"If you wanted to make money by writing a self-improvement book for Americans, what topic would you choose??"
I would write a self-improvement book on nutrition, exercise, and weight loss.I think this is a very important and relevant topic in today's modern society. According to Wikipedia, obesity rates in the United States are higher than any other in the world. It is estimated that by 2020, more than 3/4 of the American population will either be overweight or obese. It has become a very serious issue, with a large portion of the population(100,000-400,000) dying from it each year.
Some factors that have contributed greatly to obesity are a sedentary lifestyle and unhealthy eating habits. The majority of Americans have office jobs, which involve sitting at a computer/desk for most of their work day.They also spend a lot of their free time involved in watching television, playing video games, reading, and computer use. They aren't forced to get exercise in their commute to work either, because of the heavy reliance on cars for transportation.
It is well-known that there are many benefits of physical exercise and an active lifestyle. It helps to decrease the risk of cancer and diabetes, increases your life span, and improves your mental health and mood. In addition, it plays a big role in maintaining a healthy weight and strengthening your bones and muscles. Because of the extreme lack of physical exercise, Americans are far more prone to sickness and disease. This isn't even mentioning the fact that they feel tired and sluggish all the time, because of their poor lifestyle choices.
Of course, the food that people consume also controls their physical, mental and emotional well-being. Fast food has put obesity on a sharp incline, especially as one-third of children(ages 4-19) eat it every single day! High-calorie and high-fat foods, such as the burgers and fries offered at these establishments are very detrimental to one's fitness. It's also worth noting that soda and other sweet drinks can cause weight gain in people. Drinking water is the effective and proper way to stay hydrated, as it has zero calories and has beneficial vitamins and minerals.
Many types of soda on the other hand, contain caffeine(a diuretic) which leaves someone dehydrated the more they drink. Soda also has a high amount of sugar, in the form of high fructose corn syrup. Obviously this isn't a good thing for people to be ingesting on a regular basis. Sugar has been shown to cause a number of issues including: weight gain, obesity, elevated blood sugar, and and high blood sugar. It's also because of soda that a growing percentage of children are diabetic and suffer from blood-sugar problems.
It's astounding the dramatic difference Americans could have in their health, if they would simply make some small changes. If they would just increment some form of exercise in their lives, they would see a drastic change in their overall health and well-being. It's also easier to avoid fast food, if families would eat food at home together more often. There are plenty of delicious, healthy alternatives to enjoy, without the added carbs, calories, and fat. A number of companies make frozen meals, snacks, and soups that are quick but also nourishing.
There is an abundance of choices exercise-wise to pick from, many of which are not only effective but fun. Pilates, yoga, spin and dance classes are available to anyone who wishes to take them, as well as DVD workouts to do at home.
Tuesday, December 27, 2016
Thursday, December 22, 2016
Western Civilization Short Essay: Two Topics( 12.22.16)
1) What kinds of contributions did the monks make to European society?
2) What was the attitude of most Christian writers toward the philosophers of ancient Greece?
3) Based on your reading of the Rule of St. Benedict, how would you describe the way of life and the spirit that animated a Benedictine monastery?
Question 1: What kind of contributions did the monks make to European society?
The monks introduced the idea of physical labor as being commendable, for one thing. Before them, the ancient world found manual work to be disgusting and something only slaves/commoners did. But the monks thought that physical duties were holy and weren't something to be ashamed of doing. They made a number of impressive contributions to Europe, over the course of centuries. The Roman empire had existed for 1500 years, and was beginning to crumble completely. While the rest of Europe began to despair, the monks were relatively unaffected because of their independence from the outside world. They were far more self-reliant and creative about surviving in the world. The agricultural restoration of Europe, after the fall of Rome, was largely due to them. They initiated new crops and production methods and educated locals in their findings. English professor Henry Gooddell says quote," They saved agriculture when nobody else could save it."
The Cistercian monks made significant process in the creation of factories and the use of water power. They were experts in fulling cloth, sieving flour, crushing wheat, and tanning. They also were highly successful in trades such as metallurgy(iron-making), animal husbandry(breeding) and the brewing of wine and beer. Finally, the Monks were instrumental in preserving ancient Greek literature and Biblical manuscripts. They spent numerous hours painstakingly copying out these works, in beautiful handwriting.If it weren't for them, a large portion of precious documents would be lost to us forever.
Question 2: What was the attitude of most Christian writers toward the philosophers of ancient Greece?
Many people commonly think that the Christian viewpoint is one of scorn, towards anything contrary to their religion. However in actuality this is far from the attitude had by the majority of Christian writers. They were fairly open to the concepts of Greek philosophy and poets such as Plato and Homer. They were some writers(such as Tertullian) who were strictly opposed to using any life reference-book but the Christian Gospels and Epistles of Paul. But for the most part, Christians were willing to glean bits and pieces of valuable truth from Greek literature. The Greek apologist, St. Justin Martyr, believed that many Greek ideas could actually be traced back to the Old Testament. He thought that all the theories behind Stoicism, Platonism and other Greek religions were a river to Christianity. He said quote, that"Christianity is the fulfillment of philosophy and Christ the fulfillment of Socrates."
St. Basil the Great was another Christian theologian who defended Greek writings. He wrote an Exhortation to Christian Youth, in which he says "the seeds of Christianity may be found in these writings." He claimed that there are many concepts in them already taught in light of Christian teaching.He didn't deny that there was some flawed material in the works, but did acknowledge the obvious beauty in each one.
In conclusion, Christians were pretty much impartial to Greek thought. They didn't agree with every aspect of their beliefs, but they weren't opposed to seeing the good in them. There was certainly plenty of spirituality and good motives in the writing.
In conclusion, Christians were pretty much impartial to Greek thought. They didn't agree with every aspect of their beliefs, but they weren't opposed to seeing the good in them. There was certainly plenty of spirituality and good motives in the writing.
Saturday, December 17, 2016
English Lesson 65 Essay-250 words
"Write a critique of Paine's pamphlets from the point of view of a loyalist in 1778."
Paine's Common Sense and American Crisis are both extremely unfair in their biased viewpoint. He repeatedly makes mention of those loyal to the king as evil and corrupt individuals. According to him, anyone who associates with the British is asking for trouble. Paine says that are not to be trusted and leaves no room to doubt his claims. His hatred for Englishmen is rather contradictory, as he himself was born in Britain! He was unsuccessful in all his pursuits whilst he lived there, as a tax-collector,businessman, and husband. He only recently immigrated from Britain to America, so it is strange that he has so quickly adopted Patriotic views.
He is an avid supporter of a civil war, to win independence from his own mother country! Abandoning the system he was brought up in, he clings to a revolutionary and rebellious standpoint. Paine says the only way to achieve freedom and liberty is through bloodshed and conflict. He paints our own dear King George III as a tyrant and a monster, who is out to torture Americans and make their lives miserable.Taxing them harshly and unfairly, he is only out to accomplish the deeds of destruction,states Paine. The time is imminent for a separation from the King and Parliament, as well as an official Declaration of Independence.
Thomas Paine's significantly bad influence through these Pamphlets has led many Americans to forget their allegiance to the British crown. He has astoundingly rallied together a horde of rebels, who before his impact were steady in their support of the country from whence they came. His writings are a disgraceful pack of lies spewed about his fellow-countrymen and a rally for insurrection.
Paine's Common Sense and American Crisis are both extremely unfair in their biased viewpoint. He repeatedly makes mention of those loyal to the king as evil and corrupt individuals. According to him, anyone who associates with the British is asking for trouble. Paine says that are not to be trusted and leaves no room to doubt his claims. His hatred for Englishmen is rather contradictory, as he himself was born in Britain! He was unsuccessful in all his pursuits whilst he lived there, as a tax-collector,businessman, and husband. He only recently immigrated from Britain to America, so it is strange that he has so quickly adopted Patriotic views.
He is an avid supporter of a civil war, to win independence from his own mother country! Abandoning the system he was brought up in, he clings to a revolutionary and rebellious standpoint. Paine says the only way to achieve freedom and liberty is through bloodshed and conflict. He paints our own dear King George III as a tyrant and a monster, who is out to torture Americans and make their lives miserable.Taxing them harshly and unfairly, he is only out to accomplish the deeds of destruction,states Paine. The time is imminent for a separation from the King and Parliament, as well as an official Declaration of Independence.
Thomas Paine's significantly bad influence through these Pamphlets has led many Americans to forget their allegiance to the British crown. He has astoundingly rallied together a horde of rebels, who before his impact were steady in their support of the country from whence they came. His writings are a disgraceful pack of lies spewed about his fellow-countrymen and a rally for insurrection.
Thursday, December 15, 2016
Western Civilization Essay- Week 13
Writing assignment: Answer one of the following in 250 words:
1) Based on what you read in Acts, discuss Paul's missionary journeys.
2) Based on what you learned in Lesson 62, what was Christian life like between the famous letter of Pliny until the reign of Constantine?
3) What are some of the arguments advanced by Minucius Felix in defense of Christianity?
4) What are a few things we learn about early Christianity from the Didache?
2.Based on what you learned in Lesson 62, what was Christian life like between the famous letter of Pliny until the reign of Constantine?
Christian life was very difficult and unpredictable before the reign of Constantine. It was generally considered illegal and scorned, until the Edict Of Milan was enacted. Many Romans scorned and hated the Christians and wanted nothing to do with them. Because of the Christians refusal to worship Roman Gods, they were generally hated and looked down on. The Roman emperor was also considered a God and it was mandatory to worship him. Yet this was in strict contrast with the Christians belief in only one God, Jesus. They believed the emperor was only a man, to be respected and revered, but was not immortal. Naturally, this outraged a great many people in authority, as a blatant act of disobedience.
