The Apology Reading for 5/18

Indicate one sentence that you highlighted or underlined (give page number and section number) and write a short paragraph (at least 4 sentences) that explains why you underlined it or highlighted it. Be prepared to share this in discussion.

I chose the paragraph on page 64, the paragraph below section 36b, which states "However, we must face the fact that he demands the death penalty. Very good. What alternative penalty shall i propose to you gentlemen? Obviously it must be what's deserved. Well, what penalty do I deserve to pay or suffer, in view of what I have done?"

I liked this part because instead of focusing on himself winning the jury over and getting out of this mess free of charge, he also thinks about what would happen if he lost without giving the jury a proper way of deciding his punishment. He states this, thinking that there is a chance he'll lose, so that if he does lose then he'll atleast be able to have a fair punishment based on what he had suggested. If you don't come up with a good punishment throughout the discussion of the trial being held then most likely you'll have a excruciatingly, pessimistic punishment that adoesn't fit your crime because you never brought up a proper punishment in trial. Basically, I just like Socrates thinking in this paragraph.

The Apology for 5/17

Indicate one sentence that you highlighted or underlined (give page number and section number) and write a short paragraph (at least 4 sentences) that explains why you underlined it or highlighted it. Be prepared to share this in discussion.

On page 51, section 26d it says "Do you suggest that I do not believe that the sun and moon are gods, like other men do?"

I didn't really understand this sentence, does everyone believe that the sun and the moon are gods in the time period of when "The Apology" was written? I don't know, I'll bring this up in discussion because if every man in this time period does believe that the sun and the moon are gods then this is probably what is confusing me. Hopefully, I can get clarification tomorrow.

The Apology for 5/16

Indicate one sentence that you highlighted or underlined (give page number and section number) and write a short paragraph (at least 4 sentences) that explains why you underlined it or highlighted it. Be prepared to share this in discussion.
~I picked a full paragraph because I thought that it all had to be read together to give the concept I'm trying to make. On page 41 paragraph 19a it says "Very well, then; I must begin my defence, gentlemen, and I must try, in the short time that I have, to rid your minds of a false impression which is the work of many years. I should like this to be the result, gentlemen, assuming it to be for your advantage and my own; and I should like to be succesfull in my defence; but I think that it will be difficult, and I am quite aware of the nature of my task. However, let that turn out as God wills; I must obey the law and make my defence."

~I thought that this paragraph would be best used for the prosecution because it shows Socrates kind of saying, I know I'm going to lose and I'm not going to put up a fight, this will turn out how God plans that it will. This bugs me because I think Socrates could do so much more instead of just giving up and leaving God to do all the work for him. He could atleast try his hardest or even just a bit more to give the jury some thought into something like, You know, Socrates is right he isn't corrupting the youth, the youth are making their own choices and they might not just be based off Socrates teachings. It seems as if Socrates is just ready to be put to death or suffer severe punishment for his actions because, atleast from my perspective, it looks as though he doesn't even care what happens to him or where he ends up.

Pericles Funeral Oration for 5/15

Make a list of some of the Athenian values that you encountered in the text. Choose one a write a couple of sentences (or more) about why it might be good for the trial of Socrates.

~Tradition
~Morals(Right or Wrong thing to do)
~Truth(This kind of applys to the second one listed above but I thought this one was important enough to get its own category)

I'm choosing to write about Tradition-
I think using the Athenian value of Tradition for the trial of Socrates would best be used for either side of the argument. If you used Tradition, many people would feel obligated to concur with your side in the trial. They also use a couple examples of it in the text and for example, the one Mr. Jana pointed out to us in class today related to Tradition and how it was its own category mixed in with the two categories, Apply to Ethics, and Apply to Emotion. I completely agree and think it should be further used as a main Athenian value to be brought up in the final upcoming trial of Socrates.

"Jigsaw Activity" for 4/25

1) Give a quick explanation of the topic and propose a debate resolution of the topic. (a couple of sentences)

In 2004, there was an ammendment passes that stated that the desecration of a US flag. Some think this is a violation to their free speech because supposedly burning a flag is the only moral, honorable way to dispose of a flag.

2) Explain why it is an important topic. You choose what to write about, but here are some suggestions if you are stuck: How does it impact your constitutional rights? Can it impact your daily life? Does it empower or disempowered you as an individual? Does it promote or inhibit public discussion? Does it help or hurt people getting along with one another? (short paragraph)

Well, I think that burning a flag is not a big impact on our everyday lives and that people shouldn't care whether they make it against the law to burn a flag or not. However, apart of the big "Free Speech" ammendment this is tied to, now that's a big part of our lives. There are many things that tie to this and there are still big debates about this today. There is a boundary you cannot pass, there is a big difference of cussing infront of friends and cussing on national television.

3) Write one or two sentences that explain a good point made by the con side and one or two sentences that explain a good point made by the pro side (2-4 sentences total).

The con side makes some good points about how veterans fought hard for their countries freedom. Thought I'd have to side with the pro side considering they have some good points and just one of them is that burning a flag is not even part of "Free Speech" and that it isn't even speech, also it's the only proper/moral way to dispose of a US flag.

The Press in Times of Crisis for 4/24

Assume that our next debate will have the resolution, "The press should be censored in times of crisis."

