Society has its hidden secrets that many philosophers before our time have tried to piece together. Yet there is no certainty as to what is right from wrong. We can only go by what is more relevant today by those visions of others. Neil Postman contrasted the visions of the future by two philosophers work, Aldous Huxley’s novel, Brave New World, and George Orwell’s mental picture in his novel, 1984. Postman was in fact correct by making the affirmation that Huxley’s vision is more relevant today than is Orwell’s. Orwell’s vision might have been true at some time in history, but we can relate Huxley’s with the society that we live in today.
As Huxley suggest, “people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.” [Postman 11] In the society that we live in today, we are surrounded by all sorts of technological advancement that have facilitated the work of man. The people have grown accustomed to them and they have become a part of the everyday life. A students’ work at school for instance is no longer as arduous thanks to the help of devices such as computers, calculators, and the internet. Worldwide resources are at reach with the click of a button, a calculus problem won’t be as difficult to solve with the use of a calculator, and an essay due the next day will not need the use of a pencil but instead of a keyboard. Such technologies have cut off some time from such tasks and in a way they have undone our capacities to think since the need is no longer there thanks to these devices. Yet, society has grown to love them because we are not so much concerned as to how much it affects our capacities to think, but how much time it saves us.
Another one of Huxley’s visions was that “there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.” [Postman 13] Many years ago the typical family past time was to read. The average American family was interested in the work of many great writers of poetry, novels, or just news. Now, this pastime has been replaced with television, videogames, and social networking websites. More people become almost addicted to these past times that the need to read is almost out of use. The majority of students will not read for their own pleasure unless they are required to do so by a school teacher. Books are no longer seen as enjoyment of the arts, but a torture to those who don’t find it in themselves the need to read. As the endless numbers of books in libraries collect dust sitting on a rack, people in society lay around at home killing time with their typical pastimes. The delight of reading has been dying out throughout the years that Huxley’s vision is more than true; it has become this society’s reality.
“What we love will ruin us.” [Postman 23-24] Huxley could not have been more precise in his vision than with this statement. Indeed, the things that we love hurt us the most. They do so because we allow them to. Sometimes the love that we have for others is so strong that we tolerate the wrongs that they do to us, because in fact that love is so great. Eventually the pain and suffering that comes along with all of this profound love will do nothing more than ruin us. It will become uncontrollable and take over our lives. To unleash yourself from this bond is almost nearly impossible. It is what makes it so strong that keeps hurting us, and yet you allow it to, because you love it. The love that you have for others permits their harm to reach you, leaving you vulnerable to all damage and eventual ruin.
Huxley’s vision of the future could not have been more precise. It is almost as if he seen everything through our time. Although his vision can be eye opening it doesn’t stop it from being true. Postman was right in considering Huxley’s vision as the most relative to the society of our time. Huxley was able to uncover the secrets of this society through his visions and are now true in this time. Will this current society’s way of life change throughout time? If so, will there be others who will predict the time coming, and have their visions become a reality? Only time will tell.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Wealth
The American society has placed its sole grounds of existence on the value of the green paper money that this country runs on today. “The American faith in money easily surpasses the degree of intensity achieved by other societies in other times and places.” [Lapham] Lapham’s ideas are nothing more than the very truth. Today, this country evaluates one’s success by their income, property, and lifestyle. This causes many other countries to “look upon the American devotion as sterile cupidity.” But how did this money embraced society in American come to be?
The average American is not thought of as successful because of his ability to work or comprehend. The wise are not acknowledged of their gift until their steps create dollar signs all over the floor they just passed. Society has created a need to become one of the upper class. It pressures those that were not as “successful” to find their way to the very top. This pressure violates the American Dream by transforming this longing of happiness and opportunity into nothing more than the desire for money and riches that come along with it. This notion thus infects the minds of the American citizens by creating this ideal image of success as nothing more than the pursuit of money.
“As often as not it isn’t the money itself that means anything; it is the use of money as the currency of the soul.” [Lapham] An American citizen is not satisfied with just obtaining their wealth until they are “clothed in the raiment of property.” They go on buying designer clothes, luxury cars, and big beautiful houses. All of this in hopes that society will recognize their success. This is a way of almost proving themselves to the rest of society that they have in fact accomplished their dream and reached the top of the social pyramid. This leaves the rest of society to look up to these people in hopes of one day being one of them.