Also, there were those who made ludicrous claims that the Christians were cannibals. This conclusion stemmed from their ritual act of communion, the eating of Christ's body and drinking his blood. Obviously this wasn't a literal, but rather symbolic act of remembrance of how Jesus saved them from sin(by his death).Christians were also accused of committing incest and murdering infants. These condemnations were also completely unfounded and had no evidence to them at all. Followers of Christ met together in his name and referred to each other fondly, as brothers and sisters. They sang hymns and discussed their commitment to love each other and not fall into serious sin.From this, somehow rumors were spread that these gatherings involved incest and open sex. These were just some of the unjust and bizarre allegations made against them.
However, Christians were not specifically sought out all the time. There wasn't constant purges, where many of them were executed at a time. If someone was reported by their neighbor, then they had reason to fear death and severe punishment. But if they kept their activities undercover, there wasn't a lot for them to be concerned about. There were some areas of Rome, where it was certainly more dangerous to be Christian than others. You could be disowned by your own family and turned over to the authorities, if your beliefs were discovered. But in other provinces, as long as you kept to yourself and didn't stir up trouble, you had little to worry about.
A good portion of the Emperors didn't bother with the Christians, if they weren't causing mob riots or disturbing the public peace. They had more pressing matters on their mind, then this fairly peaceable religion that had emerged. There were several of the Emperors, who detested the Christian sect with burning passion Nero was a notorious one of these, annihilating a multitude of Christians in 64 A.D. He purposely started the Great Fire of Rome and then proceeded to blame it on them. They were then executed in the most brutal manners, with some being crucified and thrown to beasts, in the arena. The Christians also suffered tremendously under the rule of Diocletian, from 303-305 A.D.(during the Great Persecution). During this time period, they were forced to make sacrifices to the Roman emperor, or be put to death. Their property was confiscated and their sacred books and churches burned.This persecution went down in history as the most severe, devastating one in the Roman empire.
It wasn't until Constantine took power in 306 A.D.,that the Christians were granted liberty and freedom to live out their faith. He composed the Edict of Milan in 313 A.D. which granted Christians complete rights to worship the God of their choice. By this time, the public had grown rather tired of the persecutions and the drama had begun to wane. As a result of the edict, Christianity was eventually adopted as the official religion of the Roman Empire, in 380 A.D( by Theodosius I). An era of peace was ushered in, and pagans and Christians could mingle freely, in spite of their differing ideologies.
However, Christians were not specifically sought out all the time. There wasn't constant purges, where many of them were executed at a time. If someone was reported by their neighbor, then they had reason to fear death and severe punishment. But if they kept their activities undercover, there wasn't a lot for them to be concerned about. There were some areas of Rome, where it was certainly more dangerous to be Christian than others. You could be disowned by your own family and turned over to the authorities, if your beliefs were discovered. But in other provinces, as long as you kept to yourself and didn't stir up trouble, you had little to worry about.
A good portion of the Emperors didn't bother with the Christians, if they weren't causing mob riots or disturbing the public peace. They had more pressing matters on their mind, then this fairly peaceable religion that had emerged. There were several of the Emperors, who detested the Christian sect with burning passion Nero was a notorious one of these, annihilating a multitude of Christians in 64 A.D. He purposely started the Great Fire of Rome and then proceeded to blame it on them. They were then executed in the most brutal manners, with some being crucified and thrown to beasts, in the arena. The Christians also suffered tremendously under the rule of Diocletian, from 303-305 A.D.(during the Great Persecution). During this time period, they were forced to make sacrifices to the Roman emperor, or be put to death. Their property was confiscated and their sacred books and churches burned.This persecution went down in history as the most severe, devastating one in the Roman empire.
It wasn't until Constantine took power in 306 A.D.,that the Christians were granted liberty and freedom to live out their faith. He composed the Edict of Milan in 313 A.D. which granted Christians complete rights to worship the God of their choice. By this time, the public had grown rather tired of the persecutions and the drama had begun to wane. As a result of the edict, Christianity was eventually adopted as the official religion of the Roman Empire, in 380 A.D( by Theodosius I). An era of peace was ushered in, and pagans and Christians could mingle freely, in spite of their differing ideologies.
Friday, December 9, 2016
500 Word Essay: Most Ilogical Argument of Paine's Common Sense
Paine's Common Sense pamphlet is a document composed almost entirely of rhetoric, rather than logic and reason. He states information as if it were facts, when he really has no evidence to back up his claims. His arguments have no firm foundation or basis whatsoever to support them.
For one thing, he had little right to be writing this thesis on independence and revolution in America. He was an immigrant from Great Britain, newly arrived only two years prior to the publication of"Common Sense".
Whilst in Norfolk, England, he was a complete failure as a tax-collector, businessman, and husband. Upon arriving in 1775. he worked as a journalist. Paine hadn't even been present for the Stamp Act crisis and other such events in the colonies.
So it was rather foolish of him to think he was qualified to lecture and advice on these matters. Regardless, his document became quickly popular and was widely distributed throughout New England.
In the first 3 months, it generated 100,000 copies! There was hardly a single American, who hadn't either read it or had it dictated to them. Common Sense was the single most important document in U.S. History, even more so than the Bible. Thomas Paine's name didn't become known as first, because he claimed neutrality. In the cover of it, he refers to himself as simply"an Englishman".
Soon however he was renown and famous by all loyal Americans. The bell tolled for rebellion and insurrection and they responded. It can't be overemphasized the impact Paine had on the American Revolution. He played a hugely crucial rule in the American's view of their mother country and of the king.
His influence was unparalleled, and can't be compared with any other political activist in this time period. He rallied the Patriots together, with the overpowering emotion and power of his words. Paine had the keen ability of convincing people of the legitimacy of the cause. Excusing the Quaker's pacifist arguments, he insisted the only alternative was a civil war. Bloodshed was inevitable, and history had always depended on.
Calm and peaceable answers to America's issues with their mother country wouldn't be effective. There would have to be a battle between the two countries in order to decide their differences. Thomas stated that the very idea of an island ruling over a continent was ludicrous in of itself. He also believed it stupid to call England America" mother", the way that it treated it's so-called"child"
A mother was supposed to nurture and love for her children, not unfairly tax them and treat them disrespectfully. He argued that the true mother was Europe, as a good portion of New England's residents came from here. Paine asserted that less than a 1/3 of the continent's inhabitants were original Brits. This was one of the disputes that had poor,weak verification to it.
In actuality, a very good portion of the immigrants were from England, which made many of them loyal towards the country. Paine's claims had no facts to back them at all, and were extremely unwise and illogical. Another one of his rationalizations was that a decent number of people agreed separation was unavoidable.
This is almost laughable, in it's ridiculousness. Paine had only resided in the colonies for less than 2 years. There was no justifiable reason to assume he'd talked to enough locals to say this. He doesn't list any specific names of people, or show that he did a study of any type. His readers are just supposed to blindly believe everything, and not question the validity of his premises.
Thursday, December 8, 2016
Western Civilization Essay: 12.8.16
Writing assignment: How would you compare the teachings of Christianity, as described in the New Testament passages we read for this week, to the values cherished by earlier civilizations we have discussed (particularly the Greeks, and the values expressed in Homer's works)? Conversely, can you see anything in common between Christianity and some of the great ancient thinkers we have discussed?
Beginnings of Christianity/atmosphere during it's creation
Christianity held the answers for many of the questions people were asking, at the time of its development. Moral philosophers, like Socrates and Plato were starting to reject the ancient Greek religions. Undermining these gods, they began to seek new solutions and viewpoints on the world. Many were dissatisfied with the Stoic philosophy, which rendered them uninspired and cold. It wasn't a religion of love and humanity and didn't allow any natural human reactions/emotions to life. Relevant topics, like life after death and finding one's meaning in life
In 537 B.C, The Jews were released from their long captivity in Babylon, after the Persian defeat of the Babylonians. Some of them returned to their native homeland, Palestine to rebuild the temple(and to return to their old life). They protected the purity of their religion and regarded themselves as special in God's eyes.But the other Jews dispersed to foreign countries, such as Egypt, Antioch, Spain, and Italy. In these new places, they were exposed to Greek viewpoints and thought. As a result they became more liberal or open to the possibility of their religion as universal. Generally, the promised Messiah was believed by the Jews to be their own personal savior, not meant for other races of people.
This perception was slowly becoming abandoned though, as new ideas were adopted. The Jews entertained the possibility that the Messiah would be a savior for all people. They also considered that he wouldn't be a military leader, but instead a manifestation of their religion.
When Jesus came to earth, this truth slowly became clear and evident. Jesus revealed himself to have come to save them from sin and from themselves, not the Romans. He also emphasized reflecting on the inward heart and it's intentions, not the outward appearance of rituals and laws. His fundamental theory was love for God and for other people. Of course this was naturally a disappointment to people like the Zealots, who wanted an insurrection against Rome. Jesus proved that the Jews idea of a hero was far from what God's actual plan was.
In comparison to the Greek religions, Christianity was definitely a more dependable and welcoming faith to accept. The Greek gods were unpredictable and just as petty and selfish as humans can be. They were demanding and manipulative, as well as cunning and evil. The Greeks would often make deals with their Gods, in order to attain something they wanted.
