Blog 13

Bacon:

1. Define the word idols in the sense that Bacon seems to use it. Is the word idol a good term to use for the idea that lies behind it?

Bacon defines each idol as being an aspect of life, and how everyone has their own of these four idols in life. Because everyone thinks and believes different this could cause problems in society. Idol is used as a positive term, usually trying to be like something of good. 

2. Compare the importance of one idol with that of another. Is it possible to determine which is more likely to prevent the acquisition of true knowledge?

Each idol in Bacon rhetoric represents an error, the Idol of the tribe is errors we humans make together, idol of the cave is our own errors, and idol of the marketplace is errors of others, and idols of theatre are learned from people who are wrong.  The least serve is the idol of the tribe because everyone makes a mistake together, while the most serve is the idol of the cave because it's an error you made and everyone makes mistakes but it's something only you have to deal with. 

3. Which of the idols are the results of social intercourse, and which are the results of individual reflection? Would a person be more likely to be free of the tyranny of the idols if he/she were restricted in society? Is it possible that a hermit would be completely free of the idols? Or would he become more free the more he socialized?

Idols of social intercourse is the ideal of the marketplace. Idols of the tribe is the result of individual reflection. If someone was restricted in society they would more likely to be confined in the idols. No he wouldn't completely be free from the idols and would be more into the idol of the cave into his own error. The more someone socializes the more knowledge they gain. 

Darwin:

1. Define the phrase the survival of the fittest (the title of this chapter in a later edition of On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection). Look for ways in which its implications can be fully understood. Look, also, for examples by which it can be illustrated.

The survival of the fittest is the strongest have a better chance of living. An example is a bird laid eggs only a couple survived due to lack of food for all. 

2. Compare the breeding of animals with natural selection. Which is more directed? Which is more dominated by chance? Which is more efficient? Which is more important?

Breeding of animals is taking the breeds you want and breeding them together. The outcome is somewhat in terms of the traits you wanted. You're taking pre-existing traits and trying to make the best one. Natural selection is the random selection of traits, and it could come out just as good or better as breeding something. I think are very important, but natural selection is more important in my opinion.

3. How does cloning affect Darwin’s views? Is cloning likely to undo the beneficial work of natural selection?

Cloning would be cool as if you had something that was very strong in its particular environment you wouldn't need natural selection to try and make the strongest of the fittest when everyone could be the strongest. Yes cloning would undo the beneficial work of natural selection, and what happens when those clones don't fit the changing environment. 

4. How does human social policy affect the survival of the fittest? Are modern medicine and modern social welfare agencies causing humans to be less fit? 

I don't think medicine is causing humans to be less fit, more so helping humans become stronger.

Blog 12

Discoveries and the MIND

The way the mind works in the face of problems, both within and outside the individual, is the subject of the six selections in Part Eight. The means by which we think clearly about issues in our world depend on how carefully we prepare ourselves to examine the evidence before us and on which questions we choose to ask. Psychologists ask questions that lead us inward to an understanding of our own nature and our personality. Investigators of the natural world lead us outward to help us know the truth and avoid superstition and the kind of error that leads to ignorance and its destructive social consequences. As Plato and Bacon show, we are sometimes easily misled.

PLATO QUESTIONS:

1. Consider the issue of what it is we know when we rely on our senses. Is sensory knowledge as unreliable as Plato thinks it is?
I believe sensory knowledge is very reliable. Our five sense is how we live our everyday life, and is essential. 

2. Are we materialistic when we praise sense perception? What are the alternatives to any such materialism arising from overvaluing (or solely valuing) sense experience?
I don't think we praise sense perception as a materialistic thing, but we alternatives to sensory details. When using common sense, logical facts, and critical thinking. 

3. If we could perceive the world beneath sense experience, what would it be like?
It would be a world without sense, so the earth would be plain. 