Leaving others at the bottom, the people of the lower class still longing for the dream, go out of their way to gain a piece of that same vision. They do so by buying brand clothes and treating themselves to the newest gadgets. At times they would rather have all these valuable belongings, than investing that money on needed materials such as groceries. These attitudes only emphasize the idea that Americans have in fact placed a concentrated faith in money and are eager to show what little they have attained to the rest of the world. Unlike other countries, we as Americans cannot “balance the desire for wealth against the other claims of the human spirit.” [Lapham] That is that we focus our money more so on our wants than we do on our needs.
Overall, it has been proven that the faith that Americans have placed on that paper currency has in fact “surpassed the degree of intensity achieved by other societies in other times and places.” [Lapham] We fail to see the true meaning behind it all; due to the blindness of citizens from the green that engulfs this American society. It has become nothing more than an absurdity that “…In the United States a rich man is perceived as being necessarily both good and wise…” [Lapham] The entire nation as a whole has to put an end to such nonsense beliefs and cleanse the once so dear and true American Dream from the evils of greed.
The average American is not thought of as successful because of his ability to work or comprehend. The wise are not acknowledged of their gift until their steps create dollar signs all over the floor they just passed. Society has created a need to become one of the upper class. It pressures those that were not as “successful” to find their way to the very top. This pressure violates the American Dream by transforming this longing of happiness and opportunity into nothing more than the desire for money and riches that come along with it. This notion thus infects the minds of the American citizens by creating this ideal image of success as nothing more than the pursuit of money.
“As often as not it isn’t the money itself that means anything; it is the use of money as the currency of the soul.” [Lapham] An American citizen is not satisfied with just obtaining their wealth until they are “clothed in the raiment of property.” They go on buying designer clothes, luxury cars, and big beautiful houses. All of this in hopes that society will recognize their success. This is a way of almost proving themselves to the rest of society that they have in fact accomplished their dream and reached the top of the social pyramid. This leaves the rest of society to look up to these people in hopes of one day being one of them.
Leaving others at the bottom, the people of the lower class still longing for the dream, go out of their way to gain a piece of that same vision. They do so by buying brand clothes and treating themselves to the newest gadgets. At times they would rather have all these valuable belongings, than investing that money on needed materials such as groceries. These attitudes only emphasize the idea that Americans have in fact placed a concentrated faith in money and are eager to show what little they have attained to the rest of the world. Unlike other countries, we as Americans cannot “balance the desire for wealth against the other claims of the human spirit.” [Lapham] That is that we focus our money more so on our wants than we do on our needs.
Overall, it has been proven that the faith that Americans have placed on that paper currency has in fact “surpassed the degree of intensity achieved by other societies in other times and places.” [Lapham] We fail to see the true meaning behind it all; due to the blindness of citizens from the green that engulfs this American society. It has become nothing more than an absurdity that “…In the United States a rich man is perceived as being necessarily both good and wise…” [Lapham] The entire nation as a whole has to put an end to such nonsense beliefs and cleanse the once so dear and true American Dream from the evils of greed.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Death and Justice Questions
Meaning
1. Koch’s thesis in favor of capital punishment is, “Life is indeed precious, and I believe the death penalty helps to affirm this fact.” [pg 320] He asks for the readers to agree with the fact that human life is in fact precious and that anything should be done to keep this notion true. He argues that if the value of life were imperative and the death penalty were “a real responsibility in the minds of the murderers, they might well have stayed their hand.” Koch believes that these ideals would discourage many “cold-blooded murderers” from killing so many people.
2. Koch focuses on the death penalty as a deterrent to murder and as a form of justice for murder done. In his argument, Koch emphasizes both these points when he states, “If we create a society in which injustice is not tolerated, incidents of murder-the most flagrant form of justice-will diminish.” [pg 321] Here he states that with the death penalty, society will enforce a way of life in which a tight justice system will be key and the value of human life would be crucial. This statement also emphasizes the idea that the death penalty will indeed diminish incidents of murder.
Purpose and Audience
1. Koch’s purpose in this essay does seem political. It serves as nothing more than a justification for his beliefs on capital punishment. In return, this is just another way to aim for votes. In one statement, Koch says, “Because I support the death penalty for heinous crimes of murder, I have sometimes been the subject of emotional and outraged attacks by voters who find my position reprehensible or worse.” Here, he is making himself seem the victim of “attacks by voters.” This could be nothing more than a way to get the understanding of those who find Koch at fault.
2. Koch seems to expect his audience to disagree with his position on capital punishment. He begins his opening paragraphs with the idea that “Killing is wrong.” Throughout the entire essay, Koch names the reasons for which many may not support the death penalty. He provides all the counterarguments and negates them with supporting evidence. This then gives us the idea that Koch was expecting his audience’s disagreement on the subject.