1) Indicate wheter your reading selection is pro or con for the above resolution and write three things that support the pro or con position on this issue.

My reading selection is pro to the above resolution and I fully support the things that support the pro position on this issue. Just a couple facts to support my thinking is one, the press should be censored because they are one of the main spreaders of rumors. Two, because they can manipulize the actual story into something totally different by releasing only certain video clips, audio clips, or stories/facts out of the many they obtain. And lastly, three, because anything they show may be false, e.g., the documentary we watched in Humanities today.

2) Write a paragraph where you state your opinion on the issue. It should include some evidence from the reading, but it does not have to follow each viewpoint to the letter. You can also include ideas and evidence from other sources or individuals.

My opinion on this issue is that the media should be censored in times of crisis because they influence the people, and the people influence the government. The people can revolt, protest, and make motions to change the ways of our government. So if the media shows you something false or an opinionated story, and you decide to stand up for what you believe in, you could end up changing the government in a bad or useless way. You want to get your facts straight and make sure of it because if you are reading, hearing, or seeing is false, and you start a protest/motion about it- the matter will only end up staying the same or getting worse.

Don Imus Controversy for 4/19

ANSWER ALL THREE QUESTIONS and post on your blog. Don't forget to put the questions in bold.
Short Answer: a few sentences for each question:
1. According to the NAACP, why should Imus be silenced?

Because he needs to be silenced for what he said to start a movement to get rid of the dirty language that is being used in the media.

2. According to Frank Rich, why should Imus not be silenced?

Because there are many other things being said on the air that are way more wrong and dirty then what Imus said. The NAACP is just picking on Imus because he's white and it's unfair that other races can say those words and it won't be wrong but for some people it will end up getting you fired? This doesn't make any sense because it is being extremely unfair to certain races.

Long Answer: Write a short essay, w/ intro, body and conclusion, about 4-5 paragraphs with at least 4 sentences each.
3. Do you think Imus should be silenced? Why?

Imus definitely shouldn't be silenced, you just have to read the first paragraph of this summary and know what the NAACP is doing to Don Imus is wrong. He's white and says something that would be alowd from a black person and he gets in trouble, the NAACP is being racist in doing so because it is unfair for one race to be alowd to say some things and the other race not alowd to say those things.
That would go against the whole "Everyone is equal," statement that I've heard so many places but the thing is that isn't true in this case. The NAACP is accusing Imus for saying something wrong when he didn't do anything wrong because going back to what I said before the NAACP would not take this out of perspective if he was black. This comment has got to get heard because I'm sure many people would agree.
Caucasian people have the hard life when it comes to Freedom Of Speed because there are words that will offend other races if you call them that, however, if someone from the same race call them that they'll take it as a "Hey man!" or something like that. It seems like only some black people will refer to someone from the same race as the N word. I think this because I've never heard another Mexican, Caucasion, or Asian person refer to a "friend" of their own race as the racist word for each one, (You know which ones I'm talking about).
In conclusion, I think that it is unfair and what the NAACP is doing to Imus. I don't know if this would be a good idea, but maybe give Imus his job back with a warning and an agreement that he won't refer to inicent people with racial words that can be very offensive to a certain race.

Plato Reading and Blog for 4/18

2. What is your reaction to the ending of the section? What is good and/or bad about the type of society outlined by Socrates?

Restricting the arts will not benefit the men, that's for sure. In doing this he's restricting the mens creative release and I'm predicting that this will start a revolt against Socrates. This might make his society last a while longer but in the end the men will realize that they do not need to comply to the stupid laws Socrates has laid out to them. This will definitely have a bad effect on this community and restrictions such as this one, is definitely going to be broken some time or later.

Plato Assignment for 3/28

1. Short Paragraph – Personal Reflection: Before reading the selection from Plato write at least one full paragraph on this question: Why do you think Plato (or anyone else) would want to censor Homer (yesterday the question was about Hesiod)? You might want to think about Achilles as a "hero," and why or why not his personal characteristics are something that should be promoted, or not.

Because they want their religion to stay the way it is and be directed in the way they want it to. It seems like they don't want to base it off someone elses beliefs. Also, Homer promotes disobeying your leaders and lots of violence in society. This would definitely not be a good thing for them living in the cave.

2. Then read pp. 76-85 (Section b). Secondary or Literary Education)

3. Short Answers – Text based questions. Answer both questions, answers can be just a few sentences:

a. According to Plato, what are some aspects of poetry that should be banned and why? In other words, how can poetry undermine the education of a Guardian?

Some aspects of poetry that should be banned are that of about people that disobey kings and the law. Also of ones that lie and describe the afterlife as a horrible, bad place.

b. What should poetry “teach” and why?

Poetry should teach about life and wisdom. It should be about good, fun ideas that will make you actually have to think about the poem to understand it. Poetry should teach you to be patient with text and to keep trying at it to understand the meaning of what you're reading. This would interest people and help them learn and practice valuable skills you need for advanced reading.

4. If you were talking to Plato what would you say to him? Do you agree with his ideas? Do you think poetry, or literature in general, should be put to the purposes that he says it should?