Whereas Jesus was a loving and merciful figure to be worshipped and revered. He laid his own life down for all mankind and then rose from the dead, to save humanity from their destruction. He also came to Earth as a man like those he served and healed by miracles. He was holy and a immortal being, yet also tempted as men are to sin. But he conquered all of the lawlessness and evil desires in him.
He accomplished this miraculous feat to prove that through him, we to can overcome and defeat sin. He took all of our transgressions on himself when he was crucified, and then also won the battle with death.
This was also a living proof that a Christian's journey does not end in death, and he will be victorious over it.
If one believes in Jesus, then the end of life will only be the start of a beautiful eternity spent with his creator. He is saved by the grace of God and not by his own merits.
Many of these core premises of Christianity are very contrary to Greek religion. The Greeks had complicated opinions on the subject of an afterlife. If your family didn't provide a proper burial, you would supposedly be "trapped" between earth and the underworld.If you were outright evil, you would be sentenced to a horrible place called Tarturus, where souls were burned with fiery lava. If you had lived a good life, you would be rewarded with life in a idyllic peaceful place. If you had sinned often, you would be banished to the Fields of Punishment. This wasn't as terrible as Tarturus, although it certainly wasn't heaven either. Souls who had committed suicide were forced to wander in isolated and sorrowful places, forever regretting this decision.
In the Christian religion, you don't have to fear death if you are secure in God's love and following him. In his great mercy, he saves people from their sin, if they commit their lives to him whole-heartedly. So you need not fear death, if you turn to Jesus for salvation and grace. There is also only one God in whose sovereignty and control we can rest assured in. The Greeks had multiple Gods, who they couldn't trust or have strong faith in.
Beginnings of Christianity/atmosphere during it's creation
Christianity held the answers for many of the questions people were asking, at the time of its development. Moral philosophers, like Socrates and Plato were starting to reject the ancient Greek religions. Undermining these gods, they began to seek new solutions and viewpoints on the world. Many were dissatisfied with the Stoic philosophy, which rendered them uninspired and cold. It wasn't a religion of love and humanity and didn't allow any natural human reactions/emotions to life. Relevant topics, like life after death and finding one's meaning in life
In 537 B.C, The Jews were released from their long captivity in Babylon, after the Persian defeat of the Babylonians. Some of them returned to their native homeland, Palestine to rebuild the temple(and to return to their old life). They protected the purity of their religion and regarded themselves as special in God's eyes.But the other Jews dispersed to foreign countries, such as Egypt, Antioch, Spain, and Italy. In these new places, they were exposed to Greek viewpoints and thought. As a result they became more liberal or open to the possibility of their religion as universal. Generally, the promised Messiah was believed by the Jews to be their own personal savior, not meant for other races of people.
This perception was slowly becoming abandoned though, as new ideas were adopted. The Jews entertained the possibility that the Messiah would be a savior for all people. They also considered that he wouldn't be a military leader, but instead a manifestation of their religion.
When Jesus came to earth, this truth slowly became clear and evident. Jesus revealed himself to have come to save them from sin and from themselves, not the Romans. He also emphasized reflecting on the inward heart and it's intentions, not the outward appearance of rituals and laws. His fundamental theory was love for God and for other people. Of course this was naturally a disappointment to people like the Zealots, who wanted an insurrection against Rome. Jesus proved that the Jews idea of a hero was far from what God's actual plan was.
In comparison to the Greek religions, Christianity was definitely a more dependable and welcoming faith to accept. The Greek gods were unpredictable and just as petty and selfish as humans can be. They were demanding and manipulative, as well as cunning and evil. The Greeks would often make deals with their Gods, in order to attain something they wanted.
Whereas Jesus was a loving and merciful figure to be worshipped and revered. He laid his own life down for all mankind and then rose from the dead, to save humanity from their destruction. He also came to Earth as a man like those he served and healed by miracles. He was holy and a immortal being, yet also tempted as men are to sin. But he conquered all of the lawlessness and evil desires in him.
He accomplished this miraculous feat to prove that through him, we to can overcome and defeat sin. He took all of our transgressions on himself when he was crucified, and then also won the battle with death.
This was also a living proof that a Christian's journey does not end in death, and he will be victorious over it.
If one believes in Jesus, then the end of life will only be the start of a beautiful eternity spent with his creator. He is saved by the grace of God and not by his own merits.
Many of these core premises of Christianity are very contrary to Greek religion. The Greeks had complicated opinions on the subject of an afterlife. If your family didn't provide a proper burial, you would supposedly be "trapped" between earth and the underworld.If you were outright evil, you would be sentenced to a horrible place called Tarturus, where souls were burned with fiery lava. If you had lived a good life, you would be rewarded with life in a idyllic peaceful place. If you had sinned often, you would be banished to the Fields of Punishment. This wasn't as terrible as Tarturus, although it certainly wasn't heaven either. Souls who had committed suicide were forced to wander in isolated and sorrowful places, forever regretting this decision.
In the Christian religion, you don't have to fear death if you are secure in God's love and following him. In his great mercy, he saves people from their sin, if they commit their lives to him whole-heartedly. So you need not fear death, if you turn to Jesus for salvation and grace. There is also only one God in whose sovereignty and control we can rest assured in. The Greeks had multiple Gods, who they couldn't trust or have strong faith in.
Friday, December 2, 2016
Three Stanza-Song: English. Dec 2nd,2016
"The Rebel's Chant"
for liberty we'll stand
hands held in unison
all for one and one for all
every man proud and tall
with our brave hearts and noble minds
we'll win this battle,no matter what comes
relentless and resilient despite the storm
against every arrow aimed at us
the giant of tyranny looms overhead
yet we won't be intimidated by his power
our guns at our sides, champion we surely shall
the moment of truth is nigh and our spirits high
give us freedom or give us death
fight till our souls and bodies weary
and even still we'll prevail
to a country no longer chained
for liberty we'll stand
hands held in unison
all for one and one for all
every man proud and tall
with our brave hearts and noble minds
we'll win this battle,no matter what comes
relentless and resilient despite the storm
against every arrow aimed at us
the giant of tyranny looms overhead
yet we won't be intimidated by his power
our guns at our sides, champion we surely shall
the moment of truth is nigh and our spirits high
give us freedom or give us death
fight till our souls and bodies weary
and even still we'll prevail
to a country no longer chained
Thursday, December 1, 2016
December 1, 2016- Western Civ. Short Essay
Question 1: According to Seneca, what is man's unique good? How should a good man conduct himself?
Seneca was a Stoic philosopher, statesmen, dramatist, and advisor/tutor to the Roman emperor Nero. He had an extensive amount of influence on the infamous man, especially during the 5 humane years of Nero's rule. Seneca was an advocate of moral philosopher and wrote epistles on the meaning/purpose of life. He believed that our objective in this world was to live with virtue and purity. We should be always striving to do good and to be upstanding individuals.Centering our existence around these things was the only path to true happiness and purity. This in of itself seems to be an admirable undertaking in life, but Seneca was somewhat of a hypocrite.
His teachings supported this theory, yet he wasn't a very righteous and noble citizen and man. During Nero's rule, he wrote a defense of him after he murdered his own mother! He also made excuses for his insane, brutal actions and gave up on trying to control the dictator. So he wasn't really "practicing what he preached", when he overlooked the heinous crimes that were obviously contrary to accepted morality.
2) How would you summarize the period of the Julian- Claudian and Flavian emperors? Were they consistently humane and competent, wicked and foolish, or is the pattern erratic? Was there a consistent system of succession from one emperor to another?
The period of these two dynasties was one of both strife and peace, war and harmony. It was a lot like being on a roller-coaster, with highs and lows throughout the 121 years they lasted. The Julian- Claudian dynasty consisted of Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius I, and Nero. This dynasty's prevailing theme seemed to be one of evil, foolish and unpredictable rulers. Nero was a lunatic, who followed the crazy whims of his dark heart. He murdered countless innocent people and committed numerous atrocious felonies as emperor.
He also blamed the Christians for many things, like the Great Fire of Rome that devastated the city for 6 days( supposedly, he is the one who actually initiated it).He then proceeded to have many of them gruesomely killed, in the Coliseum arena. Nero had no conscience or heart whatsoever, even going so far as to order the execution of his mother! He eventually committed suicide when a rebellion began against him in Gaul and spread to Rome.
Caligula was just as much of a psychopath, but in a different way. He went on a violent rampage, when he suspected a revolution during his reign. He went on to end the lives of anyone he thought might be involved in this scandalous act. Claudius was more of a stable and reliable man in power but was removed from office because of an illness.
The Flavian Dynasty consisted of Vespian and his sons, Titus, and Domitian. Titus didn't lead a particularly edifying youth, but regardless was a decent emperor. Yet once his brother, Domitian took over there was once again anarchy. A revolt erupted against him and he was swift to massacre the enemies who dared to work against him. He had a particular detest and hatred for Christians, because they refused to worship any one but their God. He had instituted a law that everyone must treat him and his family as Gods. They were to be revered and regarded as immortals. It was impossible for Christians to follow this rule and stay true to their beliefs. So they were one of the main targets of Domitan's anger and a good portion of them were put to death.
There was definitely more bad rulers than good ones in these two dynasties. Decent and moral emperors were few and far between, when they did arise from the ashes of tyranny.
A steady pattern of succession lasted throughout the years, with men quickly taking the place of their precedents.