3. Koch places the responsibility on society to stand up and protect the innocent lives of others by accepting capital punishment as a solution to murder. For them to lose the “moral cowardice” that makes criminals grow “bolder” and to take action involving their community.
Method and Structure
1.
A. Emotional:
· “When we lower the penalty for murder, it signals a lessened regard for the value of the victim’s life.” [pg 322-323]
· “Thou Shalt Not Commit Murder” [pg 323]
B. Ethical:
· “During my 22 years in public service…” [pg 320]
· “As a district leader, councilman, congressman, and mayor…” [pg 320]
C. Rational:
· “A study at M.I.T. showed that based on 1970 homicide rates….” [pg 321]
· “On June 22, 1984, the New York Times published an editorial…” [pg 320]
The emotional appeals proved to be most effective. The reason why is because it truly touched the reader as a form of connection that was made through the writing. It tied the reader with the author’s views and ideas, which was the purpose of the paper. The ethical appeals proved to be the least effective. I don’t think it matters his professions or his years in public service. These ideas are the least in mind to the reader when discussing such subjects.
2. MAJOR PREMISE: All killers admit to the wrongs when they face death themselves, to bring those who sentenced them to death down to their level.
MINOR PREMISE: Willie and Shaw charged with the death penalty admitted right before their deaths that “Killing is wrong” and that “Killing is wrong when I did it. Killing is wrong when you do it.” [pg 319-320]
CONCLUSION: Willie and Shaw sought “to bring his accusers down to his own level.” [pg 323]
Koch denies its validity by stating that “The state has rights that the private individual does not. In a democracy, those rights are given to the state by the electorate.” Here Koch is justifying the laws right to execute those charged with murder.
3. When Koch countered the argument that “the death penalty is ‘barbaric’” he completely diminished this argument by stating that “it’s not the method that really troubles opponents. It’s the death itself they consider barbaric.” This method of argument is incredibly convincing because it gives Koch’s argument importance due to the fact that those opponents consider “death” itself “barbaric.” Considering this fact, Koch can argue that those same opponents would consider “murder” “barbaric” as well and therefore, do nothing about that situation.
4. Robert Lee Willie and Joseph Carl Shaw… “hoped to soften the resolve of those who sentenced them to death.” Emphasizes the idea that killers try to bring down their accusers when it comes down to their deaths. [pg 323] Luis Vera and the “tragic death of Rosa Velez.” “…I knew I wouldn’t go to the chair.” Emphasizes the idea that killers’ understanding that they won’t face capital punishment, in a sense encourages killers to go on with their plans of death. New York Times editorial on the lethal injection proved that “it is not the method that really troubles opponents…but death itself.” [pg 320-321] The analogy between cancer and murder proves that “one does not have to like an idea in order to support it.” [pg 321] “No other major democracy-in fact, few other countries of any description-are plagued by murder rate such as that in the U.S.” This supports the idea that “If other countries had our murder problem, the cry for capital punishment would be just as loud as it is here.” [pg 321]
Language
1. Koch’s tone is assertive throughout the entire essay. His language emphasizes his tone because he speaks his mind as he believes to be true, because in a sense he knows he is right and is certain on what needs to be done. This adds to the openness of the readers acceptance because he is able to counterattack every opposing issue that seems to be out there and clearly stands his ground on supporting his ideas.
2. Koch refers to his opponents’ thinking as “sophistic nonsense” and “transparently false” [pg 323] His use of words indicate that Koch’s attitude toward opponents of capital punishment and their arguments is degrading. He brings down their ideas by considering them unreasonable and untrue. Then he introduces his own ideas as ideal and right.
Writing Topics
The rising now becomes, “Whether or not murderers should be executed or not?” My response to that question is that it should absolutely be so. If you have in fact taken somebody’s right to life in this world, what gives you any better right to life than that person? You should pay the consequences for your actions and indeed suffer a painful death. Nobody should have any consideration for you because you did not have consideration for somebody else. After all "Don't do to others as you don't want others to do to you." What better punishment for these cold-blooded killers than the death penalty.
Murderers are the most deserving of such punishment. They kill in cold blood and enjoy themselves while doing it. They don’t show regret or remorse for their actions until they face death themselves. The only way to stop this plague of serial killers in the world is to place a great importance on the value of human life. The capital punishment should discourage many murderers from killing, with the fear of losing their own life. They enjoy the freedom to kill when the government only places jail sentences on their dealings. Why should tax payers have to give up money to feed, clothe, and shelter these undeserving individuals, when their lives could easily be ended. The death penalty seems like the only rational solution to such hideous crimes such as murder. In the end, even the Bible states, "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."
