of society. He went to work as a fireman, he came home every night to his wife Mildred. He had the same routine everyday and was 'happy'. But then everything changed when he met Clarisse, she asked him questions about life and about the history of things that made Montag really think.This is when Montag stopped being just abother part of society, he questioned things. Montag BIGGGEST change was when he got toghther with Farber and they made the plan to get back at the government for getting rid of all the books. Montag started to look at thing differently and didnt just do was he was 'suppose' to do.
I defianatly think that Ray Bradbury is saying something;the old Montag and the New Montag.
In the city(old Montag), everything and everyone did was it was suppose to do. No one really stopped to think about the way things worked or how things got to be how they were. They just lived there lives like they were suppose to.
In the forrest(new Montag), Montag had to chance to stop and absorb the world around him. He could have his own thoughts with out getting in trouble or being afriad.
F451 125-137
Find a line from the story or a paragraph that you like and explain why you like it.
Montag faltered, got a grip on the books, and forced himself not to freeze. Instinctivly he took a few wuick running steps, then talked out loud to himself and pulled up to stroll again. He was now half across the street, but the roar or the beetle's engines whined higher as it put on speed.
What I really like about this is the last part about the roar of the car. Because it doesnt seem like it would be a car...but it is. I think this part in the book shows that Montag has changed, because I think Montag is really thinking now. Well also because he has books, but he isnt pretending anymore, although him thinking started with Clarisse I think this shows too how Montag has changed.
Montag faltered, got a grip on the books, and forced himself not to freeze. Instinctivly he took a few wuick running steps, then talked out loud to himself and pulled up to stroll again. He was now half across the street, but the roar or the beetle's engines whined higher as it put on speed.
What I really like about this is the last part about the roar of the car. Because it doesnt seem like it would be a car...but it is. I think this part in the book shows that Montag has changed, because I think Montag is really thinking now. Well also because he has books, but he isnt pretending anymore, although him thinking started with Clarisse I think this shows too how Montag has changed.
F451 110-125
1. Summarize what happens in one or two sentences.
Captain Beatty forced Montag to burn his own house down because he had books in it, and was threating Montag. While his house was burning down, Montag killed Beatty with a flame thrower and Beatty died. Now Montag has run away.
Captain Beatty forced Montag to burn his own house down because he had books in it, and was threating Montag. While his house was burning down, Montag killed Beatty with a flame thrower and Beatty died. Now Montag has run away.
Thursday, January 25, 2007
F451 91-100
Give a very short (1-3 sentence) summary of the two main scenes in this section. The first scene was at home in the living room and the second scene was in the fire house with Beatty.
In the first big scene Montag overhears his wife ,Mildred, and her friends talk about their husbands. More speciafically how thier husbands were fighting in the war, and how they didnt care because they knew they were going to be okay. When Montag hears this he gets very angry(as i would too) and starts to rage. He reads the women a poem, and one of Mildreds friend begins to cry. When Mildred sees the lady's reaction shes says that it was just a joke and that shes throwing a party for Montags 'wild' behavier. Even after saying this the women want to leave. Maybe this was all in Montags plan, because before the women leave, because when they do he yells, "Go home and think of your first husband divorced and your second husband killed in a jet and your third husband blowing his brains out, go home and think of the dozen abortions you’ve had, go home and think of that and your damn Caesarian sections too, and your children who hate your guts! Go home and think how it all happened and what did you ever do to stop it?”
In the second scene Beatty is telling Montag about a “dream” he had. In the dream Montag and Beatty where arguing, saying quotes from different books. What Beatty was trying to do was confuse Montag, making sure he would be on his side with the rest of the firemen. Luckily Faber was there to guide Montag through it. The alarm bell rang and they all went out to burn a house. They pull up at the house for Montag to only realize it is his house that they are burning.
In the first big scene Montag overhears his wife ,Mildred, and her friends talk about their husbands. More speciafically how thier husbands were fighting in the war, and how they didnt care because they knew they were going to be okay. When Montag hears this he gets very angry(as i would too) and starts to rage. He reads the women a poem, and one of Mildreds friend begins to cry. When Mildred sees the lady's reaction shes says that it was just a joke and that shes throwing a party for Montags 'wild' behavier. Even after saying this the women want to leave. Maybe this was all in Montags plan, because before the women leave, because when they do he yells, "Go home and think of your first husband divorced and your second husband killed in a jet and your third husband blowing his brains out, go home and think of the dozen abortions you’ve had, go home and think of that and your damn Caesarian sections too, and your children who hate your guts! Go home and think how it all happened and what did you ever do to stop it?”