Seneca was a Stoic philosopher, statesmen, dramatist, and advisor/tutor to the Roman emperor Nero. He had an extensive amount of influence on the infamous man, especially during the 5 humane years of Nero's rule. Seneca was an advocate of moral philosopher and wrote epistles on the meaning/purpose of life. He believed that our objective in this world was to live with virtue and purity. We should be always striving to do good and to be upstanding individuals.Centering our existence around these things was the only path to true happiness and purity. This in of itself seems to be an admirable undertaking in life, but Seneca was somewhat of a hypocrite.
His teachings supported this theory, yet he wasn't a very righteous and noble citizen and man. During Nero's rule, he wrote a defense of him after he murdered his own mother! He also made excuses for his insane, brutal actions and gave up on trying to control the dictator. So he wasn't really "practicing what he preached", when he overlooked the heinous crimes that were obviously contrary to accepted morality.
2) How would you summarize the period of the Julian- Claudian and Flavian emperors? Were they consistently humane and competent, wicked and foolish, or is the pattern erratic? Was there a consistent system of succession from one emperor to another?
The period of these two dynasties was one of both strife and peace, war and harmony. It was a lot like being on a roller-coaster, with highs and lows throughout the 121 years they lasted. The Julian- Claudian dynasty consisted of Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius I, and Nero. This dynasty's prevailing theme seemed to be one of evil, foolish and unpredictable rulers. Nero was a lunatic, who followed the crazy whims of his dark heart. He murdered countless innocent people and committed numerous atrocious felonies as emperor.
He also blamed the Christians for many things, like the Great Fire of Rome that devastated the city for 6 days( supposedly, he is the one who actually initiated it).He then proceeded to have many of them gruesomely killed, in the Coliseum arena. Nero had no conscience or heart whatsoever, even going so far as to order the execution of his mother! He eventually committed suicide when a rebellion began against him in Gaul and spread to Rome.
Caligula was just as much of a psychopath, but in a different way. He went on a violent rampage, when he suspected a revolution during his reign. He went on to end the lives of anyone he thought might be involved in this scandalous act. Claudius was more of a stable and reliable man in power but was removed from office because of an illness.
The Flavian Dynasty consisted of Vespian and his sons, Titus, and Domitian. Titus didn't lead a particularly edifying youth, but regardless was a decent emperor. Yet once his brother, Domitian took over there was once again anarchy. A revolt erupted against him and he was swift to massacre the enemies who dared to work against him. He had a particular detest and hatred for Christians, because they refused to worship any one but their God. He had instituted a law that everyone must treat him and his family as Gods. They were to be revered and regarded as immortals. It was impossible for Christians to follow this rule and stay true to their beliefs. So they were one of the main targets of Domitan's anger and a good portion of them were put to death.
There was definitely more bad rulers than good ones in these two dynasties. Decent and moral emperors were few and far between, when they did arise from the ashes of tyranny.
A steady pattern of succession lasted throughout the years, with men quickly taking the place of their precedents.
Tuesday, November 22, 2016
Benjamin Franklin Archetypical American
There was most definitely not a more archetypical American than Franklin. It is absolutely remarkable and astounding to see what he accomplished in his life. He was a businessman, politician, inventor, printer,and wrote two books, one an autobiography! He was a hard working, clever, and ambitious man and entrepreneur. Franklin was the creator of bifocals, the "Franklin stove, lighting rod, and the glass harmonica. Different variations of the Franklin stove are still in use today, as well as with his other inventions.
He was a practical individual, as can be attested to in his book of aphorisms. He was very much so an advocate of common sense and logic in every aspect of life. His book of aphorisms is a lot like Proverbs in the Bible, in it's simplistic solutions to everyday problems. It's goal was to inform and assist people in their lives, by offering cures to each issue. This is also Franklin's motive in his autobiography, where he gives some excellent business advice.
For instance, he says that women should learn bookkeeping and accountant skills, for their husband's businesses.That way they know the odds and ends of this practical knowledge, when their husbands are no longer around. Instead of being helpless, ignorant widows, they can carry on the tradition, and have a way to earn a living for themselves. There were plenty of other hands-on applications in Franklin's literature. For example, in his book"Poor Richard's Almanac" he said, "Early to bed, early to rise makes a man healthy,wealthy and wise." This is an obvious good habit to get into, so one is happy and well rested for each day.
Another one would be "keep thy shop and thy shop will keep thee". Basically this means that if you maintain your business diligently, it's income will serve you well one day. You will benefit from the fruit of your labors, and be prosperous and well cared for, as Franklin was. He committed himself faithfully all his life, trying his hand at a variety of things. He was lucky enough to do swimmingly at all of them, and could therefore have the leisure of retirement.
This was rare in the average middle class family, during the 1700s. Usually it was only the wealthy that could even afford to live off their careers, without going to work. So Benjamin Franklin's success was very impressive for someone in his social position. He is said to have enjoyed reading very much and this was one of the ways he enjoyed spending his retirement.
For a man who worked so laboriously, he was wholly deserving of rest and rejuvenation. Other major feats he achieved were the founding of the American Philosophic Society, and working as a trustee of the University of Philadelphia. Franklin's religious/philosophical beliefs are rather difficult to pin down, but we do know for sure he was a deist. He had a fundamental belief of God and thought he was a non-judgmental being.
But unlike many popular figures around this time, he didn't emphasize the wrath and fury of God on humanity. He believed in the punishment of hell, if a person rejected their maker and choose sin/darkness. Yet he wasn't one to go into the vivid detail of describing eternity, in order to invoke fear in his listeners. In this way he didn't solely think of God as a terrifying, appalling dictator who was out to destroy his creation at every way.
Ben Franklin also didn't associate himself with any particular religion, favoring instead an broad or "eclectic" stance. It can be stated that although he didn't agree completely with the Puritans, he respected their strong work ethic.
Benjamin was a huge promoter of self-improvement and creating a persona. He even carried around his own," Poor Richard's Almanac" to remind himself of his goals. This was also something he wanted to communicate to his audience. He thought it was extremely crucial to always be enhancing one's life with adjustments that made it better. Now one shouldn't take this too far, by being haughty and proud of what they had done in their lifetime. They should take up the strategy of not taking credit and remaining humble.
To be completely fair, Franklin only exemplified this practice on the surface. It was a false perception that didn't really reflect his true heart. He was very proud of being such a well-rounded or versatile person and for good reason.
By the end of his lifetime, there was a stunning number of accolades he could brag about. He was an instrumental politician during the American Revolution,and the oldest one at the National Convention(during the French Revolution) He had written his way to success, with his Poor Richard's Almanac which sold 10,000 copies a year. His personal memoir became the most famous and influential example of an autobiography ever composed! He had invented 4 different masterpieces, which all continue to be sold long after his death. Finally, he was the very definition of an entrepreneur, starting his own successful printing business and store.
Benjamin Franklin has gone down in history,renown all over the world as a historical legend and a model American. No one in American can be compared to him, in the immenseness of his attainments.
He was a practical individual, as can be attested to in his book of aphorisms. He was very much so an advocate of common sense and logic in every aspect of life. His book of aphorisms is a lot like Proverbs in the Bible, in it's simplistic solutions to everyday problems. It's goal was to inform and assist people in their lives, by offering cures to each issue. This is also Franklin's motive in his autobiography, where he gives some excellent business advice.
For instance, he says that women should learn bookkeeping and accountant skills, for their husband's businesses.That way they know the odds and ends of this practical knowledge, when their husbands are no longer around. Instead of being helpless, ignorant widows, they can carry on the tradition, and have a way to earn a living for themselves. There were plenty of other hands-on applications in Franklin's literature. For example, in his book"Poor Richard's Almanac" he said, "Early to bed, early to rise makes a man healthy,wealthy and wise." This is an obvious good habit to get into, so one is happy and well rested for each day.
Another one would be "keep thy shop and thy shop will keep thee". Basically this means that if you maintain your business diligently, it's income will serve you well one day. You will benefit from the fruit of your labors, and be prosperous and well cared for, as Franklin was. He committed himself faithfully all his life, trying his hand at a variety of things. He was lucky enough to do swimmingly at all of them, and could therefore have the leisure of retirement.
This was rare in the average middle class family, during the 1700s. Usually it was only the wealthy that could even afford to live off their careers, without going to work. So Benjamin Franklin's success was very impressive for someone in his social position. He is said to have enjoyed reading very much and this was one of the ways he enjoyed spending his retirement.
For a man who worked so laboriously, he was wholly deserving of rest and rejuvenation. Other major feats he achieved were the founding of the American Philosophic Society, and working as a trustee of the University of Philadelphia. Franklin's religious/philosophical beliefs are rather difficult to pin down, but we do know for sure he was a deist. He had a fundamental belief of God and thought he was a non-judgmental being.
But unlike many popular figures around this time, he didn't emphasize the wrath and fury of God on humanity. He believed in the punishment of hell, if a person rejected their maker and choose sin/darkness. Yet he wasn't one to go into the vivid detail of describing eternity, in order to invoke fear in his listeners. In this way he didn't solely think of God as a terrifying, appalling dictator who was out to destroy his creation at every way.
Ben Franklin also didn't associate himself with any particular religion, favoring instead an broad or "eclectic" stance. It can be stated that although he didn't agree completely with the Puritans, he respected their strong work ethic.
Benjamin was a huge promoter of self-improvement and creating a persona. He even carried around his own," Poor Richard's Almanac" to remind himself of his goals. This was also something he wanted to communicate to his audience. He thought it was extremely crucial to always be enhancing one's life with adjustments that made it better. Now one shouldn't take this too far, by being haughty and proud of what they had done in their lifetime. They should take up the strategy of not taking credit and remaining humble.