I'd say that Plato would be right to censor Homer because I can understand that the gods are violent and aggresive in Homer. They wouldn't want their society thinking this about their beliefs. Also poems about bad things are alright to censor in my opinion. You wouldn't want your society thinking of the bad and not the good, it would bring their spirits down making them always in a bad mood. Everything around you affects how you act and what you think of and about.

Republic Assignment for 3/27

1. Short Paragraph – Personal Reflection: Before reading the selection from Plato write at least one full paragraph on this question: Why do you think Plato (or anyone else) would want to censor Hesiod? Remember that Hesiod was the poet who wrote about the fight between the gods and the titans.

I think that Plato or anyone else would want to censor Hesiod because he would be leading them off track from what they want them to believe. They have already taught them a certain way and want them to keep believing in that way so they would be disapointed if the word was to get out that they were living a lie and everything they had been taught about their beliefs and the gods had been false.

2. Then read pp. 67-76 (Section I. Secondary or Literary Education)

3. Short Answers – Text based questions. Answer both questions

a. What are Homer and Hesiod guilty of?

Misinterperating the history of the gods in their belief, when what they thought was wrong.

b. What are the two main characteristics of “god” and what are the laws/principles of story telling based on those characteristics?

How god is the cause of all things that go well, nothing that doesn't go well and that god should be spoken about and be presented in their society.

4. Compare what you wrote in your personal reflection above (#1) with what Plato wrote. How close were you to what Plato wrote?

I think my prediction was mostly correct in the main perspective of that the reason why was because they didn't want to be doubting the beliefs they have been taught.

Prep for Seminar for 3/22

7) In your opinion, is it ever right to harm somebody? Why or why not? What would Socrates and/or Thrasymachus say in response to your answer?

After going over it in class my opinion on it has changed, well, actually not really I have just heard of how to reword it so that you really never have to harm anyone, just maybe defend yourself in certain situations. I use to think it's right to harm someone if they are harming you on purpose or they won't stop harming you, but Beth has recently brought it to mind, that harming someone that's harming you or someone you care for could be considered defending yourself, your family, your country, etc. depending on the situation. I think this is a very good point and I will most definitely bring it up in the debate when this question is asked if no one else does. If someone is trying to hurt you, and you fight back, it isn't really fighting/harming it's mostly defending yourself. If you just let them hurt you and you don't do anything about it then you'd probably end up dead or in a lot of pain. If you fought back as bad as they did, and badly injure or kill them, then you'd be misunderstood and you'd be just as bad, if not, worse then the person that came at you in force. But if you simply defend youself to stay alive or save yourself from a lot of pain, then that would be the most intelligent thing you could do in that situation, in my opinion at least. I think Socrates would say it is never right to harm someone but accept that defending yourself is a pretty smart move. He'd say it is never right to harm your enemies, though if they try to harm you, then defending yourself would be, certainly, a decent answer to overcome the situation.

Republic Assignment for 3/21

Minimum one long paragraph

Prompt: In your opinion, how can acting “right” (i.e. justly) help or harm the achievement of happiness? In your answer you need to first establish, in true Socratic fashion, what you mean by "right" (justice) and what you mean by happiness. What do you think Socrates would say about what you wrote and/or what do you think Thrasymachus would say?

Well, things that make you especially happy, maybe even just you alone, are against the law and don't appear justly to many other people. This is an example of ethics clouding your view and way of being happy. Justice can also help you be happy because with laws you feel more safe and secure. People won't be runnin' around killin' other people with the law because if they did they'd go to jail and I don't think anyone would like that (at least in our society). I think laws work well in our world because without laws there would be no justice and without justice our world would be chaotic and this would probably end human civilization as we know it. I think Socrates would agree with me and my point about how laws and justice is needed to run a civilization. It seems like he might say something about how there are laws that you can brake in some cases in case of emergency. (Modern Day Example): If someone was badly hurt and you were speeding on the freeway to get them to the hospital, then breaking that law at that time in that situation would probably be fine, as long as no one was hurt while you were speeding.

Republic Assignment for 3/20

Section One:

Short answers, questions 1 and 2 (at least 2-5 sentences or bullet points, maybe more, per question)

1. Notice that our reading on Thrasymachus is divided into two parts. The first part is entitled – “First Statement and Criticisms”. In this first part, what are Socrates’ main argument(s) against the idea that justice is whatever the strong (i.e. the government) says it is?

Well, he says that it would be a stupid way of running a society. Also, that most governmental figure' will make laws and run an area with rules and laws in their best interest. They want to please themselves and the people and in doing so, the people are happy and obey the political leader.

2. In the second part – “Second Statement and Final Refutation” – what are Thrasymahcus’ two main points and what are Socrates’ two main points in response?

I could only find one main point from Thrasymachus which was 'Justice is the interest of the stronger party and that injustice is the interest and profit of oneself.' and I found two main points from Socrates which were 'No one really wants authority and with it the job of righting other people's wrongs.' and 'All wise men would prefer the benefit of this service at the hands of others.'

Paragraph response, or more, question 3:

Note that we might revisit some of these questions in a Socratic Seminar or as an essay prompt. Consider your response here as a rough draft of initial ideas that could be developed in more detail.

3. You can choose from one of the following prompts to write one paragraph or longer:

In your opinion, is it ever right to harm somebody? Why or why not? What would Socrates and/or Thrasymachus say in response to your answer?