4. I often ask my students to choose a sense that they do not already have and add it as a sixth sense that cannot be a merger of any of the five. It has to be new—not smelling, seeing, or hearing from a great distance. If nothing else, this exercise helps them begin to realize how hemmed in we are by our senses — particularly when I point out the ultimate similarity of touch, taste, and odor, three the five senses that constitute virtually one sense with three “flavors.”
I would choose the sense of reading people's minds as my sixth sense if that counts. 

FREUD QUESTIONS:

1. Do you feel your dreams have a significance that would be useful to understand?
I do think my dreams have significance that would be useful to understand. With my dream, you have to understand to keep fighting, even when things get hard. 

2. What dreams most mystify you?
The ones that test your persistence on your weakest assets. 

3. Which dreams are frightening? Describe a recent frightening dream.
The dreams that are the most frightening are the ones you are fearful of. My most frightening fear is losing my boyfriend, my mom, siblings, the people i care most about. 

4. Why do you think most people forget their dreams?
I think most people forget their dreams because it has not happened yet, and in a way it is a made-up situation we make up. 

5. Is dreaming a mental activity?
I do believe dreaming is a mental activity, as you only dream when your sleep or daydreaming which requires you to use your mind more than anything. 

Blog 11

Virginia Woolf

1. It is useful to point out that this essay was originally delivered to women students at two Oxford colleges. Ask your students to identify what evidence there is to suggest Woolf was aware of the nature of her audience.

Yes, Virginia Woolf was aware of the nature of her audience. She talked about how women were treated less than, and even in fiction, it was almost as they didn't exist. In Shakespeare's sister, she goes on to say how "her" can do so many things, but all people knew was it was "he" that did it and she was the property of the man. 

2. What do the chapter headings from Trevelyan’s History of England (para. 6) reveal about historians’ concerns?

It reveals the life of a woman and how they were treated by men on a daily basis.

3. What would Woolf propose as the most important changes in society that would alter the situation most talented women find themselves in? Why does talent make a woman’s situation especially difficult?

I think she would propose that women become their own independent people. This would allow them to have the freedom and not be the property of the men or family in their life. Having talent as a woman made everything difficult because in a way women had no role in life, in a way the talent became the property of the man if it was known. 

M. Mead:

1. What are the temperamental traits of women? Of men?

In different tribes, the temperamental traits vary, in the Mundugumor tribe both men and women are both know to be aggressive, ruthless, and sex-driven. The Arapesh men and women both are very similar as they are mild and responsive people. In the last tribe, the women are very dominant and independent emotionally, while the men were the complete opposite.

2. What price does society pay for restricting the opportunities of one sex or the other?

People would turn out to be like the sex that isn't restricted.

3. Given that our culture has standardized temperamental expectations for each sex, what price does the opposite sex pay for that standardization?


Women are supposed to be emotional and stay at home people, as the men work and are very put together on a daily basis. But when the roles are reversed, women are way doing too much, and men are teased for being so emotional. 

4. Why should our modern industrialized society be concerned about the ways of “primitive” cultures?

The way a person acts can be altered the way they're raised. This creates many culters and traits for everyone. If a specific culture wants you to do something, every one of that culture would because that's what they were raised to do. 

P

Blog #10

Wollstonecraft

Woodson

Kozol

1. Define the phrase "pernicious effects" on the basis of what is stated in the essay.

In the essay, the pernicious effect is the meaning of life being altered due to the power of a man. You can't have a family without a man, and divorce isn't an option. In a way, men have all the power over women, and women have to be dependent on a man. 

2. Is it possible to compare women with property on the basis of this essay?
Yes, as women are like property in this time, men had all the control and used the women for everything. Men of the time though the right women was someone who would do whatever they wanted and give everything they needed. Just like a property you own it, and the men owned the women of this time. 

3. Clarify in what way the “unnatural distinctions” affecting women in society cause them to behaveas Wollstonecraft says they do. Do you feel it is a genuine cause-

and-effect relationship?
Yes, I do feel it was a genuine cause-and-effect relationship. As someone continues to belittle and beat you down, eventually you get tired of that treatment you rebel or find a way out. 