To be completely fair, Franklin only exemplified this practice on the surface. It was a false perception that didn't really reflect his true heart. He was very proud of being such a well-rounded or versatile person and for good reason.
By the end of his lifetime, there was a stunning number of accolades he could brag about. He was an instrumental politician during the American Revolution,and the oldest one at the National Convention(during the French Revolution) He had written his way to success, with his Poor Richard's Almanac which sold 10,000 copies a year. His personal memoir became the most famous and influential example of an autobiography ever composed! He had invented 4 different masterpieces, which all continue to be sold long after his death. Finally, he was the very definition of an entrepreneur, starting his own successful printing business and store.
Benjamin Franklin has gone down in history,renown all over the world as a historical legend and a model American. No one in American can be compared to him, in the immenseness of his attainments.
Benjamin Franklin Archetypical American
There was most definitely not a more archetypical American than Franklin. It is absolutely remarkable and astounding to see what he accomplished in his life. He was a businessman, politician, inventor, printer,and wrote two books, one an autobiography! He was a hard working, clever, and ambitious man and entrepreneur. Franklin was the creator of bifocals, the "Franklin stove, lighting rod, and the glass harmonica. Different variations of the Franklin stove are still in use today, as well as with his other inventions.
He was a practical individual, as can be attested to in his book of aphorisms. He was very much so an advocate of common sense and login in every aspect of life. His book of aphorisms is a lot like Proverbs in the Bible, in it's simplistic solutions to everyday problems. It's goal was to inform and assist people in their lives, by offering cures to each issue. This is also Franklin's motive in his autobiography, where he gives some excellent business advice.
For instance, he says that women should learn bookkeeping and accountant skills, for their husband's businesses.That way they know the odds and ends of this practical knowledge, when their husbands are no longer around. Instead of being helpless, ignorant widows, they can carry on the tradition, and have a way to earn a living for themselves. There were plenty of other hands-on applications in Franklin's literature. For example, in his book"Poor Richard's Almanac" he said, "Early to bed, early to rise makes a man healthy,wealthy and wise." This is an obvious good habit to get into, so one is happy and well rested for each day.
Another one would be "keep thy shop and thy shop will keep thee". Basically this means that if you maintain your business diligently, it's income will serve you well one day. You will benefit from the fruit of your labors, and be prosperous and well cared for, as Franklin was. He committed himself faithfully all his life, trying his hand at a variety of things. He was lucky enough to do swimmingly at all of them, and could therefore have the leisure of retirement.
This was rare in the average middle class family, during the 1700s. Usually it was only the wealthy that could even afford to live off the careers, without going to work. So Benjamin Franklin's success was very impressive for someone in his social position. He is said to have enjoyed reading very much and this was one of the ways he enjoyed spending his retirement.
For a man who worked so laboriously, he was wholly deserving of rest and rejuvenation. Other major feats he achieved were the founding of the American Philosophic Society, and working as a trustee of the University of Philadelphia. Franklin's religious/philosophical beliefs are rather difficult to pin down, but we do know for sure he was a deist. He had a fundamental belief of God and thought he was a non-judgmental being.
But unlike many popular figures around this time, he didn't emphasize the wrath and fury of God on humanity. He believed in the punishment of hell, if a person rejected their maker and choose sin/darkness. Yet he wasn't one to go into the vivid detail of describing eternity, in order to invoke fear in his listeners. In this way he didn't solely think of God as a terrifying, appalling dictator who was out to destroy his creation at every way.
Ben Franklin also didn't associate himself with any particular religion, favoring instead an broad or "eclectic" stance. It can be stated that although he didn't agree completely with the Puritans, he respected their strong work ethic.
Benjamin was a huge promoter of self-improvement and creating a persona. He even carried around his own," Poor Richard's Almanac" to remind himself of his goals. This was also something he wanted to communicate to his audience. He thought it was extremely crucial to always be enhancing one's life with adjustments that made it better. Now one shouldn't take this too far, by being haughty and proud of what they had done in their lifetime. They should take up the strategy of not taking credit and remaining humble.
To be completely fair, Franklin only exemplified this practice on the surface. It was a false perception that didn't really reflect his true heart. He was very proud of being such a well-rounded or versatile person and for good reason.
By the end of his lifetime, there was a stunning number of accolades he could brag about. He was an instrumental politician during the American Revolution,and the oldest one at the National Convention(during the French Revolution) He had written his way to success, with his Poor Richard's Almanac which sold 10,000 copies a year. His personal memoir became the most famous and influential example of an autobiography ever composed! He had invented 4 different masterpieces, which all continue to be sold long after his death. Finally, he was the very definition of an entrepreneur, starting his own successful printing business and store.
Benjamin Franklin has gone down in history,renown all over the world as a historical legend and a model American. No one in American can be compared to him, in the immenseness of his attainments.
He was a practical individual, as can be attested to in his book of aphorisms. He was very much so an advocate of common sense and login in every aspect of life. His book of aphorisms is a lot like Proverbs in the Bible, in it's simplistic solutions to everyday problems. It's goal was to inform and assist people in their lives, by offering cures to each issue. This is also Franklin's motive in his autobiography, where he gives some excellent business advice.
For instance, he says that women should learn bookkeeping and accountant skills, for their husband's businesses.That way they know the odds and ends of this practical knowledge, when their husbands are no longer around. Instead of being helpless, ignorant widows, they can carry on the tradition, and have a way to earn a living for themselves. There were plenty of other hands-on applications in Franklin's literature. For example, in his book"Poor Richard's Almanac" he said, "Early to bed, early to rise makes a man healthy,wealthy and wise." This is an obvious good habit to get into, so one is happy and well rested for each day.
Another one would be "keep thy shop and thy shop will keep thee". Basically this means that if you maintain your business diligently, it's income will serve you well one day. You will benefit from the fruit of your labors, and be prosperous and well cared for, as Franklin was. He committed himself faithfully all his life, trying his hand at a variety of things. He was lucky enough to do swimmingly at all of them, and could therefore have the leisure of retirement.
This was rare in the average middle class family, during the 1700s. Usually it was only the wealthy that could even afford to live off the careers, without going to work. So Benjamin Franklin's success was very impressive for someone in his social position. He is said to have enjoyed reading very much and this was one of the ways he enjoyed spending his retirement.
For a man who worked so laboriously, he was wholly deserving of rest and rejuvenation. Other major feats he achieved were the founding of the American Philosophic Society, and working as a trustee of the University of Philadelphia. Franklin's religious/philosophical beliefs are rather difficult to pin down, but we do know for sure he was a deist. He had a fundamental belief of God and thought he was a non-judgmental being.
But unlike many popular figures around this time, he didn't emphasize the wrath and fury of God on humanity. He believed in the punishment of hell, if a person rejected their maker and choose sin/darkness. Yet he wasn't one to go into the vivid detail of describing eternity, in order to invoke fear in his listeners. In this way he didn't solely think of God as a terrifying, appalling dictator who was out to destroy his creation at every way.
Ben Franklin also didn't associate himself with any particular religion, favoring instead an broad or "eclectic" stance. It can be stated that although he didn't agree completely with the Puritans, he respected their strong work ethic.
Benjamin was a huge promoter of self-improvement and creating a persona. He even carried around his own," Poor Richard's Almanac" to remind himself of his goals. This was also something he wanted to communicate to his audience. He thought it was extremely crucial to always be enhancing one's life with adjustments that made it better. Now one shouldn't take this too far, by being haughty and proud of what they had done in their lifetime. They should take up the strategy of not taking credit and remaining humble.
To be completely fair, Franklin only exemplified this practice on the surface. It was a false perception that didn't really reflect his true heart. He was very proud of being such a well-rounded or versatile person and for good reason.
By the end of his lifetime, there was a stunning number of accolades he could brag about. He was an instrumental politician during the American Revolution,and the oldest one at the National Convention(during the French Revolution) He had written his way to success, with his Poor Richard's Almanac which sold 10,000 copies a year. His personal memoir became the most famous and influential example of an autobiography ever composed! He had invented 4 different masterpieces, which all continue to be sold long after his death. Finally, he was the very definition of an entrepreneur, starting his own successful printing business and store.
Benjamin Franklin has gone down in history,renown all over the world as a historical legend and a model American. No one in American can be compared to him, in the immenseness of his attainments.
Monday, November 21, 2016
Western Civilization Short Essay: November 21, 2016
(1) What was the Augustan Settlement? How did Augustus balance his perceived need for absolute power with his concern to lend the impression that the republic had been restored and the old ways were being observed?
(2) Read the selections from The Aeneid from Lesson 49, and skim this essay on The Aeneid. What is the basic story of this epic? Why do you think this great literary work has also been called an exercise in political propaganda?
(3) Discuss the autobiography of Augustus.
(4) Use your reading and the video lesson to summarize important events in the life of Julius Caesar.
Question 4: Important Events in The Life of Julius Caesar
Gaius Julius Caesar was born on July 13, 100 BC into a patrician family, that was linked to the infamous Trojan prince, Aeneas. He played a crucial role in the fall of the Roman republic, as a politician and general. He wormed his way into the position of consul in Rome in 59 B.C. He served as consul for a year and was then appointed as governor of Gaul from which he obtained quite a fortune.
