~ What are the differences between men and women in terms of the way they regard relationships.
Growing up in the world from child to adult, there are many myths between men and women that we learn. Many people in the world believe that when it comes down to it, that they are completely different. Women are always said to be the ones to be sensitive and emotional, and the men are supposed to be the ones who are tough and strong. When it comes down to relationship, many people believe women and men have a different outlook. The women have the myth to be the ones to take care of the men by feeding them and making sure their home life style is easy. Men really did not have really anything besides being there husband. Another myth we hear growing up is that women look at someone’s personality and their looks do not matter, were men only care about how the women looks, and if their not pretty then do not want anything to do with them.
When it comes down to the end, I believe that there is not really a difference between men and women about relationships. I believe that there are many women and men that have different terms in the way they believe in a relationship. Although, isn’t that why the person you consider to marry to be special. Isn’t that what love is? I believe in life, when you find a person that you feel completes you, views and sees things the same way you do that women and men will not have differences between relationships. Many myths have been build from the past because women did not have the same rights has they do now. I believe people growing up in today’s world, have a different life as many people in the past. That’s why many of these myths seem crazy to many younger people in today’s world.
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Simone De Beauvoir
~How does men’s power benefit from the myth(s) of women?
In the early years of life, women nearly had any rights or even any rights at all. Throughout many years in the world, men were the top dog, and were considered to be anything and do everything in the world. For men to benefit from myth(s) of women would be like finding out someone’s weakness. When people in the world find out how to use something to their advantage, they take it and use if against them. To think that women in today’s world were treated as if there were back then is something I can not even picture. It would almost be compared to a family’s pet dog, and I can see why men could benefit for it. Living in today’s world, women are as equal as or even better than men in a lot of ways. Now with Mrs. Clinton is the runnings for President and many other women in the government, this is a great way to so that many of the myth(s) there once was, are disappearing. Looking at a women’s point of view, I can see how many of them felt cheated from their life. A lot of the women back in time did not get the chance to live to their fullest. It would like doing something you love, but not getting the chance to do at your fullest. I am glad that the myth(s) that used to be considered towards the women are finally disappearing.
In the early years of life, women nearly had any rights or even any rights at all. Throughout many years in the world, men were the top dog, and were considered to be anything and do everything in the world. For men to benefit from myth(s) of women would be like finding out someone’s weakness. When people in the world find out how to use something to their advantage, they take it and use if against them. To think that women in today’s world were treated as if there were back then is something I can not even picture. It would almost be compared to a family’s pet dog, and I can see why men could benefit for it. Living in today’s world, women are as equal as or even better than men in a lot of ways. Now with Mrs. Clinton is the runnings for President and many other women in the government, this is a great way to so that many of the myth(s) there once was, are disappearing. Looking at a women’s point of view, I can see how many of them felt cheated from their life. A lot of the women back in time did not get the chance to live to their fullest. It would like doing something you love, but not getting the chance to do at your fullest. I am glad that the myth(s) that used to be considered towards the women are finally disappearing.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Woolf
~ What was the expected role of women in Shakespeare’s time?
If we looked back in the time of Shakespeare, I would have to say that women did not really have a role in life. They basically listen to there husband or father, and just did what they told. If we took a look back and think about ever movie or story that was written about those times, if seems has if the women were told just to look pretty, and never really have a thought on anything else. Even back then sometimes the women did even get to pick out their husband; they just listen to their father on what man to be with for their rest of their life. Women back in those days were not treated as people, which in my mind is horrible. They didn’t have any rights, and it was like they only goal for them was to look good for your husband, and in front of other people. As a child going up we watch all these “Once upon a Time” movies and both the boys and girls love them. Although, as we get older we realize how the women in most of those movies, did not have any rights to do anything. I thought the reading by author Woolf, I thought she explained very strong points, and has ideas that I never really thought of. Women back in the time of Shakespeare were not treated with any respect at all, and I’m glad we do not live that life style that they once did.