4. Describe Diversity in Schools according to Kozol and what your definition would be.
My definition of diversity in schools is a close to equal representation of backgrounds within a school and correct funding. Kozol believes diverse schools are created by wealth and race, which I agree with.

5. What does Woodson mean by mis-education?
The education for American Americans isn't what they need, or school be getting. They aren't receiving the proper education needed to prosesper. 

Blog #9

1. What is the basis of scientific pedagogy for Montessori? The use of the scientific method when a teacher is teaching. Students can have freedom physically, mentally, and environmentally. She agrees students having freedom in the classroom makes learning more enjoyable. Rather than lecture, students tend to learn more when they're interactive with the lesson.

 2. How does school furniture affect the education of the child? Furniture in the classroom is essential, as it is what makes students feel comfortable or at home. With every educational resource, it allows a more welcoming environment.

 3. What effect does freedom have on the education of the child? Students who have freedom in their education allows them to have more control over their education. With more freedom, students become less bored in their education. 

4.What does Dewey seem to mean by the expression "thinking in education"? Dewey thinks thinking is essential to education. Now thinking is referred too as critical thinking, but he believed thinking wasn't done without experiences.

 5. What conditions must exist for the student to use thinking in education? Students must be presented with interesting information to keep them engaged. The things they think are used to solve challenging problems and gain skills.

 6. What seems to be the best process of education, according to Dewey? Dewey thinks social interactive is apart of learning. With the combination of experience and learning interesting things, learning becomes like first nature. Critical thinking is used to find solutions to problems. After using what you've learned to solve a problem Dewey things you should test the solution to fully understand the outcome and what has been done.

Blog #8

1. How would you defend Smith’s views as expressed in this essay? In what sense is he right in establishing

the “natural progress of opulence” as you observe it yourself? He describes the world

as he knows it in his own time and then imagines how it might have become that way. How well does he satisfy your curiosity about the way in which nations grow rich?

Adams Smith thought natural progress of opulence is that agriculture should be first, then manufacturing, and lastly foreign commerce. He only talks about how the country development should come before the town development which would help both. 

2. Smith places a great deal of faith in the value of land for maintaining wealth. Since most people

today, including wealthy people, do not necessarily see their wealth in terms of land, what in our

time might substitute for land? What would a wealthy person interpret as a secure or conservative

capital investment?

We say a wealthy person now would invest in stocks now instead of land. They would only invest in secure stocks though that they know would not have a very high chance of losing money and a good chance of gaining money. 

3. Argue in favor of or in opposition to Smith’s statement in paragraph 8: “According to the natural

course of things, therefore, the greater part of the capital of every growing society is, first, directed

to agriculture, afterwards to manufactures, and last of all to foreign commerce.” Because in

the early 2000s the United States is in the midst of a “new economy,” this statement will need

to be examined closely and augmented. How would you continue the “evolution” that Smith

observed?

As a group we don't agree with Adam Smith's statement about how agriculture comes first, then manufacturing, and lastly foreign commerce. We think agriculture is last now. 

Blog #7

Galbraith:

1. One of Galbraith’s most basic premises is that America is now an affluent society. Examine in detail the society that you know for the purposes of validating or contradicting that assertion. Is America an affluent society? What are the signs of affluence? What qualifies as affluence? What are the results of affluence?

Galbraith's most basic premise is that America is now an affluent society, and I agree with him in some ways. For some America is a place of an affluent society, while for others it isn't. Some resources are harder to obtain for people especially lower-class citizens. Compared to other countries I would say America is an affluent society. The qualities or sign of affluence is someone or something with money, property, or materialistic goods. (Someone rich and wealthy) The result of affluence is some people having more power over others. This leads to different social classes in our country and division.