1. Koch’s thesis in favor of capital punishment is, “Life is indeed precious, and I believe the death penalty helps to affirm this fact.” [pg 320] He asks for the readers to agree with the fact that human life is in fact precious and that anything should be done to keep this notion true. He argues that if the value of life were imperative and the death penalty were “a real responsibility in the minds of the murderers, they might well have stayed their hand.” Koch believes that these ideals would discourage many “cold-blooded murderers” from killing so many people.
2. Koch focuses on the death penalty as a deterrent to murder and as a form of justice for murder done. In his argument, Koch emphasizes both these points when he states, “If we create a society in which injustice is not tolerated, incidents of murder-the most flagrant form of justice-will diminish.” [pg 321] Here he states that with the death penalty, society will enforce a way of life in which a tight justice system will be key and the value of human life would be crucial. This statement also emphasizes the idea that the death penalty will indeed diminish incidents of murder.
Purpose and Audience
1. Koch’s purpose in this essay does seem political. It serves as nothing more than a justification for his beliefs on capital punishment. In return, this is just another way to aim for votes. In one statement, Koch says, “Because I support the death penalty for heinous crimes of murder, I have sometimes been the subject of emotional and outraged attacks by voters who find my position reprehensible or worse.” Here, he is making himself seem the victim of “attacks by voters.” This could be nothing more than a way to get the understanding of those who find Koch at fault.
2. Koch seems to expect his audience to disagree with his position on capital punishment. He begins his opening paragraphs with the idea that “Killing is wrong.” Throughout the entire essay, Koch names the reasons for which many may not support the death penalty. He provides all the counterarguments and negates them with supporting evidence. This then gives us the idea that Koch was expecting his audience’s disagreement on the subject.
3. Koch places the responsibility on society to stand up and protect the innocent lives of others by accepting capital punishment as a solution to murder. For them to lose the “moral cowardice” that makes criminals grow “bolder” and to take action involving their community.
Method and Structure
1.
A. Emotional:
· “When we lower the penalty for murder, it signals a lessened regard for the value of the victim’s life.” [pg 322-323]
· “Thou Shalt Not Commit Murder” [pg 323]
B. Ethical:
· “During my 22 years in public service…” [pg 320]
· “As a district leader, councilman, congressman, and mayor…” [pg 320]
C. Rational:
· “A study at M.I.T. showed that based on 1970 homicide rates….” [pg 321]
· “On June 22, 1984, the New York Times published an editorial…” [pg 320]
The emotional appeals proved to be most effective. The reason why is because it truly touched the reader as a form of connection that was made through the writing. It tied the reader with the author’s views and ideas, which was the purpose of the paper. The ethical appeals proved to be the least effective. I don’t think it matters his professions or his years in public service. These ideas are the least in mind to the reader when discussing such subjects.
2. MAJOR PREMISE: All killers admit to the wrongs when they face death themselves, to bring those who sentenced them to death down to their level.
MINOR PREMISE: Willie and Shaw charged with the death penalty admitted right before their deaths that “Killing is wrong” and that “Killing is wrong when I did it. Killing is wrong when you do it.” [pg 319-320]
CONCLUSION: Willie and Shaw sought “to bring his accusers down to his own level.” [pg 323]
Koch denies its validity by stating that “The state has rights that the private individual does not. In a democracy, those rights are given to the state by the electorate.” Here Koch is justifying the laws right to execute those charged with murder.
3. When Koch countered the argument that “the death penalty is ‘barbaric’” he completely diminished this argument by stating that “it’s not the method that really troubles opponents. It’s the death itself they consider barbaric.” This method of argument is incredibly convincing because it gives Koch’s argument importance due to the fact that those opponents consider “death” itself “barbaric.” Considering this fact, Koch can argue that those same opponents would consider “murder” “barbaric” as well and therefore, do nothing about that situation.
4. Robert Lee Willie and Joseph Carl Shaw… “hoped to soften the resolve of those who sentenced them to death.” Emphasizes the idea that killers try to bring down their accusers when it comes down to their deaths. [pg 323] Luis Vera and the “tragic death of Rosa Velez.” “…I knew I wouldn’t go to the chair.” Emphasizes the idea that killers’ understanding that they won’t face capital punishment, in a sense encourages killers to go on with their plans of death. New York Times editorial on the lethal injection proved that “it is not the method that really troubles opponents…but death itself.” [pg 320-321] The analogy between cancer and murder proves that “one does not have to like an idea in order to support it.” [pg 321] “No other major democracy-in fact, few other countries of any description-are plagued by murder rate such as that in the U.S.” This supports the idea that “If other countries had our murder problem, the cry for capital punishment would be just as loud as it is here.” [pg 321]
Language
1. Koch’s tone is assertive throughout the entire essay. His language emphasizes his tone because he speaks his mind as he believes to be true, because in a sense he knows he is right and is certain on what needs to be done. This adds to the openness of the readers acceptance because he is able to counterattack every opposing issue that seems to be out there and clearly stands his ground on supporting his ideas.