If we looked back in the time of Shakespeare, I would have to say that women did not really have a role in life. They basically listen to there husband or father, and just did what they told. If we took a look back and think about ever movie or story that was written about those times, if seems has if the women were told just to look pretty, and never really have a thought on anything else. Even back then sometimes the women did even get to pick out their husband; they just listen to their father on what man to be with for their rest of their life. Women back in those days were not treated as people, which in my mind is horrible. They didn’t have any rights, and it was like they only goal for them was to look good for your husband, and in front of other people. As a child going up we watch all these “Once upon a Time” movies and both the boys and girls love them. Although, as we get older we realize how the women in most of those movies, did not have any rights to do anything. I thought the reading by author Woolf, I thought she explained very strong points, and has ideas that I never really thought of. Women back in the time of Shakespeare were not treated with any respect at all, and I’m glad we do not live that life style that they once did.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Robert B. Reich
~ Why and how does an individual’s position in the world economy depend on the function he/she performs in it?
There is one thing in the world that everyone wants, money. Every since being a little child, everyone in the world wishes they had millions of dollars so they can just relax and enjoy the world. One way to have that is by working for it. In today’s world if you want to make the big dollars, you have to work for it. The harder and better you perform at your job, the more money you will make. For example, let’s pretend there is a money tree, the harder and better you perform, the higher you can go up and more money you can receive. In today’s world people can not receive a well paying job without having a college degree. Unless your family already has earned themselves a name in this world, everyone else has to earn it. A business or company wants the best working for them. Once you are in, the harder you work, the better chance you have at moving up the food chain. The best example I can think of is the movie “pursuit of happiness”. The guy went from having nothing, to working hard and being great at his career. People in today’s world have to realize that if you want to be rich or successful in your life time, you have to earn it. Find something you know you would be good at, and exercise it. That is how you can separate your self for everyone else that is how you become successful.
There is one thing in the world that everyone wants, money. Every since being a little child, everyone in the world wishes they had millions of dollars so they can just relax and enjoy the world. One way to have that is by working for it. In today’s world if you want to make the big dollars, you have to work for it. The harder and better you perform at your job, the more money you will make. For example, let’s pretend there is a money tree, the harder and better you perform, the higher you can go up and more money you can receive. In today’s world people can not receive a well paying job without having a college degree. Unless your family already has earned themselves a name in this world, everyone else has to earn it. A business or company wants the best working for them. Once you are in, the harder you work, the better chance you have at moving up the food chain. The best example I can think of is the movie “pursuit of happiness”. The guy went from having nothing, to working hard and being great at his career. People in today’s world have to realize that if you want to be rich or successful in your life time, you have to earn it. Find something you know you would be good at, and exercise it. That is how you can separate your self for everyone else that is how you become successful.
Friday, November 9, 2007
John Kenneth Galbraith
~ Why is modern poverty different from that of a century ago?
I believe modern poverty has changed tremendously from a century ago. As days go by in this world the middle class seems to disappear, while the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. My theory on why I believe poverty has changed a great deal is because of the working environment we have today. A century ago people did not have to attend college to receive well paying jobs; most people did not go to college. There were also more jobs available for people who held a lower education. But now being year 2007, there is not a place in this world were you can find a great paying job without the diploma of a college education, while most of the little jobs we needed people for have been replaced by machines or computers. By this happening the poverty line has changed so fast from a century ago. With this happening people have to realize that something is going to have to great. This is a major issue going on in the world, and if no one is stepping up to the plate, who is? The world has changed so fast from the last century, and is only going to get faster. While most things are improving in the world, poverty is not. In the novel “The Position of Poverty” author John Kenneth Galbraith explains his thoughts on poverty as he breaks it downs into pieces between case poverty and the other insular poverty.
I believe modern poverty has changed tremendously from a century ago. As days go by in this world the middle class seems to disappear, while the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. My theory on why I believe poverty has changed a great deal is because of the working environment we have today. A century ago people did not have to attend college to receive well paying jobs; most people did not go to college. There were also more jobs available for people who held a lower education. But now being year 2007, there is not a place in this world were you can find a great paying job without the diploma of a college education, while most of the little jobs we needed people for have been replaced by machines or computers. By this happening the poverty line has changed so fast from a century ago. With this happening people have to realize that something is going to have to great. This is a major issue going on in the world, and if no one is stepping up to the plate, who is? The world has changed so fast from the last century, and is only going to get faster. While most things are improving in the world, poverty is not. In the novel “The Position of Poverty” author John Kenneth Galbraith explains his thoughts on poverty as he breaks it downs into pieces between case poverty and the other insular poverty.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Karl Marx
~ How does the expanding world market for goods affect national identity?
