Step 1- Read all the comments from the previous assignment.
Step 2- Choose one comment which is thoughtful.
Step 3-
First, paraphrase the comment you are responding to: For example: “Mr. Baalbaki thinks that…”
Then, write a question about the chosen comment. The question must be: clear, sincere, useful and be the sort of question which leads to more questions. The question you write must complicate the comment’s argument, make the reader of the comment you are questioning think deeper. Stir up some intellectual trouble. Find an example from US history which disproves their theory.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
Brian said "John Adams and his wife Abigal Adams disagree with each other." John and his wife were talking about two different topics. John Adams said " I always consider the settlement of America with reverence and wonder, as the opening of a grand scene and design in providence, for the illumination of the ignorant and the slavish part of mankind all over the earth."
Abigal Adams said "I am more and more convinced that man is a dangerous creature, and that power whether vested in many or a few is ever grasping, and like the grave cries give, give. The great fish swallow up the small, and he who is most strenuous for the rights of people, when vested with power is as eager after the preogatives of government. You tell me of degrees of perfection to which human nature is capable of arriving, and I believe it, but all the same time lament that our admiration should arise from the scarcity of the instances."
My question for you, Brian is: How do these two quotes disagree with each other? I feel the two quotes are unrelated in what they are talking about.
Catherine stated that:
“The authors, Abigail Adams and Walt Hitman disagree with each other. Abigail Adams is saying how Man is taking too much power and how the people with less power don’t get anything. Walt Hitman is saying how the U.S. is not the best at everything but always the most common people.”
Abigail says that men grow corrupt on power, and Walt says that power can be found within the common people of America.
My question is:
Won’t the common people of America grow corrupt on power, causing these two quotes to agree?
For example, Andrew Jackson, was the youngest of three sons of Scotch-Irish immigrants, he grew up in rural South Carolina and attended local schools. He was one of the common people who became president and wished for the impossible.
Maina was saying how “the History of Americans has been the subject that many people argue about over and over.” She said how John Adams and Abigail Adams had different point of views about America. She explained what Fredrick Douglass’ statement was and the March to Universal Suffrage. Her central theme is “America is built on war and victory but like any other country; it has a vulnerable side that you can’t help but love.”
My question is: How did people ‘suffer’ to get voting rights, Freedom of Rights and the U.S. Constitution?
Karina said that "George Santayana and Thomas Jefferson seem to disagree. George Santayana said that "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it". Thomas Jefferson said that "I like the dreams of the future better than the history of the past". Santayana thinks that the past is important and it must be repeated but Jefferson thinks that the past is not important anymore and that the only important thing is the future."
Her central theme in American History is " Everything that causes happiness always comes from pain".
My question for Karina is if everything that causes happiness comes from pain then where does pain come from?Another question is which person's quote is closer to your beliefs Jefferson's or George Santayana's.
Maina said that "John Adams thought that America would be able to change the world for the better, like making everybody smarter, including the slaves. While Abigail Adams thinks that the men of America or men in general are dangerous beings, which get power, and get drunk on it." Well in response, my question is: "Is the power hungry men who are "dangerous" make our nation prosper?" Now you may automatically think corruption is bad, but is it beneficial to the people? Sometimes, dangerous acts may be for the better if you look at the overall aspect of it. A reference from pop culture would be the graphic novel and movie, Watchmen. In it, a man stages that an outside force has attacked the world and so the whole world bands together against this "threat" ending the possibility of nuclear war. But to do this, he killed thousands of people in a staged attack. But fooling everyone that it was an "alien" threat invading. So the different nations put aside their differences and stopped their conflict to unite together. This inevitably stopped nuclear war between the other nations and would've resulted in billions of casualties. So are some dangerous acts for the better? The power hungry people that have lead this nation like Andrew Jackson might have abused his powers to kill off indians, but gained new land that added to the U.S. and gave more wealth and had our nation prosper into today. And slavery, although extremely horrible, has brought different cultures to the U.S. so people might not be here today if it weren't for that cruel act. So in some scenarios, danger may not be always good, but has another side to it.
Alisha Bunting said: "In my own words a central theme in American history is that 'It is only a free country if you do what they tell you to do.'"
My question for Alisha is: In what ways do you mean 'It is only a free country if you do what they tell you to do'?
Alisha stated in her previous post that "In my own words a central theme in American history is that 'It is only a free country if you do what they tell you to do.'"
My question to you Alisha is, if we did what "they" told us to do wouldn't that make our government a dictatorship? I think yu have to restate your theme in a clearer way. Also what do you mean when you say "they"?