2. Koch refers to his opponents’ thinking as “sophistic nonsense” and “transparently false” [pg 323] His use of words indicate that Koch’s attitude toward opponents of capital punishment and their arguments is degrading. He brings down their ideas by considering them unreasonable and untrue. Then he introduces his own ideas as ideal and right.
Writing Topics
The rising now becomes, “Whether or not murderers should be executed or not?” My response to that question is that it should absolutely be so. If you have in fact taken somebody’s right to life in this world, what gives you any better right to life than that person? You should pay the consequences for your actions and indeed suffer a painful death. Nobody should have any consideration for you because you did not have consideration for somebody else. After all "Don't do to others as you don't want others to do to you." What better punishment for these cold-blooded killers than the death penalty.
Murderers are the most deserving of such punishment. They kill in cold blood and enjoy themselves while doing it. They don’t show regret or remorse for their actions until they face death themselves. The only way to stop this plague of serial killers in the world is to place a great importance on the value of human life. The capital punishment should discourage many murderers from killing, with the fear of losing their own life. They enjoy the freedom to kill when the government only places jail sentences on their dealings. Why should tax payers have to give up money to feed, clothe, and shelter these undeserving individuals, when their lives could easily be ended. The death penalty seems like the only rational solution to such hideous crimes such as murder. In the end, even the Bible states, "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Susan Glaspell's Trifles Response
Susan Glaspell’s “Trifles”
Plays tell a story with the use of characters, actions, and visual elements. These aspects are used in plays to emphasize a setting, a personality or perhaps, a behavior. In Susan Glaspell’s “Trifles,” the use of such elements are used to set the mood for this crime story. In this story, a woman is being accused of killing her husband, and what better than a play to act out such an occurrence. Through the use of actions, costumes, and props, the visual elements in this play help to bring out this murder mystery to life.
In the beginning of the play, the scene starts out with the description of the house and its kitchen. This “abandoned farmhouse” [pg 3] is given the depiction of loneliness and gloom. The portrayal of the kitchen gives “signs of incompleted work” with “unwashed pans under the sink, a loaf of bread outside the bread-box, a dish-towel on the table.” [pg 3] All these visuals give off this feeling of a deserted and vacant home, implying its inhabitants’ need for a sudden escape. As the people begin to enter the home, the order in which they come in gives this notion of importance. The men: the COUNTY ATTORNEY, HALE, and the SHERIFF, are “followed by the two woman.” [pg 3] As always, the women are the secondary characters and just play the roles of “extras” as their characters importance is diminished by their sex. Later on, when the men go upstairs to look for evidence at the crime scene, “[The women listen to the men’s steps on the stairs, then look about the kitchen.]” [pg 12] Once again, the women are left behind and are of little concern to the men. These two women are not of importance so therefore, do not have the right to step into the room. This notion of inferiority is portrayed throughout the entire story as the men laugh at the women and the “unimportant” things that they do. This idea is later emphasized when the COUNTY ATTORNEY “[Kicks his foot against the pans under the sink.]” [pg 9] This action shows the carelessness that this man has for the woman’s house and or work. This is just another way that he is diminishing the woman’s house work as he disturbs it much more than it already is. Overall, the COUNTRY ATTORNEY shows nothing more than disrespect to the woman’s work by performing such an action. Following this, MRS. PETERS “[arranges the pans under the sink which the LAWYER had shoved out of place.] [pg 12] This action shows the woman’s concern for the pans, in a form of respect to the widow‘s home. It also brings about a connection between the women who seem to understand one another in what really concerns them in the home. What may seem of little importance to the men, may be of immense value to the women. This then brings about the difference of thought and behavior between the two sexes.
Overall, the visual elements in the play helped to bring out the characters and issues that came along in this story. With the use of actions, props, and costumes, the story’s plot as well as its setting was thoroughly depicted in the play and given a sense of life. This probably would not have been possible without the use of such elements in the story. Visuals did more than enough to add to the readers comprehension of the play with the laying out such issues that became the key parts in the story. Without the use of such elements, the readers would most likely not feel as connected with the story in regards to the lack of imagery that would usually be provided with such devices. That is why visuals are so vital to a play’s success.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