I don't think it is ever right to harm someone unless it is necessary. If you're country is at war with another, you aren't just going to stand there and wait for everyone to die you're going to need to fight in the war to escape defeat. However, you could talk your way out of it I suppose, like offer them natural resources that they need in exchange for peace, e.g. oil, gold, crops, etc. My view of justice is to harm somebody as a last resort. I think Socrates would agree with what I'm saying, how not to harm anyone unless they deserve it or it will save lives and other desperate reasons for doing so.

Plato Assignment for 3/16: Section 1

1) In your opinion, is Polemarchus definition of justice, derived from the poet Simonedes, an improvement from his father’s definition?
Well, that's kind of a difficult decision considering he look up to both. But I'd have to say it derived from Simonedes.

2) What is Simonides definition of justice? Has Polemarchus interpreted him correctly?
Simonedes said that Justice is to hurt your enemies and help your friends and I think Polemarchus interpreted him correctly.

3) What problem does Socrates see in the phrase, “helping one’s friends and harming ones enemies”? Why is this not an accurate definition of justice?
Socrates thinks that a friend isn't always good so you shouldn't always help them and an enemie is always evil so you shouldn't always hurt them. Plus you should never hurt your enemies unless they have dont something to hurt you or anything else that's bad that's worth hurting or killing over. I think this is a good definition of justice because it is focuses on emotion and feelings.

4) What lesson do you think Socrates/Plato is trying to prove by having Polemarchus give in to Socrates when his father (Cephalus) would not?
be wanting to cause a quarrel between son and father or show that the unexperienced will usually change their mind more than the experienced.

5) Whose argument do you find more convincing, Polemarchus or Socrates? Why?
I don't think Socrates isn't really argueing, it seems as if he is just trying to say that Polemarchus is wrong, he doesn't want to argue over it. Socrates shot down all the logic behind Polemarchus's arguement which took away all of my belief in it. I'm completely convinced in Socrates "arguement" and all the facts behind it, and I 100% doubt Polemarchus's arguement.

Republic Assignment for 3/16

Who are Cephalus and Polemarchus?
Cephalus is an old man that lives by the sea. It seems that he cares nothing of money.
Polemarchus is Cephalus's son and is friends with Socrates.

What is the profession of Cephalus?
It doesn't seem as if he has a profession because he is an old man and I think without a job?

What was Cephalus doing right before the discussion that took place?
He sacrificed someone at the party for a goddess.

According to Cephalus, what are the virtues of old age?
You don't care for sex and money any more and you should fix all the messed up things you've done in your life.

What are Cephalus’ view of justice?
Cephalus believes that you should always tell the truth and repay all your debts that you owe.

What is Socrates response?
That it is not always good to tell the truth and to give back things you have borrowed.

II. Write a one paragraph response to the following question:
Do you agree with Cephaus or with Socrates? Why? If you don't agree with either of them, write about which one you think makes the stronger arguement - even if you think it is not "right" - and why?
I agree with Socrates because I think he has the stronger arguement and just overall is the solution that applies the most to ethics and whats best for their society. The lawmakers should be people that were raised in the cave like the prisoners so that they can relate and understand what it's like for the prisoners and what they are going through. Then, if they want, they can go out into the light and gain knowledge so that they are wiser and more intelligent. Cephaus has the bad side to this arguement because letting people that weren't raised in the cave be the lawmakers is a bad idea I think, even if they are smarter and know more about life outside the cave. The point is that they are living in the cave and not out in the light so why should they need to know lots about the outside, the point is that it would be better for the lawmakers to know more about the cave then the outdoors.

Similie of the Cave Reading Questions for 3/15

1. Socrates asks Glaucon to suppose that one of the prisoners is freed and leaves the cave (p. 242 section 515d). What happens to the prisoner when he gets outside? Why does this happen to the prisoner?

Glaucon says that if the people in the cave were to be let loose, that they wouldn't be able to handle it. They wouldn't believe that what they were seeing all their lives in the cave was a lie. They would need to be driven out of the cave by force if they wanted to let them go.

2. Socrates states that the prisoners would try to kill anyone who tries to liberate them and lead them out of the cave (pp. 243 – 244 section 517a). Why would the prisoners kill someone who is trying to lead them outside?

They believe that everything they need is in the cave and that there's no reason to leave. They believe anything that is showed to them through shadows.

3. While reading pages 243-244 (section 517) keep in mind that the cave represents the way society actually is, while the sun (visible outside the cave) represents knowledge that could make for a better society. Don’t let the wording confuse you, Socrates sometimes calls the outside “the intelligible region” and associates it with “the divine.”
What is special about “the intelligible region” and why is it important for public servants/political leaders (p. 244 section 517 b and e) ?

The intelligible region controls all of truth and intelligence.

4. What is wrong with having uneducated people run society? What is wrong with having intellectuals (i.e. well-educated people) run society (p. 323 section 519c)?
It would be bad of course because the uneducated people would be making crappy laws and runnin the society with strange and non-educational rules. Anyone who knows anything about anything would know not to put someone with no education in a high class in society.