Reich:

2. To what extent is it the government’s responsibility to provide jobs to people who would otherwise not be able to get them? For example, should the government provide jobs for routine workers if their opportunities dry up? What arguments favor or oppose such a proposal?

Reich believed the extent of the governments' responsibility is to provide jobs to people in job areas of the government. I think the government should provide jobs for routine workers if their opportunities dry up. Routine workers who have been laid off due to money cuts in a workplace should be guaranteed a job. It keeps everyone in a job unless they don't want one. 

Blog #6

1. What is the economic condition of the bourgeoisie? What is the economic condition of the proletariat?

The economic condition of the Bourgeoise is developed. They are the people who are very wealthy and who own things. The proletariat economic condition is still developing. These are the people who own nothing but produce wealth from their work. 

2. How does the expanding world market for goods affect national identity?

The expanding of the world market for goods affects the national identity by allowing the markets and demand to grow. The modern industry is what has made the world market today. The bourgeoisie developed, increased capital, and push others during the middle ages.

3. What benefits does Marx expect communism to provide the proletariat?

Every victory is a victory for the bourgeoisie, sometimes for the proletariat as well. Communism is a class-based system, and people are rewarded based on their skills and needs. With the increase in industry profits, it gives more work to the proletariat. The increase in work enables more jobs and opportunities for the proletariat. An increase in work gives the prolateit a chance to get paid for their skills. "But with the development of industry the proletariat not only increases in number; it becomes concentrated in greater masses, its strength grows and it feels that strength more. The various interests and conditions of life within the ranks of the proletariat and more and more equalized, in proportion as machinery, obliterates all distinctions of labor, and nearly everywhere reduces wages to the same low level." (Matrix) The immediate aim of the communist is the same as that of all the other proletarian parties: formation of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of the bourgeoisie of supremacy. (Matrix)

Carnegie ends his essay by saying that he thought that obeying the dictates of his Gospel of Wealth

would someday solve the problem of the rich and the poor and bring “Peace on earth, among men

Good-Will” (para. 24). Do you think that wealthy people should follow Carnegie’s example? Bill

Gates, who recently quoted from Carnegie’s essay, has left his post at Microsoft and is devoting

himself to giving away his wealth through his foundation. Do you feel such activity will “solve

the problem of the Rich and the Poor” (para. 24)?

I believe to follow Carnegie's example would be nice, and would definitely solve the problem if the reach and poor. This would bring some "peace on earth" among men but it wouldn't solve everything. Gates giving away his wealth through his foundation still helps, but wouldn't ultimately solve the issues of rich and poor.  

Blog 5

Blog 5:

1. How might Aristotle have responded to the painting by Howard Chandler Christy of the signing of the Constitution of the United States (p. 57)?

Aristotle would've thought positively of the painting by Howard Chandler. Aristotle believed the government had power over the states. A fair government and just was what he supported and believed in. Aristotle favored a government more like a democracy, everyone had a say so.  

2. How many different "elements" of society are represented in this painting?

George Washington is one who is standing up in the front. He's the president, so he's the center of attention and the main point of the picture. The people who are next closest to him are the other founding fathers. And as the people get further away not to say they're less important but less important. 

3. Would Aristotle have assumed that the government being formed was a democracy or an oligarchy? Why or Why not?

Aristotle would've assumed the government being formed was a democracy rather than an Oligarchy. He doesn't ever talk about supporting a type of government like an oligarchy. Aristotle liked forms of government where one group of people determined where all the power went. 

4. Research the men who signed the Constitution. How well did they represent the elements of the society of the newly formed country?

The people who signed the constitution, for the most part, were these heroic people until after signing the constitution. America wanted representation, but all the British did were tax them without a say so in the political government. 

5.  Read Tocqueville, “Government by Democracy in America,”. Compare this reading to that of Aristotle's reading.

They had separate views on things which lead to them having totally different outlooks on their morals and how a society should function. 

