Apology, pages 61-70

"I do not think that it is just for a man to appeal to the jury or to get himself acquitted by doing so; he ought to inform them of the facts and convince them by argument" (Section 35c, page 63).

In this text, Socrates is using himself as an example. Whatever I have read about him, he has not really asked questions about himself. He is usually asking about some random individual, but this time, he shows that he is censoring himself and asking the jury if they think it is right to put him to death or not. Also, I think this text could be good to bring up in the trial: "should Socrates have been put to death or should he have lived?" I might use this as my topic for the trial if we ever have a debate on it.

Apology pages 51-61

"I am not going to alter my conduct, nor even if I have to die a hundred deaths" (page 56, 30c).

This sentence is related to the trial of Socrates because it shows that Socrates was willing to make a decision to accept his penalty as punishment for what he did. He was willing to be sentenced to death. It also brings up a point that Socrates was probably someone who fought in a war before and that he did fight in some of the wars that led up to the trial. It is saying that he is willing to sacrifice his life a hundred times to protect lots of people. So if you look at it in a certain way, he is kind of a savior.

The Apology

"Here is another good point. Tell me seriously, Meletus, is it better to live in a good or in a bad community?" (page 50, section C6-9)

I think the prosecution could use this line because Socrates was born when Athens and Persia were at war and just starting. This question seems like it is asking a good question about where is the best place to live. It seems like it would be better to live in a good community because Sparta, Athens and Persia were all in this argument anyways and Socrates was just in the middle of it. I think it would be better to not be in the war and be in a good community.

Athenian Values in Pericles' Funeral Oration

Honor
Courage
Glory
Democracy
Judgment
Equality
Openness
Love of ancestors

Judgment is something that is complicated to determine. It depends on the subject and what the consequences and action could be. It's one of the most important actions that you have to take in life every day. It's a very big part of philosophy.

Jigsaw

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

This article was about whether freedom is important to America or not. My debate resolution is that an average American would define freedom as being able to do what s/he wants and get what s/he wants.

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

In the First Amendment, the freedom they give us is limited and this is for a good reason. This is because we want to have an organized and civilized country and community. Without the First Amendment, we might not have gotten to where we are today in terms of being a civilized society. Freedom is something that most people want in daily life, but we don't always get it. For instance, I just learned that you can't always do what you want, you have to work to earn that freedom because you don't deserve to be free if you haven't done anything to prove your freedom. One thing about freedom is that some people who don't have money or jobs, or are struggling in school, they may not want to work to get these things, but the only way you can get something in life today is to work for what you want and work for a living. It is basically survival of the fittest. The ones that aren't the fittest are the ones who are getting hurt.

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

CON:
--My definition for freedom is that you can say as much as you want, but if the laws say something different because we are limited in our freedoms.
--Not everyone can say what they want and do what they want, especially if they don't have money or are part of a minority. Often it is more difficult for these people to express themselves and be listened. For example, the Klu Klux Klan makes it difficult for certain people to do and say what they want.

PRO:
--The First Amendment gives people choices and protects them if they say what they want because it gives them freedom of speech.
--The First Amendment also gives people the freedom to believe what they want to believe so they can do what they want.

"The press should be censored in times of crisis."

My reading selection is pro and is called "The Press Should Not Be Censored During Times of Crisis."

Three things that support the pro position:

1. "The only effective restraint upon executive policy and power. . .may lie in an enlightened citizenry."
2. "Paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving people."
3. "The stakes are high. America's great strength has been produced by an open society, where every policy was subject to great debate."

I don't think the press should be censored because I think people have the right to know the truth. Also in the First Amendment it says "that the Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press. . ." (Amendment I, page 127). Therefore, the press has every right to give the people the truth, whether people want to believe or not. And people have the right to determine whether they want to believe the press or not. Also, in Viewpoint there is a quote "A press that is alert, aware and free most vitally serves the basic purpose of the First Amendment. For without an informed and free press there cannot be an enlightened citizenry" (page 48) which backs up what the First Amendment says about the press and it also brings up another point about the purpose of the press. The purpose of the press is to be able to write down what is actually happening and citizens should be able to decide whether they want to know about the information the press is giving them. It is each person's choice whether to listen or read what the press is saying.

Censorship Debate

1) For chapter 1, write three things based on the reading that supports the above resolution. This is the "pro" argument.