5. On pp. 323 – 324 (section 519 section d – section 520) Socrates tells Glaucon what the “job” of a lawmaker is. What is the job of a lawmaker and how is a lawmaker supposed to influence the best minds?

I don't think I got the full packet because mine is missing those pages, but if I had to guess I'd say a lawmakers job is to make the shadow puppets? =

Personal Reflection for 3/14

1) Recall a time that you heard a statement of “fact” that was later found to be untrue. It can be from a parent, a teacher, a friend, a government official, a book, or a film. How did you find out it was untrue and how did it make you feel? Did it change your outlook on anything?

Well, a long, long time ago I was told that there was such thing as Santa and that he brought presents and filled stockings and everything. I was told this by my parents and now that look back at it I laugh but at the time I was told this I was really dissapointed and mad at my parents for lieing to me. My parents told me this when I was about ten because my next door neighbor was telling us a little bit about Santa and how he's not real, but my parents wanted me to hear it from them first, that's how it happened. I use to see Christmas as something more special, and it is still special, but it took away from the whole tradition and special occation. I'm glad they told me but I was so angry to see the holiday's story fade away.

Personal Reflection for 3/2

At the moment I can't recall any times where my pride has gotten in the way. However...I do know that sometimes I'll get in fights with my parents or friends on small or large things that'll have to do with me or the person I'm arguing with knowing they're right and that there is no way in the world that I or they are wrong. I/they won't even listen to the other persons side of the story and won't accept that I/they are wrong because most of the time in these situations you know for sure you are right but the other person won't accept a no for an answer. These arguments seem to relate to pride because you're not listening to logic but rather thinking all about you and that you are correct without basing it on anything else that could be simple evidence that both people know but will not listen to it and only determine that your right through pride.

Iliad Assignment for 3/2

Simply summarize the main points and ask questions.

Patroclus began fighting the Trojans with Achille's armor and weapon, with seemingly high pride. Then, Hector rides up on his chariot and leaps off to attack Patroclus. Patroclus then finds men looting Cebriones' body, and fiercely rushes over and kills 27 men. Apollo came down to Patroclus and knocked his helmet off. When he was injured, he came back to the Archaean camp and Hector was waiting for him. He then stabbed Patroclus with a spear that went straight through him.

Predict what will happen next...

I think that Patroclus will rise from the dead! Well, at this point in the book I'm not really sure what might happen next but to kill a character thats in the book a fair ammount is a tad bit strange, I think something might happen to Patroclus.

Iliad Reading Homework for 3/1

1. What does Patroclus propose to Achilles and what is Achilles’ response? Why does Achilles grant Patroclus’ request?
Patroclus asks Achilles if he can go into battle and Achilles agrees. I was a little confused at this part but I think Achilles gives Partroclus his armor weapon and horse because it doesn't look like Achilles will be going into battle any time soon.

2. On p. 413 line 35 (approximately), Patroclus tells Achilles that Achilles is “cursed in [his] own courage.” What does Patroclus mean by that and do you agree with him?

He means that Achilles is too caught up in his pride and confidence that it is imparing his thoughts and judgement.

3. Either ask questions about the text or write down vocab words from the text with definitions.

I like how Patroclus is finally taking place in the war but why in the world would Achilles sit back and let his best friend go out there and fight without him with the chance Patroclus could die?

Iliad Assignment for 2/28

1. Write a question you have about the text, either an interpretive question that you have an opinion on, or something that you don't understand. You don't need to write the answer.
If Agamemnon thinks he's better then Achilles why does he need Achilles help in the war, don't you think that's kind of strange?

2. What was your opinion of Achilles before reading Book 9? Does it change after reading Book 9? Explain why or why not.
I think Achilles got more stubborn and a little greedy, I dont know, because the way he refused Agamemnon's offer, and the offer was very generous but it wouldn't really do much for his pride.

3. Same as yesterday - Make a list of the persuasive strategy used by these characters, following this format:

1) Who is speaking?

2) What does that person say and to whom does he say it?

3) What persuasive strategy is it?

4) Why is it an example of that strategy?

1) Achilles

2) Agamemnon

3) Emotion

4) Because he is telling Agamemnon that he doesn't deserve to have Achilles and that he should fight in the war himself.


1) Pheonix

2) Achilles

3) Ethics

4) Pheonix wants Achilles to return his favor by letting go of his anger and fight in the war.


1) Ajax

2) Achilles

3) Reason

4) Because he is trying to tell him that he is being foolish for not helping out his comrades.

The Embassy to Achilles for 2/27

1. Write a question. It can be an interpretive question that you have an opinion on or something about the text that you don't understand. You do not need to write the answer.
I don't know why Achilles is still so mad about Agamemnon taking his war prize. I guess I would be mad if I were him, maybe not so much because this takes place a long time ago in an era based on pride pretty much and I can see how that can tie to this. And I don't know why Agamemnon needed a war prize and why would he take it from his greatest fighter Achilles? Why not another soldier that isn't too good in combat? (that is if there are any...)

2. What was your opinion of Agamemnon before reading this section? Does your opinion of him change after reading it? Why or why not? Aone paragraph reply is fine, minimum of 6 solid setneces, but you are encouraged to write more.