Martin Luther King Jr & Henry David Thoreau

Martin Luther King Jr.

Henry David Thoreau

Audio of Martin Luther King Jr. 

Letter from Birmingham

https://youtu.be/ATPSht6318o

1. In Martin Luther King, Jr's Letter from Birmingham Jail:  

King sites conscience as a guide to obeying just laws and defying unjust laws. How close is his position to that of Henry David Thoreau? Do you think that King had read Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience" as an important document regarding morality and immorality? Compare and contrast the positions of these two writers.

Martin Luther King Jr was immense on laws being just. If something was unjust, he believed in defying them till things were right. Being defiant came with its consequences as MLK ended up in the Birmingham Jail, in 1963. There, he wrote the well-known "Letter from Birmingham". Dr. King said it best "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." I believe this correlates to Henry Davids Thoreau and his work "Civil Obedience".  Henry David Thoreau was very firm on moral values and thought people should do what their conscience tells them, and not to follow unjust laws. 

There's a considerable possibility Dr. King had read Thoreaus' "Civil Obiendence" regarding mortality and immortality. In his letter, Dr. King said " Lamentably, it is a historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups tend to be more immoral than individuals." This is very parallel with Thoreau's thoughts, as  he said in "Civil Obidence"" After all, the practical reason why, when the power is once in the hands of the people, a majority are permitted, and for a long period continue, to rule is not because they are most likely to be in the right, nor because this seems fairest to the majority, but because they are physically the strongest. But a government in which the majority rule in all cases cannot be based on justice, even as far as men understand it. Can there not be a government in which majorities do not virtually decide wrong, but conscience?"

Even though Martin Luther King Jr. and Henry David Thoreau had similar ideas, their writing had differences as well. They had different views on determining what was just and what wasn't. Dr. King thought anything that didn't follow God's rules or Ten commandments it wasn't just. Thoreau believed things weren't just depending on your own conscience, it was more of self-governing. 

Thoreau Civil Obedience

Henry David Thoreau

1. Examine quotations from Thoreau that focus on the individual and the question of justice and ethical treatment of the individual by government. What are the values of the government that Thoreau describes and how might that government see its moral obligations to the governed? How would it treat mattes of justice, ethics, and morality? To what extent does the government of Thoreau's time resemble the government of our time?

"The best government is the best which governs least"

Thoreau said governments that govern the least are the best forms of government. He doesn't believe in a large government where the majority have all the power in making decisions. With his type of government they would want to insure freedom to the people. Modern government is ran by people who are legislatures, politicians, lawyers, ministers, and office holders. "They serve the state with their heads and rarely make any moral distinctions." With Thoreau's thought of government there would be an entire new government. A government of Thoreau's time wouldn't resemble a government of our time. Our current government is too unjust and unpractical. 

2. Do some research on the Mexican War and decide whether or not there were any significant concerns that warranted Thoreau's reaction. Who's was fighting? Who started the war? What were President's Polk's intentions and were those intentions ethical?

The Mexican War was an armed conflict between the United States and Mexico from 1846 to 1848. The war started after President James Knox Polk, pressured congress for an immediate declaration of war on Mexico. Polk wanted to push Mexico into negotiating with the United States, and he was willing to push things to the limit to get what he wanted. He didn't want an actual war, but if it happened he planned for it to be a small and quick war. If Polk had tried to negotiate again but in a different approach things might have worked out and been more ethical. 

James Knox Polk

Roussea

1. Rousseau argued that a government is supposed to protect liberty, freedom, and help people get along and work together. I say the closest form of government Rousseau would approve of today would be a democracy.  I think the only problem would be not everyone would get their way, because not everyone would agree on every situation. He would confine to a government where things are close to fair as possible. I think a ruler Rousseau would approve of would be one who would be like a father to their people.They would let their people have a say, but also guide them in the right direction.