--"Copyright are one of the oldest forms of censorship."
--Censorship is not "always and everywhere a threat to our very freedom." Censorship of triple XXX porn on Saturday mornings" is probably a good thing.
--"Campaign finance laws" regulate free speech and this is a good limit to freedom of speech.

2) For chapter 2, write three things based on the reading that goes against the above resolution. This is the "con" argument.

--First Amendment protects people's ability to express their opinions and it's good to hear what other people are thinking.
--The government shouldn't be able to decide whose opinions are "hateful."
--Freedom of speech is a good way to gain knowledge and find truth.

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

My opinion about free speech is that it is something that I have a right to, but I don't have a thorough understanding of what it is or what is involved in it. I agree that things like pornography and racism should be limited. I believe that free speech doesn't mean that everyone is insulting each other 24 hours a day. I believe the laws are made for a reason that helps to keep things in order. I believe free speech is a right, but that there are times when that right needs to be controlled to an extent. I usually don't state my opinion on politics because I don't understand what politicians do. Since I don't know, I don't feel like I should say anything. I do agree with one sentence in the article where it says that speech should be protected. I don't think we should let the government decide what is protected because I think they have been biased against minorities. Free speech lets you be an individual but you have to decide what is worth sharing with others. Government is supposed to keep us in order, but they shouldn't jump into our business.

Imus

1. According to the NAACP, why should Imus be silenced?

The NAACP thinks Imus should be silenced because he called the African American women basketball players a derogatory name. He shouldn't have said something like this live on the radio.

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

Frank Rich says Imus should not be silenced because he is not a bigot and because he has taken responsibility for what he said.

3. Do you think Imus should be silenced? Why?

I think Imus should be silenced because usually you shouldn't call a whole group of people nappy headed ho's on the radio which is broadcasted everywhere. A lot of people are offended by this type of comment. He has the right of free speech, but what was he thinking? Was he thinking at all?

I think it is important to silence people when they are making mean comments because people have different beliefs, some people are offended easily and some people find those words rude. Some people take those words as if something was personally done to them. I believe it is best to think before you speak and I don't think Imus thought before he spoke. Also, there is another idea that says if you don't have something good to say then to not say anything at all. I think Imus should not have said anything if he didn't have something good to say.

I don't really understand the meaning of the words he said and I prefer to keep out of these types of conversations because I don't like to offend anyone. I think people are offended by his comments because people are offended by things about race. But I think we are all of the same race, the human race, and I don't think we should pay attention to skin color. I don't know why Imus said this, but I can't think of any reason why he did say it. Maybe he said it because he has freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech does not mean a person can just go around and say whatever he or she wants. I think people still need to be careful about what they say and how they say it because some people take some words as offensive even if they person who said them don't think of them that way. For example if you call someone a parrot and you thought it was random and silly, but the person might be offended and might feel it is rude. I think when you say things you have to think about how the other person might hear what you are saying.

I think Imus should be silenced. Free speech is a big thing in our country. It's been debated for a long time for a number of reasons. Free speech gives us freedom, but we need to limit it or things can get out of control. If everyone was cussing around every day, it wouldn't make socially and we might end up being barbarians. Our world is supposed to be civilized and we don't want it to be chaotic. We should all just be equal and put all this behind us so we can all get along and have peace. I really don't like it when people offend each other.

Plato, pages 85-93

Why should plays, and acting in them, be regulated? What is potentially beneficial or harmful from acting in a play?

Plays should be regulated because then people can put on a good show and the acting will be better directed. It might be good to regulate plays because then you can control the violence and there isn't as much detail in the battles and the fighting. Plato criticizes how some of the dialogue is written and if a play is regulated, then you can control the dialogue. Plato thinks plays should be edited or banned.

One thing that could be beneficial from acting in a play is that an actor can gain popularity. Something that can be harmful is that people can get jealous about actors and some people may not like the acting and some people may criticize you or hurt your feelings because they have different feelings about the play. Other beneficial things are that plays can be entertaining and make people happy.

Censoring Homer

Why do you think Plato (or anyone else) would want to censor Homer?

I think Plato would censor Homer because there was a lot of violence in the battle scenes. The battle scenes are gory and disturbing. For example, one time Ajax is charging at a soldier. The soldier throws a spear at him that he dodges and then Ajax picks up the spear and throws the spear straight through the soldier's head and then he stabs him. Also, if we were led by a warrior who is only good at fighting and is not in any agreement with politics or who doesn't help his own king, then Plato might want to censor Homer because he doesn't agree with him.

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

Some aspects of poetry that should be banned are made up names of places, the violence in Hesiod and Homer, things that are scary and has sexual content.