In the late 1800’s a man named Karl Marx had an idea which he called communism. Communism was a type of government that he thought all countries should live by. Many countries after reading the idea of Karl Marx thought the idea of communism was the greatest type of government ever created. During the 1900’s many countries turn to communism, by this it started many wars between many countries and even world wars. What people do not realize is that reading Karl Marx’s study on communism, it looks like the greatest system a country could turn too. If gives a government many ways to rise back up by making everything in the country equal. Many people in the U.S believe in the term the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and the middle class seem to disappear. And this is where communism can step in. By turning to communism it makes everything equal. There are no rich or poor, and everything is spread out even throughout the country. Marx’s also believe this would expand the national market between all the countries. When Marx’s first came out with his theory, many countries did not trade between each other. But in today’s world there is world trade market all over the world. Karl Marx theory on expanding the trade market is basically the same as how he thinks communism would run in the countries. With everything being equal, countries and people could trade between each other to products they need. For example, if I had a car and needed a house and someone had a house and needed a car. We could trade each other to help are needs. Now, in the national trade market it works like this but with bigger products in different ways.
In the late 1800’s a man named Karl Marx had an idea which he called communism. Communism was a type of government that he thought all countries should live by. Many countries after reading the idea of Karl Marx thought the idea of communism was the greatest type of government ever created. During the 1900’s many countries turn to communism, by this it started many wars between many countries and even world wars. What people do not realize is that reading Karl Marx’s study on communism, it looks like the greatest system a country could turn too. If gives a government many ways to rise back up by making everything in the country equal. Many people in the U.S believe in the term the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and the middle class seem to disappear. And this is where communism can step in. By turning to communism it makes everything equal. There are no rich or poor, and everything is spread out even throughout the country. Marx’s also believe this would expand the national market between all the countries. When Marx’s first came out with his theory, many countries did not trade between each other. But in today’s world there is world trade market all over the world. Karl Marx theory on expanding the trade market is basically the same as how he thinks communism would run in the countries. With everything being equal, countries and people could trade between each other to products they need. For example, if I had a car and needed a house and someone had a house and needed a car. We could trade each other to help are needs. Now, in the national trade market it works like this but with bigger products in different ways.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Martha Nussbaum
~ What are the central human capabilities?
Martha C Nussbaum is a professor at the University of Chicago, where she teaches literature and philosophy. During her teaching career Nussbaum wrote a novel called “The Central Human Functional Capabilities”. Throughout her book she expresses not in what a person really does, but what they should be in titled too. For example, she believes that all people should get the chance to live a long live, that everyone should have the choice to get an education, that everyone should be able to eat enough for themselves, that all people should have the choice to live in a home unless they choose not to do so (Nussbaum). This is all called central human functional capabilities. In her book Nussbaum makes a list of ten things she believes that people should have a choice to in during that life. After reading this novel I really find myself supporting in what Nussbaum is trying to say. I know some of the things on the list are something we can not control, but there still are some things as people we can. I believe that if I had a decision to choose to live like we are now, or choose to live with the ability of the central human functional capabilities, I would choose CHFC but wouldn’t. Martha Nussbaum wrote a very good novel and I feel that this is one of the better readings that I have read during this class. The things that she discusses are very good points and she expresses her feelings very well throughout the book.
Martha C Nussbaum is a professor at the University of Chicago, where she teaches literature and philosophy. During her teaching career Nussbaum wrote a novel called “The Central Human Functional Capabilities”. Throughout her book she expresses not in what a person really does, but what they should be in titled too. For example, she believes that all people should get the chance to live a long live, that everyone should have the choice to get an education, that everyone should be able to eat enough for themselves, that all people should have the choice to live in a home unless they choose not to do so (Nussbaum). This is all called central human functional capabilities. In her book Nussbaum makes a list of ten things she believes that people should have a choice to in during that life. After reading this novel I really find myself supporting in what Nussbaum is trying to say. I know some of the things on the list are something we can not control, but there still are some things as people we can. I believe that if I had a decision to choose to live like we are now, or choose to live with the ability of the central human functional capabilities, I would choose CHFC but wouldn’t. Martha Nussbaum wrote a very good novel and I feel that this is one of the better readings that I have read during this class. The things that she discusses are very good points and she expresses her feelings very well throughout the book.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
John Rawls ~ A theory of Justice
~ How does Rawls articulate his idea of “justice as fairness”?