2. The authors of The Declaration of Independence insisted that "whenever a form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and institute new government." I say the declaration justifies the right to revolt against a government if the government won't guarantee a mans natural rights. But The Declaration of Independence isn't focused on the aspect of rebellion. I feel the end of independence would justify the means of rebellion involving war, civil disorder, and death. I say Jefferson ends he had in mind didn't justify those particular means. On one hand Jefferson was about people having freedom and their own rights, on the other hand Machiavelli thought the people shouldn't have as much control and not to be given power. I say Jefferson and Machiavelli's views would completely contradict each other. 

Lau Tzu and Noccolo Machiavelli

Lau Tzu vs Niccolo Machiavelli

Lau Tzu (Picture on the Left) was an ancient Chinese philosopher who created the philosophy of Taoism. He was the author of the Tao te Ching which influenced many people in their way of life. 

Niccolo Machiavelli (Picture on the Right) was a Italian political philosopher during the renaissance period. He was known for his creation of The Prince, which has also influenced people of his time. 

Views of Government

Lau Tzu

 Lau Tzu who was a philosopher during the Zhou Dynasty, he was very influential to the people of that time. Lau Tzu thought the ideal government was a simple one, one without conflict, and followed the flow of how things were given naturally. He was the figure of the practice known as Daoism. Daoism is the practice of meditation, chant scriptures, and different kinds worships to different gods and goddesses. The Tao Te Ching describes the Dao meaning the path; its described as being like the bible. The Dao is supposed to be the path to a joyful life in perfect harmony. The way to do that is to learn Wu Wei which means flowing or to do something with effortless action. It requires you to live in the natural way of the Dao. Instead of having plans we need to experience the world as it is given. Ultimately, the purpose of Lau Tzu ideal government is a ruler who isn't harsh and doesn't force things, rather let it happen.

Niccolo Machiavelli

Niccolo Machiavelli on the other was very different from Lau Tzu. His idea of a perfect government consisted of a totalitarian like government. The goal of this idea of government was for a Prince to have control over the people.  Niccolo Machiavelli was a late 15th century diplomat, a general, and enemy of the state at one point in time. He was a failed politician who was most remember by two works The Politician and The Disclosures. He believed it was impossible to be a good politician and a good person in a Christian sense. Instead of being nice you have to be effective. A good prince defends state external and internal threats to stable governance. People shouldn't find him soft and easy to run over, but they shouldn't find him to harsh where people can't approach him. The overall purpose of Machiavelli's ideal government is for a Prince to have strong control over the government through moral principals.

Obligations of Rulers 

Lau Tzu

Tzu thought the only obligation a ruler should have is to let its political system follow its own course. There wasn't really any obligations besides being a relaxed ruler. They did nothing to get things done own its own path. 

Niccolo Machiavelli

The obligation of a Prince in Machiavelli's view is to be ready to fight. This included making sure the people knew how to fight as well. A Prince was supposed to do what's best for himself, even if that mean lying to his people. 

Main Work of State

Lau Tzu

Tzu wanted people to have a mind of their own and form their own opinion. The goal was for them to have their own state of mind. 

Niccolo Machiavelli

Machiavelli wanted enemy's to know that they were ready to fight. The state of mind was very arrogant  and coincident.  

The Princes of Each Philosopher

Lau Tzu

Lau Tzu Master didn't talk about what he was doing, he just took action of what needed to be done. He wanted people to learn but they had to learn on their own as well. This allowed them to not be influenced into things.

 "If you want to lead the people, you must learn how to follow them."-Lau Tzu

Niccolo Machiavelli

 Niccolo Machiavelli Princes job is to be strong and ready to fight. Not only to fight but to make the people feel like they need him. His full attention is protecting his people, but in a way to make them think he's their only hope in any situation. 

"It is much safer to be feared than loved because... love is preserved by the link of obligation which, owing to the baseness of men, is broke at every opportunity for their advantage; but fear perseveres you by a dread of punishment which never fails."-Niccolo Machiavelli