In 59 B.C., Caesar formed the First Triumvirate with Pompey the Great and Marcus Crassus. Pompey was at the time looked up as the greatest military commander of his time! Crassus was the richest man in Rome, largest landlord, and a property speculator. This was an extremely important political alliance, that lasted from 59 B.C. to Crassus's death in 53 B.C. The First Triumvirate was an informal secret agreement between these powerful figures to support each other.
In the public eye, it looked as if these three men just happened to agree with other other, and solve problems smoothly.But, in private, they had simply created a compromise that was selfish at the core. These men only wanted their advance their own personal gains and really had no interest in each other whatsoever. Each one was simply in the deal for what they could get out of it.
Julius Caesar was victorious in the Gallic Wars, where he defeated a number of Gallic Tribes.This win increased Rome's territory, with the addition of the English Channel and the Rhine. It made Caesar the first general to cross these two rivers, when he built a bridge and directed the first invasion of Britain.
Pompey had chosen to recommit himself to the Senate, after the death of Crassus. This had ended the First Triumvirate and made Pompey jealous. After the conquering of The Rhine, the Senate ordered him to resign from his military command. He had the choice of either obeying the Senate or starting what would be a bloody war with Pompey. Pompey had chosen to recommit himself to the Senate, after the death of Crassus. This had ended the contract(First Triumvirate) and put Caesar in a higher position than Pompey.This win increased Rome's territory, with the addition of the English Channel and the Rhine. He also made a bold, rebellious move when he crossed the Rubicon River in 49 B.C. "Crossing the Rubicon" was a illegal, scandalous move that ultimately ignited a Civil War within Rome's borders.
The Rubicon was a river that separated Gaul and Italy. Caesar knew that a war would be the result, yet he plunged ahead without hesitation.The consequence of this deadly action would eventually be the formation of the Roman empire. It was a decision that couldn't be taken back, once Julius went ahead with it.
As his men followed him across the river, Caesar famously shouted, "Let us go where the omens of the Gods and the crimes of our enemies summon us! The crime is now cast!" In light of this fateful deed, Caesar also became the first man daring to defy this ancient roman law. Of course, as always, Julius Caesar kept on fighting and the Roman civil war became one of his many conquests and accomplishments.
Upon the end of the war, he took over the government completely and essentially became a tyrant. He was declared, "dictator in perpetuity," which means emperor for life and basically thought to be God. He had access and power over the bureaucracy, as well as initiating many new social and government reforms. His own "Julian calendar" was a notable alteration, which all the citizens were expected to use.
There were plenty of people who opposed his rule and outright disregard for Roman laws.Eventually, his controlling, ambitious attitude led to his assassination on March 15, 44 B.C, by a group of senators led by a man named Marcus Brutus. Because of this, even more drama and strife was aroused and new civil wars took place. Julius's great- nephew, Octavian was given the privilege of taking his uncle's place as governor, when he beat his adversaries in one of these civil wars. The start of his reign kindled the beginning of the Roman empire era, and an end to the old constitutional form of government.
Question 1: What was the Augustan Settlement? How did Augustus balance his perceived need for absolute power with his concern to lend the impression that the republic had been restored and the old ways were being observed?
The Augustan Settlement took place on January 16th, 27 B.C. Gaius Octavian, the great-nephew and heir of Caesar was renamed "Augustus," which means " the illustrious one". Octavian maintained the illusion that he wasn't a tyrant like his Uncle, and even relinquished some of his powers to the Senate. He pretended to be humble and contrite, willing to obey Roman tradition. He realized he had to be more subtle about his want for control, than his Uncle before him, if he was to survive.
Therefore, he outwardly returned the Republic to it's original free state, by restoring control to the Senate, legislative assemblies, and executive magistrates. Augustus refused to be given titles that made him the highest authority and a monarch. Rather he referred to himself as Princeps Civitatis "First Citizen of The State". But the truth was that Augustus had autocratic(tyrannical) powers just like his Uncle had. By law he had the role of supreme military command for life,tribune, and censor. He was extremely clever, in weaving an intricate framework that fooled everyone. He convinced his nation that he respected the constitutional form of government and was a fair, noble ruler.
During his lifetime, he started the Praetorian guard, instilled police/fire services for Rome, developed a standing army, and an official courier system. He was also instrumental in repairing and rebuilding Rome after the havoc of the past years. Augustus was even further successful by developing Roman's borders, with the addition of Egypt and Africa. His reign ushered in a long period of Pax Romana (The Roman Peace), that lasted for 2 centuries!
Upon the end of the war, he took over the government completely and essentially became a tyrant. He was declared, "dictator in perpetuity," which means emperor for life and basically thought to be God. He had access and power over the bureaucracy, as well as initiating many new social and government reforms. His own "Julian calendar" was a notable alteration, which all the citizens were expected to use.
There were plenty of people who opposed his rule and outright disregard for Roman laws.Eventually, his controlling, ambitious attitude led to his assassination on March 15, 44 B.C, by a group of senators led by a man named Marcus Brutus. Because of this, even more drama and strife was aroused and new civil wars took place. Julius's great- nephew, Octavian was given the privilege of taking his uncle's place as governor, when he beat his adversaries in one of these civil wars. The start of his reign kindled the beginning of the Roman empire era, and an end to the old constitutional form of government.
Question 1: What was the Augustan Settlement? How did Augustus balance his perceived need for absolute power with his concern to lend the impression that the republic had been restored and the old ways were being observed?
The Augustan Settlement took place on January 16th, 27 B.C. Gaius Octavian, the great-nephew and heir of Caesar was renamed "Augustus," which means " the illustrious one". Octavian maintained the illusion that he wasn't a tyrant like his Uncle, and even relinquished some of his powers to the Senate. He pretended to be humble and contrite, willing to obey Roman tradition. He realized he had to be more subtle about his want for control, than his Uncle before him, if he was to survive.
Therefore, he outwardly returned the Republic to it's original free state, by restoring control to the Senate, legislative assemblies, and executive magistrates. Augustus refused to be given titles that made him the highest authority and a monarch. Rather he referred to himself as Princeps Civitatis "First Citizen of The State". But the truth was that Augustus had autocratic(tyrannical) powers just like his Uncle had. By law he had the role of supreme military command for life,tribune, and censor. He was extremely clever, in weaving an intricate framework that fooled everyone. He convinced his nation that he respected the constitutional form of government and was a fair, noble ruler.
During his lifetime, he started the Praetorian guard, instilled police/fire services for Rome, developed a standing army, and an official courier system. He was also instrumental in repairing and rebuilding Rome after the havoc of the past years. Augustus was even further successful by developing Roman's borders, with the addition of Egypt and Africa. His reign ushered in a long period of Pax Romana (The Roman Peace), that lasted for 2 centuries!
Western Civilization Short Essay: November 21, 2016
(1) What was the Augustan Settlement? How did Augustus balance his perceived need for absolute power with his concern to lend the impression that the republic had been restored and the old ways were being observed?
(2) Read the selections from The Aeneid from Lesson 49, and skim this essay on The Aeneid. What is the basic story of this epic? Why do you think this great literary work has also been called an exercise in political propaganda?
(3) Discuss the autobiography of Augustus.
(4) Use your reading and the video lesson to summarize important events in the life of Julius Caesar.
Question 4: Important Events in The Life of Julius Caesar
Gaius Julius Caesar was born on July 13, 100 BC into a patrician family, that was linked to the infamous Trojan prince, Aeneas. He played a crucial role in the fall of the Roman republic, as a politician and general. He wormed his way into the position of consul in Rome in 59 B.C. He served as consul for a year and was then appointed as governor of Gaul from which he obtained quite a fortune.
In 59 B.C., Caesar formed the First Triumvirate with Pompey the Great and Marcus Crassus. Pompey was at the time looked up as the greatest military commander of his time! Crassus was the richest man in Rome, largest landlord, and a property speculator. This was an extremely important political alliance, that lasted from 59 B.C. to Crassus's death in 53 B.C. The First Triumvirate was an informal secret agreement between these powerful figures to support each other.
In the public eye, it looked as if these three men just happened to agree with other other, and solve problems smoothly.But, in private, they had simply created a compromise that was selfish at the core. These men only wanted their advance their own personal gains and really had no interest in each other whatsoever. Each one was simply in the deal for what they could get out of it.
Julius Caesar was victorious in the Gallic Wars, where he defeated a number of Gallic Tribes.This win increased Rome's territory, with the addition of the English Channel and the Rhine. It made Caesar the first general to cross these two rivers, when he built a bridge and directed the first invasion of Britain.
Pompey had chosen to recommit himself to the Senate, after the death of Crassus. This had ended the First Triumvirate and made Pompey jealous. After the conquering of The Rhine, the Senate ordered him to resign from his military command. He had the choice of either obeying the Senate or starting what would be a bloody war with Pompey. Pompey had chosen to recommit himself to the Senate, after the death of Crassus. This had ended the contract(First Triumvirate) and put Caesar in a higher position than Pompey.This win increased Rome's territory, with the addition of the English Channel and the Rhine. He also made a bold, rebellious move when he crossed the Rubicon River in 49 B.C. "Crossing the Rubicon" was a illegal, scandalous move that ultimately ignited a Civil War within Rome's borders.
The Rubicon was a river that separated Gaul and Italy. Caesar knew that a war would be the result, yet he plunged ahead without hesitation.The consequence of this deadly action would eventually be the formation of the Roman empire. It was a decision that couldn't be taken back, once Julius went ahead with it.