For the first time after already having to write seven blogs, this one is very hard to understand and I have to say I am very confused by it. In the readings by John Rawls he explains a theory he wrote on justice. In his theory he talks about how his idea of justice is fairness. He explains “In order to do this we are not to think of the original contract as one to enter a particular society or to set up a particular from of government. Rather, the guiding idea is that the principles of justice for the basic structure of society are the object of the original agreement.” Throughout the rest of the reading by Rawls I do not understand his theory or what he is trying to get across. Even after reading over and over again, to me it does not make any sense on how his theory would work. To me it just sounds like another Karl Marx reading. How someone has found out the best of doing things. I don’t know why people in this world try to sit down and think of different ways we could run our government and make it better, its not like they would listen to any ideas. I hope later in the future someone can explain to me better what Rawls is trying to explain about his theory. Or maybe the fifth or sixth of me reading again and the light bulb in my head will light up, but as I stand now, I do not understand his reading at all.
For the first time after already having to write seven blogs, this one is very hard to understand and I have to say I am very confused by it. In the readings by John Rawls he explains a theory he wrote on justice. In his theory he talks about how his idea of justice is fairness. He explains “In order to do this we are not to think of the original contract as one to enter a particular society or to set up a particular from of government. Rather, the guiding idea is that the principles of justice for the basic structure of society are the object of the original agreement.” Throughout the rest of the reading by Rawls I do not understand his theory or what he is trying to get across. Even after reading over and over again, to me it does not make any sense on how his theory would work. To me it just sounds like another Karl Marx reading. How someone has found out the best of doing things. I don’t know why people in this world try to sit down and think of different ways we could run our government and make it better, its not like they would listen to any ideas. I hope later in the future someone can explain to me better what Rawls is trying to explain about his theory. Or maybe the fifth or sixth of me reading again and the light bulb in my head will light up, but as I stand now, I do not understand his reading at all.
Friday, October 12, 2007
Elizabeth Stanton
~ What power has man had over women, according to Stanton?
Ever since I’ve been born, the United States has been the best country in the world. One of the main reasons which make this country as powerful is because of the freedoms and rights which belong to every citizen in America. It does not matter if your black, white, brown, man, or women, everyone is equal. However, it has not always been this way. Back in the eighteen hundreds and early nineteen hundreds not everyone had their rights which in the constitution entitles everyone does so. Both women and blacks were both treated differently. Growing up through school we learn about slavery and how blacks did not have any freedoms until the civil right acts, but how about the women. During school we never learn on how they women were treated back in the early days. In the readings of Elizabeth Stanton she explains the feelings about being behind the shadows of the men. She expresses how in her life, she never got the chance to exercise her rights. She felt has if her first rights were all taken from her. And when married she explains on how it made you feel civilly dead. After reading this novel by Elizabeth Stanton, I wonder why growing up we never learn about learn how the women in this country had to quietly fight for there rights also. During the early ages of the U.S women had no say; they were stay at home women who did not work nor get to go anything as the men got to do. I am glad that all these issues happened before the days of my time. I do not know how I would have lived my life knowing that not all people have the freedoms that I have just because their not white nor male. Looking at the world today, everyone should just be in smiles about the steps the United States have taken, there are all kinds of people no matter if you are black, white, brown, male or female, making this country as great as it is today.
Ever since I’ve been born, the United States has been the best country in the world. One of the main reasons which make this country as powerful is because of the freedoms and rights which belong to every citizen in America. It does not matter if your black, white, brown, man, or women, everyone is equal. However, it has not always been this way. Back in the eighteen hundreds and early nineteen hundreds not everyone had their rights which in the constitution entitles everyone does so. Both women and blacks were both treated differently. Growing up through school we learn about slavery and how blacks did not have any freedoms until the civil right acts, but how about the women. During school we never learn on how they women were treated back in the early days. In the readings of Elizabeth Stanton she explains the feelings about being behind the shadows of the men. She expresses how in her life, she never got the chance to exercise her rights. She felt has if her first rights were all taken from her. And when married she explains on how it made you feel civilly dead. After reading this novel by Elizabeth Stanton, I wonder why growing up we never learn about learn how the women in this country had to quietly fight for there rights also. During the early ages of the U.S women had no say; they were stay at home women who did not work nor get to go anything as the men got to do. I am glad that all these issues happened before the days of my time. I do not know how I would have lived my life knowing that not all people have the freedoms that I have just because their not white nor male. Looking at the world today, everyone should just be in smiles about the steps the United States have taken, there are all kinds of people no matter if you are black, white, brown, male or female, making this country as great as it is today.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Martin Luther King
~ Why was Martin Luther King disappointed with the white churches?