In the second scene Beatty is telling Montag about a “dream” he had. In the dream Montag and Beatty where arguing, saying quotes from different books. What Beatty was trying to do was confuse Montag, making sure he would be on his side with the rest of the firemen. Luckily Faber was there to guide Montag through it. The alarm bell rang and they all went out to burn a house. They pull up at the house for Montag to only realize it is his house that they are burning.
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
F451 81-91
Faber jokingly proposes a plan of action and then starts to discuss it seriously with Montag. What is the plan of action? More importantly, why does he say it won’t work? Analyze his answer. Why won't it work?
Farbers ,MASTA, plan was to plant books in each of the firemens houses. By putting bookis in the firemens houses they would be caught with book and for a change get there houses burned down to the ground.
Farber says the plan to plant books inside other firemens houses WOULD NOT work because of trust. Farber and Montag themselves could not possibly plant all the books by themselves, they would need other people. But they people they chose to help plant the books would have to be people they could trust, which was hard to find.
Farbers ,MASTA, plan was to plant books in each of the firemens houses. By putting bookis in the firemens houses they would be caught with book and for a change get there houses burned down to the ground.
Farber says the plan to plant books inside other firemens houses WOULD NOT work because of trust. Farber and Montag themselves could not possibly plant all the books by themselves, they would need other people. But they people they chose to help plant the books would have to be people they could trust, which was hard to find.
F451 pages 71-80
What are you confused about?
My answer is be mostly the same everytime, but I'm not really confused about anything. If i dotn fully understand something thats happening in the book I just re-read the book, or ask a peer how they read it or understood it.
C. What is the signfificance of the story about the sieve and the sand? There is a reference to it shortly after the story is told. Why? What's going on here.
Main Entry: 1sieve
Pronunciation: 'siv
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English sive, from Old English sife; akin to Old High German sib sieve
: a device with meshes or perforations through which finer particles of a mixture (as of ashes, flour, or sand) of various sizes may be passed to separate them from coarser ones, through which the liquid may be drained from liquid-containing material, or through which soft materials may be forced for reduction to fine particles
If you didnt already know what the definition of sieve was then you shouldve read the definition above this. Montag told the story of when his cousin promised him money if he could hold the sand in the sieve. Montag accepted, but at the time didnt know that it was impossible for him to do...impossible for anyone. I think along with not being able to understand things as Montag didnt understand that the sieve couldnt hold sand, helplessness also goes along with this too. I think that that word 'helplessness' came to mind for me because Montag was the only one who didnt know that the sieve couldnt hold the sand. Not only being helpless from the sieve, similer feelings if ot exact would be the sam for Montag and books.
My answer is be mostly the same everytime, but I'm not really confused about anything. If i dotn fully understand something thats happening in the book I just re-read the book, or ask a peer how they read it or understood it.
C. What is the signfificance of the story about the sieve and the sand? There is a reference to it shortly after the story is told. Why? What's going on here.
Main Entry: 1sieve
Pronunciation: 'siv
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English sive, from Old English sife; akin to Old High German sib sieve
: a device with meshes or perforations through which finer particles of a mixture (as of ashes, flour, or sand) of various sizes may be passed to separate them from coarser ones, through which the liquid may be drained from liquid-containing material, or through which soft materials may be forced for reduction to fine particles
If you didnt already know what the definition of sieve was then you shouldve read the definition above this. Montag told the story of when his cousin promised him money if he could hold the sand in the sieve. Montag accepted, but at the time didnt know that it was impossible for him to do...impossible for anyone. I think along with not being able to understand things as Montag didnt understand that the sieve couldnt hold sand, helplessness also goes along with this too. I think that that word 'helplessness' came to mind for me because Montag was the only one who didnt know that the sieve couldnt hold the sand. Not only being helpless from the sieve, similer feelings if ot exact would be the sam for Montag and books.
F451 pages 40-68
(From the perspective of Captain Beatty).
Is it better to be ignorant and happy OR is it better to be aware, educated and disturbed at the world?
Theres a saying 'ignorance is bliss', and this is what Caption Beatty makes clear, well not that ignorance is bliss, but that he would much rather be ignorant BUT happy. You find this out when Beatty tells...well recites Montag his speach. The reason why i say recites is because he didnt think of the speech himself. What Beatty believes is happiness and what he believes in is true, but only because someone else who told him about it believed it was true as well. The cycle just repeats itself forever. So maybe Beatty ideas aren't origional, BUT in this futuristic era or time that is in F541, Beatty is still MUCH more informed then say Montag's wife Mildred, who is scared to question and deal with the consrquenses of the 'real world'
Is it better to be ignorant and happy OR is it better to be aware, educated and disturbed at the world?
