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.
whereas Holden's rebellion is demonstrated through symbolism throughout the text, stream of consciousness and his ideals. Holden and Igby are both on existential journey, in which they desire to find their place in society. The hypocrisy present in the corresponding texts of Catcher In The Rye and Igby Goes Down is manifested through Holden's ideals and Igby's values and beliefs. The language of Igby clearly reveals how he feels towards the concept hypocrisy, he despises it. Holden loathes people who he says are phony or fake.
The Prince has elicited debate amongst generations of readers for its seemingly ruthless approach to statecraft and its abandonment of conventional morality. What Machiavelli recommends may seem, in a different political context to the stability of interstate relations today, to be shocking or immoral. However, such an interpretation fails to consider that The Prince is very much made by and for the real world. Machiavelli’s prescriptions are tailored to circumstances where society is already immoral by human nature and is blighted by disorder. Thus this essay will posit that Machiavelli is not motivated by immorality but rather pragmatism, in his advocacy of the means necessary to achieving an ‘end’ of stability and security for the collective good of the people.
Yet, upon careful examination one can see that such racist views expressed in Heart of Darkness are products of the perspectives of the narrators and speak to their own motives rather than that of the book or author. Strangely enough, Achebe uses a nearly identical method of flawed perspective to arrive at the same denouncement of colonialism, but with little to no criticism. Such a paradox induces one to conclude that the responsibility to reveal the shared motives of these works (while avoiding false deductions) is that of the reader or audience. One must recognize, understand, and then overcome the multiple layers of perspectives belonging to the characters and authors of these stories in order to fully unveil the shared motive that makes these books so great and
2010 HSC Question Analyse how the central values portrayed in King Richard III are creatively reshaped in Looking for Richard The work of Pacino is able to creatively place Shakespeare’s core ideals of humanist philosophy and the corrupting influence of power within a modern context, to reveal the perennial nature of the playwright’s central values. Shakespeare’s King Richard III (1592) identifies hereditary power as a potent force when the natural order is usurped. Al Pacino’s Looking for Richard (1996) sees power within a democratic time and thus presents it as privilege, not a God-given gift, yet the two maintain a similar view of the dangers of authority without balance. Shakespeare’s time demanded a negative portrayal of Richard’s humanist ideals, where blame is placed upon the King’s lack of Christianity for his abhorrent acts. Pacino, however, contends with a time where it is increasingly becoming the norm, but still contends with a society that can be considered moral devoid in some manners, and thus the importance of spirituality and thought is evident in both.
Paper Number 2: Gaddis Chapter Six While reading Gaddis’ chapter six, he focused on how to question causation. He uses E.H. Carr’s fatal flaw as a big example for the distinction of “rational” and “accidental” causes. Gaddis also gives an alternative view on procedures of causation, and additional procedures historians need to keep in mind when narrate the reality of history. Carr explains rational causes as, “lead to fruitful generalizations and lessons can be learned from them.” While he says that accidental causes, “teach no lessons and lead to no conclusions.” Gaddis claims that Carr clearly confused himself as well as his readers about the differences between the two. Gaddis claims that not explaining clearly the distinction between rational and accidental causes is the more serious problem with Carr.
Through analysis of her motives, they both attempt to argue that Marina should be viewed as innocent in regard to the downfall of the Aztec Empire. Candelaria and Karttunen’s argument acts as an unscholarly approach to justification, however, because their speculation of Marina’s motives diverges from historical evidence. Stephen Greenblatt’s analysis of Doña Marina’s important role serves as an epitomical example of a scholarly approach.
Angela Carter’s The Bloody Chamber and Other Stories is a theorist’s nightmare. If you want to learn about it you should read these texts, rather than trying to plagiarise somebody’s essay by paying for it. That is not learning, and you are doing yourself and the education system a dis-service by even being on this website. Armitt, L., 1997. ‘The Fragile Frames of The Bloody Chamber’ in Joseph Bristow and Trev Lynn Broughton, eds.
We are tempted to think that the soul purpose of Arthur Miller’s play The Crucible was to create an outlet that exposed the mass hysteria of the McCarthy era , however to say this you would be ignoring the central themes that have allowed this play to reach universal audiences. Among themes such as the abuse of power, conflict with authority and mass hysteria The Crucible deals with the importance of identity and the individual conscience. These two themes are closely linked because until you complete your journey in finding yourself you are unable to have an individual conscience. Miller uses one of the central characters in the story, John Proctor, to explore the journey of individual conscience. This theme combined with a unique structure and language allows him to creature a play that addresses the social and political concerns which are essential to every human existence.
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.