In order to understand Salamon's argument however it is first necessary to provide a clear analysis of Feinburg's theory. Feinburg argues that transgendered people have been historically subjected as invisible by a society that rejects gender difference. Through this observation, Feinburg suggests that theory has a key part in helping with the circulation of social change because it can steer action. With this in mind, Feinburg claims that the relation between history and theory are simple through the idea that gender can be explained through the social construction of languages. To illustrate this idea, Feinburg (2010) states, 'History is the record of past experience.
It is a defense of studying each historical period on its own terms, and not imposing one's own moral and social standards on figures and situations that existed with, perhaps, a different set of ethical and cultural concerns. Butterfield’s text described historians who project modern attitudes on to the past, pass moral judgments on historical figures, and regard history as significant only to the extent that it labored to create the modern world. Such judgments are viewed as problematic because they tempt historians not to understand the past on its own terms. Butterfield argues that historians should write aesthetically rather than polemically, exercising "imaginative sympathy" in appreciating the lost worlds of the dead rather than seeking, or expecting, the vindication of their own current positions (92). The "Whig interpretation," as Butterfield calls it, sees history as a struggle between a progression of good libertarian parties and evil reactionary forces, failing to do justice to history's true complexity.
Sample Essay With Primary Source Only Title Creative opening - a universal idea mentions author and title of work intro give relevant context THESIS is arguable POINT, aka: Topic Sentence introduction of textual evidence - the context and speaker EXAMPLE: textual evidence with citation EXPLANATION: how the textual evidence supports the topic sentence another piece of textual evidence with EXPLANATION / ANALYSIS of text RESPONSE: concluding sentence ties the paragraph back to the main idea of the paper TRANSITION - idea level Topic Sentence #2 RESPONSE: concluding sentence ties the paragraph back to the main idea of the paper The Symbolism of the Conch For centuries philosophers have debated the question of whether man is innately evil. William Golding poses this question in his realistic novel Lord of the Flies. Set on a tropical island during World War II, the novel begins when schoolboys from Great Britain are being flown to safety and their plane is shot down. No adults survive, and the boys are left to govern themselves and get rescued. William Golding uses symbolism in the form of the conch to represents the concept of society.
The degradation of dialect reveals how it is almost entirely impossible to object to the Party’s core beliefs. Through the protagonist character of Winston Smith, the importance of individualism is advocated through critical thinking. Firstly, the text illustrates how language and power can be used as a mechanism of control by discouraging an individual from expressing their true emotion. The controlled language, Newspeak, was created by the totalitarian state as a tool of power, its sole purpose being to restrict the people’s understanding of the real world. The gradually declining dialect limits the ideas that individuals have the potential of formulating and expressing, promoting a narrowing of thoughts and awareness to their system of control.
Employing a broad new historicist approach and referring to a cultural materialist reading strategy, this paper will argue that ‘it is Falstaff and Hotspur who consistently resist monarchical order and pose different challenges to royal authority’ and monarchical identity to determine that stagecraft and statecraft coalesce in Shakespeare’s play to offer the audience an alternative historiography to the conventional Elizabethan ‘world–picture’ where ‘English unity or nationhood’ was correlated with a hereditary divinely ordained legitimated monarchy. Traditional criticism of Shakespeare’s history plays (Tillyard, Cambell and Dover Wilson) have presented the play’s as offering a cohesive historical script which articulated a political, morally orthodox ordered ‘Elizabethan world picture’ (Holderness 1992, p. 2) where monarchical power and kingly authority were correlated with divine legitimation, political stability and a united kingdom – ‘the Tudor myth’ (Holderness 1992, pp. 3–4). According to Dollimore the Tudor myth was an ‘ideological legitimation of an existing social order’ (2005, p.5). A new
They take clear stands on issues. What is Huxley’s specific criticism of escapism? How does escapism contribute to a dystopia. Write something like: “ Huxley uses foil, symbolism, and irony to illustrate how escapism breeds a passivity in society that enables the rise of a dystopian regime.” Remember that your thesis needs two parts: a topic and a specific opinion. In this thesis, the topic is escapism; the specific opinion is: escapism breeds passivity which leads to dystopia) In Brave New World, John the Savage and Lenina Crowne serve as foils to display the effects of escapism in human beings .
However, it does not take long to realise that Berkley appears to have not been careful with his choice of words and has committed various conflations leading to fallacies of ambiguity. It is my view that these fallacies play a large role in undermining the success of the Master Argument. In order to analyse the strength of what Berkeley saw as his most convincing argument against the existence of mind independent objects I intend to look specifically at Bertrand Russell’s discussion of the Master Argument in his evaluation of idealism in his book The Problems of Philosophy. I will then look into the nominalist interpretation of the Master Argument in order to see if Russell’s allegations can be sidestepped once we discern the assumptions that Berkeley arguably based the Master Argument on. The Master Argument was originally known as the inconceivability argument until Andre Gallois referred to it as the former in his 1974 article as a nod to the prominence that Berkeley gives it within his attack on materialism.
It also owed to foreign influences. The transcendentalists rejected the theory that all knowledge comes to the mind through the senses. Truth, rather, transcends the senses and can't be found just by observation. Associated traits included self-reliance, self-culture, and self-discipline. ﻌRalph Waldo Emerson- transcendentalist poet and philosopher; urged American writers to forget European traditions and write about American interests.
Socrates argues about the nature of rhetoric as: the truth and false idea of flattery, the loss of meaning to rhetoric, and rhetoric’s concerns with discourse. In addition, he and Gorgias encompasses around its usage in the field
Essay Two: Descartes and the Evil Genius Doubt In this paper, I will first deconstruct the Evil Genius hypothesis brought forth by Descartes, as well as lay out the basic elements of O.K Bouwsmas’ argument that was intended to refute it. Following which, I will evaluate Bouwsma’s objections against Descartes’ hypothesis and consider how Bouwsma’s arguments do not invalidate the Evil Genius hypothesis because of the limitations of various definitions Bouwsma has confined his argument to. In his meditations, Descartes first realizes his need of establishing for himself truths that cannot be refuted under any circumstance because in doing so, he would be able to base all his acquired knowledge upon a rock solid foundation that would ensure that the consequent knowledge he would possess would be nothing short of certainty and reliability. The methodology that Descartes uses revolves around the notion of the existence of a “malicious, powerful, cunning demon” (Descartes 3), also known as the Evil Genius, who utilizes all its power to deceive him in every possible way, even in the simplest of ideas such as mathematical knowledge, without his knowledge. Because of this assumption, Descartes chooses to throw out all knowledge he has thus acquired and to start on a clean slate.