Martin Luther King was one of the biggest civil rights leaders for a long period of time. He led many civil right acts all over the United States. During his time King was very victorious by getting his point across, which still to this day everyone still remembers the “I have a dream speech”. During his time Martin Luther King was throwing into the Birmingham jail for a short period of time. One of Martin Luther King biggest disappointments was that he was very disappointed with white churches. King felt that the churches have lost their leadership, that the white churches have lost their spirits inside the church. King did not say this because he wanted to make issues about it, but because he was a minister himself. He also felt the white churches did not welcome the black community very well either. King expressed his feelings about when there was a time when the churches were very powerful, and the leadership was there. That there was not any popular opinion back then. Martin Luther King did not go against the white churches to make any kind of issues. He was just very disappointed in what happen to the white churches. He could not believe how different the churches have become. He felt that if the churches do not try to recapture the spirits they once had, that it will never be the same as it one was. Martin Luther King was one of the greatest leaders in time, and will be always remembered all over the world forever
Martin Luther King was one of the biggest civil rights leaders for a long period of time. He led many civil right acts all over the United States. During his time King was very victorious by getting his point across, which still to this day everyone still remembers the “I have a dream speech”. During his time Martin Luther King was throwing into the Birmingham jail for a short period of time. One of Martin Luther King biggest disappointments was that he was very disappointed with white churches. King felt that the churches have lost their leadership, that the white churches have lost their spirits inside the church. King did not say this because he wanted to make issues about it, but because he was a minister himself. He also felt the white churches did not welcome the black community very well either. King expressed his feelings about when there was a time when the churches were very powerful, and the leadership was there. That there was not any popular opinion back then. Martin Luther King did not go against the white churches to make any kind of issues. He was just very disappointed in what happen to the white churches. He could not believe how different the churches have become. He felt that if the churches do not try to recapture the spirits they once had, that it will never be the same as it one was. Martin Luther King was one of the greatest leaders in time, and will be always remembered all over the world forever
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
Henry David Thoreau
~ What is the individual’s responsibility regarding supporting the government when it is wrong?
It is the common saying, not everything is perfect. I believe the people of this country have the right to determine whether they believe anything regarding the government is wrong to them. Throughout the years of the United States many laws have been switch around. Not only that, but we have also changed some situations with some of are government too. In the novel by Thoreau stated “We must affect our country as our parents; and if at any time we alienate, our love or industry from doing it honor, we must respect effects and teach the soul, Matters of conscience and religion. And not desire of rule or benefits.” From this quote Thoreau is explaining that our country is like our parents, as a child when you felt your parents were being unfair or wrong, you gave your opinion, and told them how you felt. That is the same way you should be with our country, when there is something you feel that is wrong or unfair, you should speak up and let your voice be heard. It is the most powerful amendment we have has citizens, the freedom of speech. We couldn’t ask for a better government, what we have today is exactly why we are one of the most powerful countries. But every now and then the perfect person makes a mistake, not everything the U.S. does might be right. And when something happens that we know is unfair or wrong, we have to be there to step up and let our voices be heard.
It is the common saying, not everything is perfect. I believe the people of this country have the right to determine whether they believe anything regarding the government is wrong to them. Throughout the years of the United States many laws have been switch around. Not only that, but we have also changed some situations with some of are government too. In the novel by Thoreau stated “We must affect our country as our parents; and if at any time we alienate, our love or industry from doing it honor, we must respect effects and teach the soul, Matters of conscience and religion. And not desire of rule or benefits.” From this quote Thoreau is explaining that our country is like our parents, as a child when you felt your parents were being unfair or wrong, you gave your opinion, and told them how you felt. That is the same way you should be with our country, when there is something you feel that is wrong or unfair, you should speak up and let your voice be heard. It is the most powerful amendment we have has citizens, the freedom of speech. We couldn’t ask for a better government, what we have today is exactly why we are one of the most powerful countries. But every now and then the perfect person makes a mistake, not everything the U.S. does might be right. And when something happens that we know is unfair or wrong, we have to be there to step up and let our voices be heard.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Stephen L. Carter
Question 2- Does the First Amendment protect religion from the state or the state from religion?