What should poetry “teach” and why?

Poetry should teach about every day things and not about sex and violence. Plato thought that poetry should teach about morals.

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

If I were talking to Plato, I would tell him that I think people should choose what they want to read. Each person should be entitled to do what they want to do as long as they stand within the law. However, some books might not be the best for someone to read, like little kids wanting to read some sexual content. A scholar might want to read a book like Tom Sawyer. People should be able to read what they want.

Censoring Hesiod

Why do you think Plato (or anyone else) would want to censor Hesiod?

If Plato was against women having the greater power on earth than he might want to censor Hesiod because Hesiod's whole story shows that the titans Gaia and Rhia are setting up the entire plot. Mother Earth created everything and men just help to give birth. It might also be true that Plato didn't believe in Greek mythology. He might have believed in something else. Or he might have not been a very good friend of Hesiod. He also might have been jealous that Hesiod wrote up the story and then had so much power over the people. Plato's philosophy might not have had that much power.

What are Homer and Hesiod guilty of?
Homer and Hesiod are guilty of writing what they think the gods have said when they don't really know who the gods are. Did the gods actually come to them and tell them all these things? We don't know.

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

The two main characteristics are 1) phenomenal living being that is believed to exist through faith, not by fact and 2) each god is unique, supernatural and has special powers. The laws of story telling based on those characteristics are gods may be written about in any way since they are not easy to describe based on their charactertistics. As long as you follow the laws of their base characteristics, you can write a story about them. Take the Iliad for example. Achilles, Agamenon, Ajax, etc. were all real people who fought in the Trojan War, but it is not proven that gods helped them; but they put them in the story to try to explain about things they didn't really know about.

Compare what you wrote in your personal reflection above with what Plato wrote. How close were you to what Plato wrote?

My personal reflection was only right on one part. He questioned whether the gods were real. He also questioned the behavior of how the stories were written because there were conflicts between families and that is not always the best kind of reading for all ages. He also pointed out that were a lot of really bad lessons in Hesiod's writing.

Socratic Seminar Prompt

9) In the “Simile of the Cave,” do you think there is any part that has to do with the subject of justice?

There certainly is a part that has to do with justice in the Simile of the Cave when a man comes to free the prisoners. When the prisoners see the man for the first time in their life, they kill him. Why? The prisoners seemed scared and uncertain about whom the man was. Also, they were indubitably bringing punishment against the man because they were chained up from birth and they thought the man was the person who chained them up. They acted out of instinct because the first thing in their minds was: “ I’m scared. Attack.”

So what is justice in the story? Judgment. There was no justice. The law was: human instinct and intelligence. Justice was made to keep thing s under control. However, they didn’t have justice in the story, so the prisoners had to rely on their judgment of right and wrong. The prisoners were not limited to do certain things. They didn’t know the laws and they didn’t have laws like we have today which give them a right to know.

In the story justice is viewed in another way. Justice is viewed as common sense. The shadow puppets were the only thing s the prisoners saw when they first opened their eyes and they judged the shadow puppets as reality and the truth. They had been chained up and forced to see that reality is truly justice because everyone is alright with the world if there is no war. This type of justice might be a true path to peace. So in the end, justice exists because the prisoners find the truth and find reality. The prisoners had been fooled their entire lives and acted on inaccurate judgment and they found the reality of truth indubitably at the end. So what justice is in the story is that there is no justice. The law was: human instinct and intelligence.

The Republic, Justice and Happiness

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

Acting "right" or justly means going with the flow and by this I mean that you fit in with the crowd because usually when people do the same things, they get along better. However, sometimes on some conditions, like when you hang out with people like a bank robber and rob a bank, this type of crowd might not be the best kind of crowd to call "just." I try to stay in the middle of things, but stay out of trouble. So I am closer to the "just" side of things.

There are different views of happiness and they all depend on the people you are talking about. Happiness in my definition is basically one of the most complicated parts of life. Happiness affects you and the ones around you strongly just like any other very complicated emotion does. The emotion of happiness is usually something that makes you feel good, pleased with yourself, and makes you feel loved. Happiness makes you feel open-minded. Happiness is a very good feeling. But some kinds of happiness, depending on other types of people, are sometimes considered "bad" views of happiness. Usually if people say that bad things are good and that makes them happy, then most people would say they are crazy.