Before, in the last book Agamemnon had been a horrible, self centered leader but throughout the last couple pages hes became a little less ridiculous in a sense that he is acting more kind and it seems to me at least a tad bit nicer. Now Achilles is seeming like the selfish one considering the fact that Agamemnon fix what he had said and Achilles denied it willingly. Then letting the Achaean soldiers face their death.

3. At various points in the text some characters attempt to persuade other characters to take a course of action. Examples of characters using persuasion include Nestor, Odysseus, and Ajax. Make a list of the persuasive strategy used by these characters, following this format:

1) Who is speaking?

2) What does that person say and to whom does he say it?

3) What persuasive strategy is it?

4) Why is it an example of that strategy?

1) 0dysseus

2) Achilles

3) Emotion

4) Because Odysseus keeps trying to make Achilles feel bad for the Achaeans and get him to fight with them against the Trojans.

1) Achilles

2) Odysseus and other men.

3) Reason

4) Because Achilles tries to tell them his side of it and he wouldn't lie or it would effect his public esteem.

1) nestor

2) Achilles and Agamemnon

3) Reason

4) Because Nestor is trying to tell them that they will either have lost Achilles or the kings honor, maybe even ending the Achaean army.

Iliad Reflection - Book One

If you were an ancient Greek, which of the following statements would you agree with?

A) Achilles’ rage is justified and I support his decision not to fight, even if it means the Greeks might lose lots of men, or even the war itself.

Or

B) Agamemnon is the commander, as such he is in the right, and I support his decision to ask for Achilles’ war prize Briseis – even if it means that Achilles will sit out the war.

A) I think Achilles' rage is justified and I support his decision not to fight. Though the Greeks may lose a lot of men and maybe even the war itself I do understand why he is raged. With Agamemnon being the horrible leader that he is and being cowardly, without having fought in one single battle. Achilles thinks that Agamemnon is one of the worst leaders ever and despizes him. In the text it even says something about Achilles wanting to kill Agamemnon but Athena came down from the heavens and asked him to stop before he had the chance. He the moved his hand onto the silver hilt and slid it back into his sheath.

Disagreements and Fights...

I disagreed with my parents last summer when we were taking a trip to Europe. I really didn't want to go but I didn't have a choice. I had to go and was complaining the whole eight or ten hour plane ride saying how boring it was. When we finally got there I was still in a bad mood and I was being very annoying complaining through the entire car ride to the hotel. My parents became very frustrated and were very angry with my behavior. They joke around about it now but at the time we became very far apart but towards the end of the trip we had disregarded the whole thing. I think they are still a little angry with me to this day about that incident though sometimes we look back and laugh about it.

Iliad Notes for Tuesday 2/13

1. Summarize with one or two quick bullet points per stanza - ones that you will be able to understand when you read your notes later.
-The old priest prayed to the god Apollo and got his power and skill with bow and arrows. He started to kill the mules and circling dogs, then the Achaean men.
-Achilles called his men and is thinking about retreating back to their home to escape their deaths.

2. Ask questions about the reading from one or more stanzas.
Who is the old priest? Did they mention it before in the beginning? Is he Chryses or is that someone else?

3. Predict what will happen next.
I think the Achaean's will ask Zeus for power beyond their wildest dreams and with it they will kill the old priest(Chryses?).

My Rage – Cause.

I'm raged because I can't think of something I'm raged about. It's so frustrating when something like this happens where you can't think and you just blank out. I HATE when this happens because it can make easy things difficult. I am raged because I have no clue what I'm raged about. I am mad that I can't put my finger on it and it's on the tip of my tongue, and I'm mad because I'm taking the time to think about something that I CAN'T THINK OF!

Fahrenheit 451 for 2/8

I have to get out of here, I have to leave! Montag has turned into a mad man and is having crazy ideas and expects me to put up with it! I’m so confused right now, I don’t know what to do, should I leave or go! He’s not the real Montag; he’s turned into an animal! I’ll do the right thing and call the fire department and the police. His heart has already been taken by those disturbing books. He doesn’t pay one bit of attention to me, I bet this is why the government took books away in the first place, those horrid things. I have to call a cab before Montag gets home…ohhh I hope Montag doesn’t go bringin’ me back into this again! Oh Montag…my dear Montag…what have you become? -Mildred on the day Montag was called to burn his house.

Fahrenheit 451 Homework 2/7

I have to get out of here, I have to leave! Montag has turned into a mad man and is having crazy ideas and expects me to put up with it! I’m so confused right now, I don’t know what to do or should I leave or go! He’s not the real Montag; he’s turned into an animal! I’ll do the right thing and call the fire department and the police. His heart has already been taken by those disturbing books. He doesn’t pay one bit of attention to me, I bet this is why the government took books away in the first place, those horrid things. I have to call a cab before Montag gets home…ohhh I hope Montag doesn’t go bringin’ me back into this again! Oh Montag…my dear Montag…what have you become? -Mildred on the day Montag was called to burn his house.