I believe the first amendment protect religion from the state. There are some many people in the world who believe in some many different religions. With the first amendment of freedom of religion, this gives the right to the people to choose their own. For example, religion can not play in any kind of role at a public school, because everyone else might believe in their own religion, or not believe in one at all. We also have private schools where if you wanted the choice to go to a school that talks about religion. However, to follow the first amendment private schools do not get money from the state, because the state can not support any kind of religion. I believe the freedom of religion is one of the strongest amendments we use in are country today. The 1st amendment gives you support if you want to kept your choices private or not. If we didn’t have the freedom of religion, the state could tell what and where to go to learn about are religions, they could also take us away from religion. How would you feel if you have believed in type of religion your whole life and one day the state came in and took it away or told you to choose a different kind of belief? But with the most powerful item that all people have in the US, the constitution, we have the power to use the first amendment to protect religion from the state.
I believe the first amendment protect religion from the state. There are some many people in the world who believe in some many different religions. With the first amendment of freedom of religion, this gives the right to the people to choose their own. For example, religion can not play in any kind of role at a public school, because everyone else might believe in their own religion, or not believe in one at all. We also have private schools where if you wanted the choice to go to a school that talks about religion. However, to follow the first amendment private schools do not get money from the state, because the state can not support any kind of religion. I believe the freedom of religion is one of the strongest amendments we use in are country today. The 1st amendment gives you support if you want to kept your choices private or not. If we didn’t have the freedom of religion, the state could tell what and where to go to learn about are religions, they could also take us away from religion. How would you feel if you have believed in type of religion your whole life and one day the state came in and took it away or told you to choose a different kind of belief? But with the most powerful item that all people have in the US, the constitution, we have the power to use the first amendment to protect religion from the state.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Hannah Arendt- Total Domination
Question 3- What happens to human beings in concentration camps?
During world war two many things can come to mind. Pearl Harbor, the bombing on Japan, but the major event that still leaves people sick to their stomachs is the concentration camps held by Hitler in Germany. During world war two presidents Hitler had his army called the Nazis go throughout Germany and Poland to collect any Jewish people they could find and sent to what we called concentration camps? When the Jewish people were sent to the camps, many of them didn’t last very long, if they made it at all. Even before the Jewish people had a chance to reach the camps, some of the Nazis soldier shot and killed them on the spot. When the Jewish people arrived to the camps, the Nazis would have them split into two different groups, Men on one side, with women and children on the other. However, what they didn’t know was one group was being taken inside the gates of the camp, and the others were going to the gas tank. During the time the people were inside the camps, they basically worked as slaves. At what ever time a Nazis felt has if they had to kill one of them, they did so. They were also were not supporting the camps with food for the people, were many of them died of starvation. The concentration camps can only be described simply as horror. What happens in the camps is something that a human being should never have to go through. Those people lost their lives by absolute horrifying things, and will go down has one of the most horrible events ever to take place in the world.
During world war two many things can come to mind. Pearl Harbor, the bombing on Japan, but the major event that still leaves people sick to their stomachs is the concentration camps held by Hitler in Germany. During world war two presidents Hitler had his army called the Nazis go throughout Germany and Poland to collect any Jewish people they could find and sent to what we called concentration camps? When the Jewish people were sent to the camps, many of them didn’t last very long, if they made it at all. Even before the Jewish people had a chance to reach the camps, some of the Nazis soldier shot and killed them on the spot. When the Jewish people arrived to the camps, the Nazis would have them split into two different groups, Men on one side, with women and children on the other. However, what they didn’t know was one group was being taken inside the gates of the camp, and the others were going to the gas tank. During the time the people were inside the camps, they basically worked as slaves. At what ever time a Nazis felt has if they had to kill one of them, they did so. They were also were not supporting the camps with food for the people, were many of them died of starvation. The concentration camps can only be described simply as horror. What happens in the camps is something that a human being should never have to go through. Those people lost their lives by absolute horrifying things, and will go down has one of the most horrible events ever to take place in the world.
Monday, September 17, 2007
NICCOLO MARCHIAVELLI
Question 2- Is it better for a prince to be loved or to be feared?