Sometimes acting right can help happiness because when you do what you are told you are helping someone and you and the other person feel good about what you do. For example, if you have to get your homework done, if you just refuse to do it, you won't get anywhere, and you and the teacher will both be mad and you'll get a bad grade. So it's better to just do the work you are given and then in the end you'll be a lot happier because you'll be free. Freedom is the largest part of happiness because the feeling of being free is like having nothing holding you down. You can just do what you want to do.

Socrates would agree with me but he would probably say that I was right about needing to do the work I was given because that is my responsibility. Being responsible leads to happiness. He would also ask me if being right was the only way to happiness.

The Republic pp. 15-29

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

• rulers may often be mistaken about their own interest
  
• rulers might be wrong
• rules might make bad laws

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

T: --pursuing self interest and injustice pays better than justice and political power is exploiting one class over another

S: --true rulers pursue their subjects' interests but it is natural to pursue self interest

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

In my opinion, you should only harm someone if they have harmed you because if a person starts something then the person needs to be taught a lesson through the same way you were injured. Then the person would know how you feel. Until the person learns the lesson, you should keep repeating the process. Socrates would probably ask me to clarify what I meant and he would think differently. He might ask me "do you think it is right to try and teach this lesson through hurting somebody or do you think you could solve it in a better way." Socrates would say that mentally solving things is a lot less damaging to others. Thrasymachus would probably say that I was wrong and that I shouldn't harm someone no matter what they do to you. You should always just do what is right. If the person did something wrong, they will pay for the consequences. You shouldn't take things into your own hands.

The Republic, Conventional View of Justice Developed

A) In your opinion, is Polemarchus definition of justice, derived from the poet Simonedes, an improvement from his father’s definition?

His father's definition is to tell the truth and pay your debts. Polemarchus says we must be consistent and help and injure both friends and enemies. I don't think his is an improvement over his father's because I think it is hard to understand.

B) What is Simonides definition of justice? Has Polemarchus interpreted him correctly?

Simonides definition of justice is to give everyone their due. Polemarchus, in a way, has interpreted him correctly if you look from the perspective of judgment because if you judge a person you judge them based on whether they are good or bad.

C) What problem does Socrates see in the phrase, “helping one’s friends and harming ones enemies”? Why is this not an accurate definition of justice?

Socrates sees that Polemarchus is confused and he tells him that you must help both your friends and your enemies, that it isn't just to help just your friends.

D) What lesson do you think Socrates/Plato is trying to prove by having Polemarchus give in to Socrates when his father (Cephalus) would not?

Socrates is trying to teach him the truth of what is right and what's wrong and what should be done and what should not be done.

E) Whose argument do you find more convincing, Polemarchus or Socrates? Why?

I find Socrates' argument more convincing because he seems to know more about justice. Socrates' has some very good examples of justice. Socrates explains how transactions between people are like a chess game. He asks if a just man is a "good and useful partner or just a chess player." What this means to me is that justice is like a game and if you are a good person with a open-minded partner and you don't ask questions and just play by the rules, then you are okay. On the other hand, if you try to cheat at the game, then you are a bad person. To summarize this as simply as possible, Socrates seems to be saying if you're good, you're fine; if you're bad, there are consequences.

Definition of a friend

A friend is someone you have a very close bond with and someone you can trust. A friend is someone who respects you for who you are. A friend is someone who admires your personality. A friend is also someone who cares about you and someone who would always want to be there for you. You should treat your friend with the same respect they treat you. That way you each learn a lesson. You should treat your friends better than they treat you. You should always try to help them.

The Republic Prelude

I. Answer the following questions – short answer (about a couple of sentences or more)

• Who are Cephalus and Polemarchus?
  They are friends of Sinonides who argue over how justice works.
  

• What is the profession of Cephalus?
  Cephalus is a a businessman.
  

• What was Cephalus doing right before the discussion that took place?
  He was talking with his sons and some other people out in a courtyard.
  

• According to Cephalus, what are the virtues of old age?
  The virtues of old age are to be free and happy. Old age lets you be free so that in this part of life you don't have to have strong feelings and you can have peace.
  

• What is Cephalus’ view of justice?
  Caphalus' view of justice is if you tell the truth and pay your debts.
  

• What is Socrates response?
  Socrates says that those things are not the definition of doing right.
  

AND

II. Write a one paragraph response to the following question:

• Do you agree with Cephalus or with Socrates? Why? If you don't agree with either of them, write about which one you think makes the stronger argument - even if you think it is not "right" - and why?
  