Fahrenheit 451 2/6 Homework

1. Find the scene in the book
2. Make a list of the descriptive words in that scene – minimum of 3, but you should be able to find a lot.
Forbidden, burning, chilling, swiftly, immediately, softly, flurry, shivered, gazed, perservative, scream, slammed, and crashed were only a few discriptive words used in Fahrenheit 451 Pgs. 35-45.
3. Write a short paragraph of why you think that scene and the words Bradbury used were effective in representing fear. This is like the assignment from last night expect with Bradbury.
Well you can just paint a picture in your mind when a writer uses a lot of discriptive words in their sentences. If you use figurative language in every sentence or atleast in every paragraph like Ray Bradbury does in Fahrenheit 451, then for the reader it's almost like watching a movie and you can understand the book better, in my personal opinion I think it makes reading a little more fun or interesting.

2/6 - Hesiod Writing Assignment

3. Explain how Zeus came to power and discuss how similar. Write about these following issues: How is he similar/different to Uranus or Cronos? Is his grip on power secure or fragile? Explain why or why not.
Zeus came into power by defeating his father Cronos is a war which he was helped in by other gods and the beasts such as the cyclopes. It was The Titans including Cronos versus The Gods including Zeus and the beasts in the war and The Gods won because of the help they got from the beasts. He's similiar to Cronos because Zeus stole the power from his father just like Cronos did. His grip on power is secure for now but if he has a child then he'd might try to steal Zeus's power because from what it seems like, it runs in the family.

Fahrenheit 451 Pgs. 155-End

1. Ask a question.
I don't have many questions at this point of the book but I really liked how Montag started making and finished his own book, this makes me think that this main character changed a lot through out the book, I bet you would never believe Montag would do such a thing on the first couple pages.
2. Visit a couple other blogs from classmates and try to answer someone else’s question(s) and/or comment on their blog.
Ok, I commented on Austin's blog.
3. Answer one of the following sets of questions.
B. What does Montag mean when he says, “And when they ask us what we are doing , you can say, We’re remembering” ? Why is this quote important? How does it fit into the novel, what is Bradbury trying to say with this?
I think this quote gives me the general idea that it means repeating the same thing over again. For example, Montag could be reading a book and someone would come up to him and ask "What are you doing?" and he'd say "Remembering" because he's doing what people use to do a while back and hes gathering information about the past. I'm not sure if this is the general understanding of the quote but this is how I like to base my thoughts off of it.

Fahrenheit 451 Pgs. 138-154

1. Write one or more questions that you have. Don't just say "I don't get it." Ask a specific question about what is happening in the story.
Why does Montag get Mr. Black's house burnt down. Was it just because he was another fireman and he doesn't like what they do or did he have some kind of grudge against him I didn't realize?
2. How has Montag changed from the beginning of the novel to this part? In writing about this you might want to notice that the environment has changed from the city to nature. Is this a coincidence or is the author trying to say something by contrasting the city to nature in relation to the ways Montag has changed.
I think Montag becomes a lot smarter and wiser throughout the book. It seems as if Montag didn't give a care for anything other then his wife and his job. He never took the time to look at life and nature and it seems like to me he never really thought things all the way through. He started out in the book having the pleasure to burn and didn't think he was making the world worse or hurting people. Now I can tell he's changed and looks at life with a different perspective, he is slowly getting more like Clarisse and Faber, different from the average man.

Fahrenheit 451 Pgs. 126-137

"You'd better head for the river if you can, follow along it, and if you can hit the old railroad lines going out into the country, follow them. even though practically everything's airborne these days and most of the tracks are abandoned, the rails are still there, rusting." I thought this part of the story was interesting because it's always nice to know there is a chance that the main character will live on and continue to go on and live his dream. I personally think they are going to get books back out there because of the energy running though Montag and Faber, I can tell they won't quit no matter what stands in their way. I think it's also strange how the railroads are closed even when they live in such a futuristic world. Because how will all the people without transportation get around?

Fahrenheit 451 Pgs. 110-125

1. Summarize what happens in one or two sentences.
Montag blasted Beatty with a flamethrower and he died!!! (He so deserved that!) Then the hound injects the needle into him so it was difficult for him to walk. The police were out to get him and he cleaned up at a gas station.
AND
2. On your blog, copy down one sentence from this reading selection that strikes you as particularly descriptive. Which of the 5 senses does it appeal to? What verbs, adjectives, or figurative language are used and why are they effective in describing a certain action, person, or thing? "Police Alert. Wanted: Fugitive in city. Has committed murder and crimes against the State. Name: Guy Montag. Occupation: Fireman. Last seen..."-> This was after he started running from the fire ingulfed crime seen, so I smelled the smoke and felt the hot air and pressure. I could see him limping through the dark alley and hearing the sirens and helicopters flying over in the background. This was really intense to me and I liked this part a lot! It made me want to keep on reading to find out what happened next, the pressure was on! This part in the book was the turn point for me and I actually started to enjoy reading this extreme battle Montag is fighting against the whole State! =D

Fahrenheit 451 Pgs. 91-110

Give a very short (1-3 sentence) summary of the two main scenes in this section. The first scence was at home in the living room and the second scene was in the fire house with Beatty.
The scene at Montag's house was when he started reading poetry to his wife and her friends. One even started crying after the reading of one of the poems. The other scene in the fire house was when Beatty was quoting many quotes from books and telling Montag about his dream where they got into an argue with quotes.