Theres a saying 'ignorance is bliss', and this is what Caption Beatty makes clear, well not that ignorance is bliss, but that he would much rather be ignorant BUT happy. You find this out when Beatty tells...well recites Montag his speach. The reason why i say recites is because he didnt think of the speech himself. What Beatty believes is happiness and what he believes in is true, but only because someone else who told him about it believed it was true as well. The cycle just repeats itself forever. So maybe Beatty ideas aren't origional, BUT in this futuristic era or time that is in F541, Beatty is still MUCH more informed then say Montag's wife Mildred, who is scared to question and deal with the consrquenses of the 'real world'
Something I Dread
First things first. squirt squirt. I see the blue liquid hit the surface and trickle down. I quickly wipe the liquid from the surface until its free of any smearing. "Are you almost finshed?", someone says. I am just trying to do my job. I walk out and wait until the person is finished. squirt squirt, I am back to where I was before. Squirting and wiping, my arm feels like an engine, and engine that just lost all its power, but i continue to do my work because I want to see Britney Spears this weekend. This is the only way I will be able to. SQUIRT, WIPEEEE. ah...it's finally over.
Thursday, January 18, 2007
F451 Pages 21-40
What do you find confusing? What is something you don’t understand?
Like before, im not confused about anything in the book. When i do feel a little confused or unsure of what is fully going on i re-read the part that i didnt get.
1) Montag compares Mildred (his wife) to Clarisse and says that Clarisse seems older. In what way does Clarisse act more mature and WHY do you think she is more mature? Why does Bradbury (the author) make the contrast between the two?
I think Clarisse, although she is younger, 'seems older' then Mildred because she isnt afraid to ask questions. Clarisse doesnt just take in and believe what is put in front of her, and Clarisse doesnt do what all the 'normal' kids her age are doing. She is not afraid to question the unknown, or Guy. Mildred seems less mature compared to Clarisse, i think, because she jsut goes with the flow and doesnt have her own opinion. This isnt Mildreds fault though, its the only thing she knows. Mildred reads the scrips and is 'happy' with the way she lives with Guy....
Like before, im not confused about anything in the book. When i do feel a little confused or unsure of what is fully going on i re-read the part that i didnt get.
1) Montag compares Mildred (his wife) to Clarisse and says that Clarisse seems older. In what way does Clarisse act more mature and WHY do you think she is more mature? Why does Bradbury (the author) make the contrast between the two?
I think Clarisse, although she is younger, 'seems older' then Mildred because she isnt afraid to ask questions. Clarisse doesnt just take in and believe what is put in front of her, and Clarisse doesnt do what all the 'normal' kids her age are doing. She is not afraid to question the unknown, or Guy. Mildred seems less mature compared to Clarisse, i think, because she jsut goes with the flow and doesnt have her own opinion. This isnt Mildreds fault though, its the only thing she knows. Mildred reads the scrips and is 'happy' with the way she lives with Guy....
Pages 3-21
What do you find confusing?
I dont really find anything confusing. While i was reading sometimes it took a re read to fully understand what was happening in a part of the story, but nothing i couldnt understand. Also the book reminds me of 1984...in some ways.
1) Even before Montag and his wife Mildred talk to one another we know that they are alienated (distant) from one another. How does the author convey this?
I think he shows that they are distant in ways that, he is at work all day starting fires and his Mildred is at home. Also when Montag meets Clarrisse it is night, and as he talks to her it he shows no rush or worry or need to get home to Mildred. Also when Montag gets home, Mildred is asleep
I dont really find anything confusing. While i was reading sometimes it took a re read to fully understand what was happening in a part of the story, but nothing i couldnt understand. Also the book reminds me of 1984...in some ways.
1) Even before Montag and his wife Mildred talk to one another we know that they are alienated (distant) from one another. How does the author convey this?
I think he shows that they are distant in ways that, he is at work all day starting fires and his Mildred is at home. Also when Montag meets Clarrisse it is night, and as he talks to her it he shows no rush or worry or need to get home to Mildred. Also when Montag gets home, Mildred is asleep
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
HI FRIENDS!
i have no idea how this blog thing works...so this is a test.
;D
ummm yeah you guys are chill.
stay cool
;D
ummm yeah you guys are chill.
stay cool
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