As his men followed him across the river, Caesar famously shouted, "Let us go where the omens of the Gods and the crimes of our enemies summon us! The crime is now cast!" In light of this fateful deed, Caesar also became the first man daring to defy this ancient roman law. Of course, as always, Julius Caesar kept on fighting and the Roman civil war became one of his many conquests and accomplishments.
Upon the end of the war, he took over the government completely and essentially became a tyrant. He was declared, "dictator in perpetuity," which means emperor for life and basically thought to be God. He had access and power over the bureaucracy, as well as initiating many new social and government reforms. His own "Julian calendar" was a notable alteration, which all the citizens were expected to use.
There were plenty of people who opposed his rule and outright disregard for Roman laws.Eventually, his controlling, ambitious attitude led to his assassination on March 15, 44 B.C, by a group of senators led by a man named Marcus Brutus. Because of this, even more drama and strife was aroused and new civil wars took place. Julius's great- nephew, Octavian was given the privilege of taking his uncle's place as governor, when he beat his adversaries in one of these civil wars. The start of his reign kindled the beginning of the Roman empire era, and an end to the old constitutional form of government.
Question 1: What was the Augustan Settlement? How did Augustus balance his perceived need for absolute power with his concern to lend the impression that the republic had been restored and the old ways were being observed?
Upon the end of the war, he took over the government completely and essentially became a tyrant. He was declared, "dictator in perpetuity," which means emperor for life and basically thought to be God. He had access and power over the bureaucracy, as well as initiating many new social and government reforms. His own "Julian calendar" was a notable alteration, which all the citizens were expected to use.
There were plenty of people who opposed his rule and outright disregard for Roman laws.Eventually, his controlling, ambitious attitude led to his assassination on March 15, 44 B.C, by a group of senators led by a man named Marcus Brutus. Because of this, even more drama and strife was aroused and new civil wars took place. Julius's great- nephew, Octavian was given the privilege of taking his uncle's place as governor, when he beat his adversaries in one of these civil wars. The start of his reign kindled the beginning of the Roman empire era, and an end to the old constitutional form of government.
Question 1: What was the Augustan Settlement? How did Augustus balance his perceived need for absolute power with his concern to lend the impression that the republic had been restored and the old ways were being observed?
English Essay, "Sinners In The Hands of An Angry God"
Question: If you had heard both these sermons, would you have thought you were the target?
If I was in the congregation, I would definitely think I was the recipient of anger and rage. Mr. Edwards and Mr. Whitfield had the keen ability to to cast a spell over everyone and make them all feel guilty. It doesn't matter how holy or righteous they see themselves, in his eyes they are evil and done for. This is the overall message of the sermon, which is reinstated over and over again. Gloom and doom seem to be the prevalent themes that Jonathan writes on. It gets to a rather ridiculous, annoying point and is very repetitious to say the least. The sermon leaves little, if any room for hope or mercy whatsoever. The writers don't paint a happy picture and leaves a terrifying imprint on anyone who listens to/reads it.
The sermons both echo a feeling of despair and hopelessness, with impending doom ready to descend on one and all. These Great Awakening preachers both firmly believed that if you thought you were saved from hell, you were more than likely going there! It's stated thoroughly that more than a few will be shocked on the day of judgment, when their works are deemed filthy rags. Any goodness or morality you have is disgusting in the eyes of the omnipotent one.According to Edwards and Whitfield, he won't hesitate to cast your soul into hell for eternity. No one is safe from his wrath, as he is almighty and all-powerful, capable of doing anything he pleases.
There is no peace or mercy, once someone has been sentenced to this fiery abyss. It is only be God's grace, that this eternal misery is not yet our fate. Just because we are not in a physical hell yet doesn't mean that God isn't angry with us. We are no better off here on earth, than the millions of lost souls already separate from God. The goal of the ministers was to invoke an overwhelming sense of fear and despair on their congregations; so they'd realize the pitiful condition of their souls. They wanted people to repent and admit their worthlessness without God. True salvation came when they turned from their evil,sinful ways, renouncing them and surrendering their lives.
The illusion of of their so-called" salvation" need to be shattered, held under the microscope of the truth. If they were to be rescued, they needed to reexamine themselves and recommit themselves to an intimate relationship with God. Their fake piety and outward devoutness to religion was nothing, without a real, manifest love for their maker.
The point of these discourses was for people to conclude that they were all transgressors,and bow
in humble admission of their guilt. Their regret should be a stepping stone to push them to let go of their pride and give everything to God.
If I was in the congregation, I would definitely think I was the recipient of anger and rage. Mr. Edwards and Mr. Whitfield had the keen ability to to cast a spell over everyone and make them all feel guilty. It doesn't matter how holy or righteous they see themselves, in his eyes they are evil and done for. This is the overall message of the sermon, which is reinstated over and over again. Gloom and doom seem to be the prevalent themes that Jonathan writes on. It gets to a rather ridiculous, annoying point and is very repetitious to say the least. The sermon leaves little, if any room for hope or mercy whatsoever. The writers don't paint a happy picture and leaves a terrifying imprint on anyone who listens to/reads it.
The sermons both echo a feeling of despair and hopelessness, with impending doom ready to descend on one and all. These Great Awakening preachers both firmly believed that if you thought you were saved from hell, you were more than likely going there! It's stated thoroughly that more than a few will be shocked on the day of judgment, when their works are deemed filthy rags. Any goodness or morality you have is disgusting in the eyes of the omnipotent one.According to Edwards and Whitfield, he won't hesitate to cast your soul into hell for eternity. No one is safe from his wrath, as he is almighty and all-powerful, capable of doing anything he pleases.
There is no peace or mercy, once someone has been sentenced to this fiery abyss. It is only be God's grace, that this eternal misery is not yet our fate. Just because we are not in a physical hell yet doesn't mean that God isn't angry with us. We are no better off here on earth, than the millions of lost souls already separate from God. The goal of the ministers was to invoke an overwhelming sense of fear and despair on their congregations; so they'd realize the pitiful condition of their souls. They wanted people to repent and admit their worthlessness without God. True salvation came when they turned from their evil,sinful ways, renouncing them and surrendering their lives.
The illusion of of their so-called" salvation" need to be shattered, held under the microscope of the truth. If they were to be rescued, they needed to reexamine themselves and recommit themselves to an intimate relationship with God. Their fake piety and outward devoutness to religion was nothing, without a real, manifest love for their maker.
The point of these discourses was for people to conclude that they were all transgressors,and bow
in humble admission of their guilt. Their regret should be a stepping stone to push them to let go of their pride and give everything to God.
note: originally due November 15th
Monday, November 14, 2016
11/14.16: Western Civilization Short Essay
2. Why did Tiberius Gracchus attract so much suspicion from the Roman Senate?
Tiberius was a rather impulsive, headstrong individual who didn't heed the rules and traditions of his elders. In fact, he blatantly disregarded them on many an occasion. First off, he insisted on ignoring the fact that one must have the approval of the Senate before passing a bill. He decided to go directly to the tribune, in order to ask permission. He wanted to change the land commission, which stated that land could only be owned by the wealthy. Tiberius's plan was to make property open to the poor as well. In this way more citizens could join the military and assist their country in war(it was illegal to join the army without being a landowner).
Although he might have gotten his bill approved, Tiberius ruined his chances by the methods he used. The senators were dismayed by his utter disobedience and refused to support it. Naturally he was furious when the bill passed and no one would fund it. Then the Persian Empire gifted Rome with some land and Tiberius went on to fund his own way with tax revenues! Of course this was also contrary to Rome's financial regulations and only generated a growing mistrust for him.
Tiberius's co-tribune, Marcus Octavius was affected by the Senate to veto the bill, which he consented to. In a fit of rage, Tiberious threatened to throw him out of the Senate if he didn't resign. This was another direct violation of rules and Octavious wouldn't listen to his tribune. This resulted in his eventual removal.As a final act of defiance, Tiberus ran for tribune again, which went against Rome's one-term policy.
He met a sad end and was eventually killed, going down in history as the first political figure to rebel against Roman tradition.
Tiberius was a rather impulsive, headstrong individual who didn't heed the rules and traditions of his elders. In fact, he blatantly disregarded them on many an occasion. First off, he insisted on ignoring the fact that one must have the approval of the Senate before passing a bill. He decided to go directly to the tribune, in order to ask permission. He wanted to change the land commission, which stated that land could only be owned by the wealthy. Tiberius's plan was to make property open to the poor as well. In this way more citizens could join the military and assist their country in war(it was illegal to join the army without being a landowner).
Although he might have gotten his bill approved, Tiberius ruined his chances by the methods he used. The senators were dismayed by his utter disobedience and refused to support it. Naturally he was furious when the bill passed and no one would fund it. Then the Persian Empire gifted Rome with some land and Tiberius went on to fund his own way with tax revenues! Of course this was also contrary to Rome's financial regulations and only generated a growing mistrust for him.
Tiberius's co-tribune, Marcus Octavius was affected by the Senate to veto the bill, which he consented to. In a fit of rage, Tiberious threatened to throw him out of the Senate if he didn't resign. This was another direct violation of rules and Octavious wouldn't listen to his tribune. This resulted in his eventual removal.As a final act of defiance, Tiberus ran for tribune again, which went against Rome's one-term policy.
He met a sad end and was eventually killed, going down in history as the first political figure to rebel against Roman tradition.