If you choose verbs and adjectives, do the following:1) Find a sentence or two that has strong adjectives and/or verbs. Quote the book and explain why these are strong descriptive words and why they are effective. How do they appeal to the senses? What mental images do they invoke?
"But remember that the Captain belongs to the most dangerous enemy to truth and freedom, the solid unmoving cattle of the majority." I thought this sentence had a lot of strong verbs and adjectives e.g. when they say "...the most dangerous enemy to truth and freedom," and "...the solid unmoving cattle of the majority." These verbs and adjectives make me picture in my mind of the Captain being the highest rank almost like the boss, also him being the solid high rank cow out of all the cattle as he uses in his simile. It is effective because you really get the sense that what he says goes and there's nothing you can do about it.

Descriptive Writing for 01/23/07

Sleeping is something everyone can be good at. I am joyful when I sleep. Sleeping in a comfortable bed, excited to get a delightful rest after a long day at school. I'm good at sleeping, it's almost as if I can control what a dream and when I wake up. Sleep is something you can do all most anywhere. In your room, on the couch, even in class! (Note: Not encouraging it) =)Though sometimes it can be hard to control when you are unsuccesful or bored...

Fahrenheit 451 Homework Pgs. 80-91

Do the following three things --- this has one more step than last time.

1. Write a question. What are you confused about?

I'm confused about how Faber and Montag are going to stay in touch through their ear communication device without having people notice it.

AND

3. Answer one of the following questions:

A. According to Faber, “three things are missing” from the popular media (like the “parlor games) of his society. Write what they are and explain what he means.

The first thing that is missing is the quality of information. The second is the leisure to digest it and the third is the right to carry out actions based on what we learn from the interaction of the first two. I'm a little confused around this part but I take this as the population living to good to realize all the bad things in life, making them not even know how bad thing can get.

Homework for Monday 1/22

1. Write a question about the reading. What are you confused about? If you don't get an answer on your blog, be sure to raise the question in class. Even if you do get an answer, and you think it's a good question with a good answer, bring it up in discussion.

I'm confused why the hound (robotic dog thing) wants to hurt or kill Montag, I know someone had to program him but I'm wondering who would do that if Beatty says everyones happy and blissfull?

2. Answer at least one of the following questions:

A. What does Montag mean when he says that books "point, one way or another, to Clarisse?" He means that they are a lot like her personality, different from the way they think and are very unique, unlike most of the population. The books point to Clarisse because she acts like the people from centuries ago and takes time to look at life and nature.

B. How will books get us out of "the cave?" What is the cave and how will books get us out of it?The cave is kind of the problem the world is in right now and the will get them out maybe by finding something important in the books or something usefull to help the world have freewill again.

C. What is the signfificance of the story about the sieve and the sand? There is a reference to it shortly after the story is told. Why? I got really confused when I got to this part with the sieve- I know its like a filter type thing but I'm hoping that someone can clear this up for me in discussion tomorrow...

In Class Work- Something I Dread...

I dread the times when I hear the buzzing sound in my head…BEEP…BEEP…BEEP! I feel the cold air blow in over my bed and know it’s time to get up. So tired from the day before and still half asleep as I leave the room I call mine. When I'm finally awake and ready to go I eat a malicious breakfeast and am sent out the door and on my way today to a head pounding day of learning. ~My Mornings~

Fahrenheit 451 Pgs. 40-68

Answer this question from the perspective of Captain Beatty. Give the type of answer you think he would give – use quotes and other details from the book in your answer. Write a thoughtful answer – reread the section where Beatty and Montag talk to one another if you have to.
Is it better to be ignorant and happy OR is it better to be aware, educated and disturbed at the world?
Captain Beatty would say it's better to be ignorant and happy then to be aware, educated and disturbed. This is because, as Beatty says, you dread the unfamiliar. "With school turning out more runners, jumpers, racers, tinkerers, grabbers, snatchers, fliers, and swimmers instead of examiners, critics, knowers, and imaginative creators, the word 'intellectual,' of course, became the swear word it deserved to be." He thinks everyone must be alike and made equal. His basc opinion is that it's all a waste and that there is no point in doing it so why do it? Also, that everyone is happy now so why change their ways of living right now.

Fahrenheit 451 pgs. 21-40

1) Montag compares Mildred (his wife) to Clarisse and says that Clarisse seems older. In what way does Clarisse act more mature and WHY do you think she is more mature? Why does Bradbury (the author) make the contrast between the two?
Clarisse acts more mature in a way that she kind of takes the time to look at life and nature. She acts like shes that only non-"brainwashed" character in this book. Bradbury makes a connection between the two because they both seem very different in many ways yet I think they have similiar moods.

2) How are the people in the novel – both children and adults - similar and/or different from people today?
The people in the book don't seem to have any free will, they just go about their lives how the goverment and firefighters want them to. Because in our lives we have more choices and options we can choose to decide our own actions.

Fahrenheit 451Pgs. 3-21 HW

Do the following:

1) Ask a question that you have about what's going on in the novel. What do you find confusing?
I think it's kind of confusing because of the fact that they get such a low salary (I think it was $6,000 a year?)

Answer the following question:

1) Even before Montag and his wife Mildred talk to one another we know that they are alienated (distant) from one another. How does the author convey this?
Because Montag is thinking that he was not happy and that Mildred had not swam the sea in the last two years.