It does not settle the west. It does not educate.” Thoreau also uses powerful imagery in order to persuade his readers towards his ideals. He believed that one must be conscious of the laws they choose to obey and disobey, whether or not they are in the minority. The people should not be tricked into believing that neither the government nor the majority will know what is right and what is wrong. Instead, Thoreau remarks that it is up to every man to decide for himself what is right based on his moral standards and ethics.
He explains the difference between unjust and just laws saying a just law is one that is made by man but parallels the code and laws of God. And thus, he can rightfully tell people to disobey the unjust segregation ordinances because they are not morally correct. [627] He then point out the distinction between his arrest for not having a permit to parade, and that he was really arrested because he was promoting desegregation. He then points out the First amendments right of peaceful assembly and protest. He says that if you are going to disobey the law you must do it so with a willingness to admit it and acceptance of the appropriate punishment- that in turn is an example of respecting the
People will always do what they want to do trying not to get caught. In the book the defense attorneys were not fair with Jefferson’s trial and they were not nice either by considering him a hog. In trials in the society today people get chances and say on what they did or didn’t do to prove how they’re not guilty. In the novel an innocent black man was not treated with respect. Jefferson was treated as a poor lowlife creature.
He references documents such as the United States Constitution and The Declaration of Independence as grounds for his arguments against the “Taylor Machine”. Holding the ideals that he was raised upon is how Jefferson Smith demonstrates the same idea of civil disobedience that Thoreau refers to. Senator Paine was oblivious to the strong heart and mind of Jefferson Smith. I believe that Smith was looked down upon and maybe even considered an imbecile due to his lack of knowledge about political affairs. Had Paine known of his plans to build a facility near Willet Creek then he surely would not have allowed him to be sworn in.
On the other hand, Martin L King believed in non-violence and integration. MLK organized “sit-ins” which consisted on black people to go into shops where colored people weren’t welcome and just sit there as a peaceful protest. Malcolm criticized Martin on this because he believed that these actions weren’t making any successful impact. These events are what differenced Martin L. King from Malcolm X. I approach more to MLK’s cause because he wanted integration between different races without any usage of violence from their part. He wanted to achieve this by peacefully breaking the unjust laws, which was a code that is out of harmony with the moral law.
As Quoted in Millers book by the Character Mr. Hale, he states:” We must not blame each other but fear god and his Wrath.” This quote helps us to understand that we cannot blame others but must go through what trails an tribulations that god has intended. Mr. Hale also goes onto say that “we must look into ourselves to find what has thy done to anger god.” With all accusations going around our ancient society there is always going to be a minority in society. Lastly the connections with the McCarthy era and the people of Salem portrayed in Arthur Miller’s play of the Crucible are the impact of the government and the opinions of society. The government in tiny ways gives the public an image of what a problem is and then follows public opinion for popularity. A great example of this is given by Miller’s Character Reverend Paris a minister in Salem that is blaming others so that his reputation may not ceed.
During the course of reading Euthyphro, the idea of doing what is right became the overall goal for what Socrates was trying to argue. Though to one such as myself, I would easily define it as doing what is morally good according to a just law. However, after reading this dialogue, there would seem to be many loop-holes that could be argued against my understanding. The whole dialogue of this section concerns how a man named Euthyphro is supposed proceed against his father in civil court, and how Socrates see's this as morally wrong. How he asserts his disposition is through asking Euthyphro to give his reasoning behind his actions, and constantly disagreeing with him through more questions which lead into more universal idea's such as
BODY PARAGRAPH #3 (Reason three) A. Sub Thesis: 1. The third reason that you provided in your original Thesis B. Evidence 1. What information from either documents or sources is there to support
Aristotle Dialectic Induction, example To show the basis of many similar instances that something is so And syllogism “to show that if some premises are true something else beyond them results from them because they are true Rhetoric Paradigm” similar cases And Enthymem Pathos (audience) Ethos (speaker) Logos (speech subject) Possible varieties of persuasion Subjects rhetorician talks about-things in the community “rhetoric masquerades to political science” Why is it so important, the differences between dialectic and rhetoric. ; the two run in tandem, use similar methods, their similarities do not suggest that rhetoric is not a sloppy derivitive of dialectic. Dialectic deals with induction: two kind of thinking induction or deductive: one simply gathers similar cases or examples, fills up a classification, suggests if done properly what is true with one classification will be true with theothers. Otherwise they wouldn’t be in the same category. 2nd is deduction: on the basis if” and “if” and “then” chain of reasoning.
Find examples 3 quotations from the text to prove that he does or does not achieve his purpose; one of these quotations should be the examination of a figure of speech (metaphor, simile, etc.) and how that contributes to his purpose. Also consider looking at Douglass’s style and tone, including his objectivity and restraint in describing painful incidents. Respond in a paragraph that: 1. Has a clear topic sentence (2 points) 2.