Wednesday, November 9, 2016
500 Word Essay: Theopolis Americana
If I was a member of the general court, I probably wouldn't find anything offensive in this message. When Cotton Mather composed it, many of his ideas/beliefs were already accepted and practiced by the Puritans. Mather didn't believe that the Puritans should drink alcohol or get drunk, as this was a sin. He was also against kidnapping men to be slaves, because it wasn't moral or Christian. He praised New England Judges for their decisions regarding the Salem Witch Trials. He supported the idea that Christ couldn't return, until all the Jews were converted. To back up this theory, Cotton attempted to make up Biblical prophecies and apply them to America.
He thought that New England would be a part of God's kingdom, but not the center of it or the"New Jerusalem". However Mather wasn't a true Christian in that he never mentioned Jesus's rule or dominance as a King over the earth So he disagreed with his theological friend, Joseph Mead who said the Devil would be in charge of the Western Hemisphere. Mead also maintained that it would be a worldwide expansion of the kingdom of God.
In many of Mather's sermons, he advocated an anti-Catholic viewpoint, even saying that the Pope was the anti-christ. This is why, according to him, the Catholic church had to be abolished for Jesus to return.He had a one-track mind that basically said the Puritan way was the only real,true path to follow. Europe and the colonies were the center of his attention and he thought they were specially chosen by God.
He thought that New England would be a part of God's kingdom, but not the center of it or the"New Jerusalem". However Mather wasn't a true Christian in that he never mentioned Jesus's rule or dominance as a King over the earth So he disagreed with his theological friend, Joseph Mead who said the Devil would be in charge of the Western Hemisphere. Mead also maintained that it would be a worldwide expansion of the kingdom of God.
In many of Mather's sermons, he advocated an anti-Catholic viewpoint, even saying that the Pope was the anti-christ. This is why, according to him, the Catholic church had to be abolished for Jesus to return.He had a one-track mind that basically said the Puritan way was the only real,true path to follow. Europe and the colonies were the center of his attention and he thought they were specially chosen by God.
Monday, November 7, 2016
Western Civilization Essay 11.7.16
Writing assignment (choose two of the following):
1. What is the difference between the liberty of the ancients and the liberty of the moderns? What would moderns find lacking in ancient liberty? 2. Plutarch tells about an important episode in Alexander's life. What characteristics is it intended to show? 3. What, in Plutarch's opinion, makes a "great man"? Is Alexander great? 4. Based on the Principal Doctrines, explain the basic ideas of Epicureanism.
Topic One: What is the difference between the liberty of the ancients and the liberty of the moderns?What would moderns find lacking in ancient liberty? The ancient's idea of liberty was the freedom to make political decisions and decide what rulers governed them and so forth. They had no concept whatsoever of the individual freedoms that we Americans enjoy today. Being able to have a voice heard amidst the thousands of citizens was the only thing of value to them. The Greeks treasured the ability to choose what laws they were governed by and who was in charge of their city-states. Yet they never stopped to consider how different life was without democracy. Nowadays, Americans would be shocked at the lack of self-government in old times. There was no freedom to speak or act as you liked or rights to your home, family, or personal property. You couldn't hire a lawyer to defend you in an unfair case, where you might be accused of something you never did.
For instance, in Greece you could be banished for 10 years, just because they suspected you might cause trouble! Back then, they didn't have to have any evidence to back their claims. So you could be virtually innocent of any crimes and still be unjustly treated and sent away. They could separate you from your wife/husband or children and take your property if they pleased, without reason. But these were just facts of life in Athenian times that were largely overlooked. The Athenians appreciated only their political independence. They were allowed to; discuss matters of state and make alliances with foreign governments, investigate magistrates, or pronounce judgements. Sadly they were ignorant of what they were missing as far as individual freedom goes. They had no say in any other aspect of life, other than politics.We should be thankful in today's modern, enlightened world that we can enjoy civil liberties and not have them taken from us.
Topic Two: Epicureanism is a form of philosophy, created by the Greek philosopher, Epicurus. It's core belief is that one's goal/aim in life should be to pursue pleasure, in all it's forms. Epicurus stated that a human being should focus on experiencing as much pleasure in their lifetime, as possible. However he didn't promote overindulgence in any physical/mental gratification.He did say that it wasn't healthy to give full vent to desires, as that would result in remorse and pain. Overeating or getting drunk would be considered wrong, because they were contrary to moderation. Seeking pleasure and also procuring knowledge eventually led to a state of peace, or an absence of fear(in greek"atoroxia") and an absence of body pain(in greek"aponia").
As far as religion goes, Epicurus and his followers believed in the gods; but didn't think they had any affect on humanity. They questioned the existence of a higher spirit or deity, especially their relation to anything crucial in the world. If a God did exist,why didn't he prevent evil and suffering? Did his power allow him to do so but he refused out of spite? Or was he just weak and incapable of destroying pain? Epicurus is commonly thought to be an atheist, because of these questioning views. He thought the gods are immoral and better than us, but didn't hold that they cared at all about our well-being and happiness.
Topic One: What is the difference between the liberty of the ancients and the liberty of the moderns?What would moderns find lacking in ancient liberty? The ancient's idea of liberty was the freedom to make political decisions and decide what rulers governed them and so forth. They had no concept whatsoever of the individual freedoms that we Americans enjoy today. Being able to have a voice heard amidst the thousands of citizens was the only thing of value to them. The Greeks treasured the ability to choose what laws they were governed by and who was in charge of their city-states. Yet they never stopped to consider how different life was without democracy. Nowadays, Americans would be shocked at the lack of self-government in old times. There was no freedom to speak or act as you liked or rights to your home, family, or personal property. You couldn't hire a lawyer to defend you in an unfair case, where you might be accused of something you never did.
For instance, in Greece you could be banished for 10 years, just because they suspected you might cause trouble! Back then, they didn't have to have any evidence to back their claims. So you could be virtually innocent of any crimes and still be unjustly treated and sent away. They could separate you from your wife/husband or children and take your property if they pleased, without reason. But these were just facts of life in Athenian times that were largely overlooked. The Athenians appreciated only their political independence. They were allowed to; discuss matters of state and make alliances with foreign governments, investigate magistrates, or pronounce judgements. Sadly they were ignorant of what they were missing as far as individual freedom goes. They had no say in any other aspect of life, other than politics.We should be thankful in today's modern, enlightened world that we can enjoy civil liberties and not have them taken from us.
Topic Two: Epicureanism is a form of philosophy, created by the Greek philosopher, Epicurus. It's core belief is that one's goal/aim in life should be to pursue pleasure, in all it's forms. Epicurus stated that a human being should focus on experiencing as much pleasure in their lifetime, as possible. However he didn't promote overindulgence in any physical/mental gratification.He did say that it wasn't healthy to give full vent to desires, as that would result in remorse and pain. Overeating or getting drunk would be considered wrong, because they were contrary to moderation. Seeking pleasure and also procuring knowledge eventually led to a state of peace, or an absence of fear(in greek"atoroxia") and an absence of body pain(in greek"aponia").
As far as religion goes, Epicurus and his followers believed in the gods; but didn't think they had any affect on humanity. They questioned the existence of a higher spirit or deity, especially their relation to anything crucial in the world. If a God did exist,why didn't he prevent evil and suffering? Did his power allow him to do so but he refused out of spite? Or was he just weak and incapable of destroying pain? Epicurus is commonly thought to be an atheist, because of these questioning views. He thought the gods are immoral and better than us, but didn't hold that they cared at all about our well-being and happiness.
Thursday, November 3, 2016
500 Word Essay(English): In what ways was William Penn an advocate of middle class morality?
William Penn's was perhaps the biggest advocate of middle class morality. He took a very neutral stand-point on most things concerning this topic, however. He was never an extremist, favoring one end of the spectrum or another. For instance, he didn't think it was okay for someone to squander all their wealth, like the prodigal son in Matthew. But he found it unacceptable to hoard all of one's money and be a miser. This viewpoint is commonly called Accumulation Vs. Prodigality. He also stood in the middle of the argument "adventurism vs. caution." He believed one should take risks in business and so forth, but not be too reckless or dangerous. Finding a happy medium was the best solution to every case/problem in life, according to William. When it came to charity, he was definitely not opposed to those who choose not to give to other people. He wasn't of the opinion that one was obligated to donate money, unless they felt led to. But if he saw someone who purposely turned a blind eye to suffering, that angered him and was deemed cruel and selfish.
Penn had some strong opinions on how the middle class should view material things, like food and clothes. When it came to eating, he said people shouldn't overeat or indulge in more food than they needed, "hunger vs. satiation". He also argued for, "fashion vs.rags" . William Penn's conviction was that the middle class shouldn't bother with following after the latest fashions and trends. Rather he upheld that they should dress simply and not busy themselves trying to be stylish and wear jewels and so forth. Middle class people played significant roles in society and were very influential and important. Because of this, Penn was extremely specific about how they should conduct themselves. Their behavior would be watched and modeled more carefully, than lower classes. They were blessed with a lot of wealth and position, so they had to be careful how they spent their money/lived their lives.
Penn had some strong opinions on how the middle class should view material things, like food and clothes. When it came to eating, he said people shouldn't overeat or indulge in more food than they needed, "hunger vs. satiation". He also argued for, "fashion vs.rags" . William Penn's conviction was that the middle class shouldn't bother with following after the latest fashions and trends. Rather he upheld that they should dress simply and not busy themselves trying to be stylish and wear jewels and so forth. Middle class people played significant roles in society and were very influential and important. Because of this, Penn was extremely specific about how they should conduct themselves. Their behavior would be watched and modeled more carefully, than lower classes. They were blessed with a lot of wealth and position, so they had to be careful how they spent their money/lived their lives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)