Ever since we have been growing up there are always the two same parts if it’s from a television show, movie, or book. There is the character who loved, and there is the one who is feared. The question I am trying to ask is, which is better, to be loved or feared. Growing up as a kid everyone always seemed to cheer for the good guy, or in this case the loved one. But as we get older we find ourselves standing behind the people who are the feared ones. I believe in life there isn’t a right answer to this question. A prince who chooses to be loved would have a lot of power from his people. For example, President Jim Carter. President Carter was loved by many people in the U.S. By the people loving him, that gave him a lot of power for him being president. But there was also another opinion people had about President Carter and that was scared of his own shadow. When the people needed him to be strong for the U.S, he couldn’t connect for them. For him not being feared was a huge reason he didn’t last. Then you come to the opposite side of being loved and that is being feared. Being feared by people, you can gain great respect quick, and also gives you a lot of power. I believe being strong and showing toughness is a good value to have, but I think to much is also can but you in jeopardy. There a lot of people in this world that try to use power and being feared, but they all seem to fall. They always seem to take it over the edge, and get conceited. With all of this, I do not think I can give you a right answer. I come to think you have to play the middle of both of them. Why use one, when using two can make you that much stronger.
Ever since we have been growing up there are always the two same parts if it’s from a television show, movie, or book. There is the character who loved, and there is the one who is feared. The question I am trying to ask is, which is better, to be loved or feared. Growing up as a kid everyone always seemed to cheer for the good guy, or in this case the loved one. But as we get older we find ourselves standing behind the people who are the feared ones. I believe in life there isn’t a right answer to this question. A prince who chooses to be loved would have a lot of power from his people. For example, President Jim Carter. President Carter was loved by many people in the U.S. By the people loving him, that gave him a lot of power for him being president. But there was also another opinion people had about President Carter and that was scared of his own shadow. When the people needed him to be strong for the U.S, he couldn’t connect for them. For him not being feared was a huge reason he didn’t last. Then you come to the opposite side of being loved and that is being feared. Being feared by people, you can gain great respect quick, and also gives you a lot of power. I believe being strong and showing toughness is a good value to have, but I think to much is also can but you in jeopardy. There a lot of people in this world that try to use power and being feared, but they all seem to fall. They always seem to take it over the edge, and get conceited. With all of this, I do not think I can give you a right answer. I come to think you have to play the middle of both of them. Why use one, when using two can make you that much stronger.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Thoughts from the Tao-Te Ching
Question 1 – What is the Master’s attitude toward action?
The Master’s action towards people can be put into one word, Tao (the way). The Master believed in something that people are afraid of doing, something that would not be tried now, or even later in the world. In the world today we have government and dictators, communism and democracy. Everywhere around the world there are people who think they know the missing pieces to the world, everyone seems to know all the answers. But then there is the Master, who believes in one word, Tao (the way). He believes that the less power put towards the people, the less problems you will have towards the world. He believes if you try to fix the world with your beliefs, you will ruin it. It can run on its own rhythms (Lao-Tzu pg 25).
“Therefore the Master says: I let go of the law, and people become honest. I let go of economics, and people become prosperous. I let go of religion, and people become serene. I let go of all desire for the common good, and the good becomes common as grass (Lao-Tzo pg 27).” The Master believes in something that no other ever has the strength to do, believe in the people. He believes if there wasn’t so much of a competition, we wouldn’t have to control it, that we have made the problems by putting the actions towards us. “For those who feel government can solve the problems of the people, it will seem strange and unwise. For those who believe that the less government the better, the advice will sound sane and powerful (Lao-Tzu pg 20).
The Master’s action towards people can be put into one word, Tao (the way). The Master believed in something that people are afraid of doing, something that would not be tried now, or even later in the world. In the world today we have government and dictators, communism and democracy. Everywhere around the world there are people who think they know the missing pieces to the world, everyone seems to know all the answers. But then there is the Master, who believes in one word, Tao (the way). He believes that the less power put towards the people, the less problems you will have towards the world. He believes if you try to fix the world with your beliefs, you will ruin it. It can run on its own rhythms (Lao-Tzu pg 25).
“Therefore the Master says: I let go of the law, and people become honest. I let go of economics, and people become prosperous. I let go of religion, and people become serene. I let go of all desire for the common good, and the good becomes common as grass (Lao-Tzo pg 27).” The Master believes in something that no other ever has the strength to do, believe in the people. He believes if there wasn’t so much of a competition, we wouldn’t have to control it, that we have made the problems by putting the actions towards us. “For those who feel government can solve the problems of the people, it will seem strange and unwise. For those who believe that the less government the better, the advice will sound sane and powerful (Lao-Tzu pg 20).
Thursday, September 6, 2007
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)