My friend Jackie said that Will Rogers and Emily Dickinson agree, but you were supposed to choose to people that disagree. Also, Will Rogers and Emily Dickinson disagree because Will Rogers is saying that civilization advances and Emily Dickinson is saying we are strangers to our selves has nothing to do with each other. My Question to Jackie is what two people disagree with each other?
Brian said that "John believes that America is a beautiful place filled with reverence and wonder. Abigail has the thought that America and its men have the urge for power and cannot get enough and once they get too much, they forget how to control it." In my opinion, i think that John is thinking about the nature of America, and Abigail is talking about the government. So i think that these two quotes doesn't interact.
My question to Brian is, if John is really talking about AMERICA's FUTURE, how do they disagree?
Jackie said 'I think that Will Rogers and Emily Dickinson agree, Will Rogers said "You can't say civilization don't advance... in every war they kill you in a new way." and Dickinson said "We meet no Stranger, but Ourself" Dickinson thinks that we don't notice that we are changing. Rogers think that every time we win a war, they will always find a new way. I think they agree because they get more ideas from time to time, and not knowing that themselves.'
My question to Jackie is what ideas does he think people dont realize that they know? How is what Emily Dickinson's quote related to Will Rogers quote? I believe that Emily is talking about how all people are the same, no matter what race religion or background. While Will Rogers is saying how we keep finding more advanced ways to kill each other.
Catherine stated that Abigal Adams and Walt Hitman both disagree with eacher. Abigal Adams had said that man have too much power. Walt Hitman seams to say that people is good at alot of things, not the United States.
My question to Catherine is: How is Abigal Adams and Walt Hitman disagreeing with each other when common people have too much power and/or is good at different things?
Jackie said 'I think that Will Rogers and Emily Dickinson agree, Will Rogers said "You can't say civilization don't advance... in every war they kill you in a new way." and Dickinson said "We meet no Stranger, but Ourself" Dickinson thinks that we don't notice that we are changing. Rogers think that every time we win a war, they will always find a new way. I think they agree because they get more ideas from time to time, and not knowing that themselves.'
My question to Jackie is that what people don’t agree or disagree in your web log.
Alisha Bunting said that John Adams says that America is good while Abigail Adams says that man is very dangerous and always takes down the person that has less power than them. In my opinion is doesnt really explain how they are different, she just explain what there comments are about the world. My question is how are they really different? Can you explain how they are similiar as well?
Alisha Bunting said that, John Adams says that America is good while Abigail Adams says that man is very dangerous and always takes down the person that has less power than them.That depends on which type of men they were talking about not just one type of men.She also said that it was a free country if they tell you what to do. Well my question for Alisha is that " When you said that America is good what do you mean good and who do you think is right Abigail Adams or John Adams?
Jackie said Rogers and Dickinson agree. Jackie said that Will Rogers thinks that every time we win a war, they find a new way to kill you. Emily Dickinson's quote is "We meet no stranger, but ourself". My question is how are those quotes relative to each other?
Karina stated that George Santayana and Thomas Jefferson seem to disagree. That George Santayana said that "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" and that Thomas Jefferson said that "I like the dreams of the future better than the history of the past". She wrote that "Santayana thinks that the past is important and it must be repeated yet Jefferson thinks that the past is not important anymore and that the only important thing is the future."
My question is: Are Jefferson and Santayana really disagreeing? Because Jefferson is not saying that the past is bad, he is just saying that he prefers a better future. And Santayana is telling you to remember the past, he is not saying it is all bad. So are they really disagreeing?
Daniel katz said "I think that George Santyana and Thomas Jefferson's speeches appear to disagree with each other. George Santyana's speech sayd " Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. " Thomas Jefferson's speech says " I like the dreams of the future better than the dreams of the past. " George is saying that if you don't remember the past, then you will end up repeating it. Thomas is saying that he preffers focusing on the future of our country rather than focus on the past because the past is the past and cannot be changed. The quote that comes closest to my beliefs is Thomas Jefferson's. Like hi I also like to focus on my future rather than look into the past."
My question to you is Whats wrong with the past? and What makes the future better?
Daniel Katz stated he think George Satanya and Thomas Jefferson disagree. George stated “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”. Jefferson stated “I like the dreams of the future better than the history of the past”. Katz continued to say “Thomas is saying that he prefers focusing on the future of our country rather than focus on the past because the past is the past and cannot be changed.”
My question for Katz is Thomas is not stating what you stated he’s saying he doesn’t enjoy thinking about the bloodshed and foundations in which America started. So what is Thomas really saying? Do they really disagree and why?.
Post a Comment