  I think neither of them is right exactly because justice is based on the law, truth, opinion, and it depends on what is going on. But I also think both of them can be right. It just depends on what you are dealing with. I think Cephalus makes the stronger argument because I actually live by honesty and truth so since I have to pick one of them, I would pick him because I know the kind of way he thinks of things. I also think that telling the truth is the best way to go because usually honesty is better than lying and making things up. And honesty makes things easier. Paying your debts is also the right thing to do because if you owe somebody something and unless they say it is ok not to, you should pay your debts. It is not right to deny something you have done. Denying you are in debt can lead to bad things.
  

AND

III. Try to give this a shot, if you can’t answer it that’s okay: What do you think Cephalus represents? What is particular or unique about his view of justice compared to the others you have discussed in class?

I think Cephalus represents the kind of person who is neutral in the crowd and who tries to do his best. He tries to stay out of trouble by doing what is right. Cephalus' view of justice is similar to one of ours that we have discussed in class. His is about telling the truth and paying your debt which is one of the choices we could discuss.

Simile of the Cave

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

When the prisoner gets outside, he is blinded by the sun's rays. This happens because all of his life he has been in the cave and the only light he has seen was the light's glow that was behind him when he was chained up and they were doing shadow puppets. The only light he saw was the glow. When he gets outside, the sun's rays are much stronger than that light. He can feel the heat of the sun and the ray's are something he has not experienced before since he has been in the cave since birth.

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

The prisoners would try to kill someone who is trying to lead them outside because they wouldn't trust someone they had never seen or knew because they have been in the cave since birth. The only things they saw were silhouettes of hand puppetry that they thought were animals. The only truth they know is what their eyes see. So never having seen a person before might be threatening and make them scared.

3. While reading pages 243-244 (section 517) keep in mind that the cave represents the way society actually is, while the sun (visible outside the cave) represents knowledge that could make for a better society. Don’t let the wording confuse you, Socrates sometimes calls the outside “the intelligible region” and associates it with “the divine.”

What is special about “the intelligible region” and why is it important for public servants/political leaders (p. 244 section 517 b and e) ?

The "intelligible region" is special because it shows the truth and society today is really having a hard time knowing what the truth is in our society. Who is telling the truth? The government? The Republicans? Is anyone telling the truth. Trust is a hard thing. It's a confusing. It's important for political leaders to know the truth because if they know the truth then usually that leads to happiness. It's usually better to tell the truth than to make things up.

4. What is wrong with having uneducated people run society? What is wrong with having intellectuals (i.e. well-educated people) run society (p. 323 section 519c)?

It is wrong to have uneducated people run society because they don't fully understand what they are doing. Usually a good leader is intelligent and knows what's going on in their society. It is wrong to have intellectuals run society because some times people know too much; for example, Ghengis Khan was a brilliant military strategist, but he brought violence to the world of Asia and Europe by conquering all that land. The aftermath was devastating. Sometimes even though someone is an intelligent leader doesn't mean that person is a good leader. Sometimes their personality can be bad.

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

The job of a lawmaker is to use judgment and they are encouraged to have the highest form of knowledge to prevent people from behaving how they shouldn't. Their judgment should be based on justice.

Plato + Fact

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

I was going to X block today, but it turned out I had an unexpected appointment with Phyllis to help me find things to use. I was really shocked by this and I needed to get a Spanish essay done. I was getting really stressed and I got very stubborn, but then later we resolved everything. I found out that I wasn't going to X block when Ephraim said "you have an appointment with Phyllis." I wasn't happy when he told me because I thought I was going to X block. Even though we sorted everything out, I am going to keep a schedule of when I am going to have appointments with Phyllis so I know when they are coming up and I won't have to be surprised or disappointed. Then it won't be a problem if I can keep a schedule and know what's going to happen.

Agamemnon is a good leader

Main Argument: Agamemnon is a good leader.

Evidence

1. He's the king.
2. He's won many wars for Greece.
3. He had to lead an army to fight the wars.
4. He claims he's the best of the Acheans.
5. He has the courage to take away the war prize of one of the most powerful men in Greece who is almost immortal.
6. He motivates his troops (Book 9, Lines 20-30).
7. He has the courage to speak against the gods (Book 9).
8. He's a good fighter.
9. He brought back Chryses' daughter (Book 1, Line 525-530).
10. He formed the army to attack Troy.
11. He inspired the men to fight on even though Achilles wasn't going to fight.
12. He formed the largest army in all Greece.
    

Debate Resolution

Resolution: Achilles is a lot more favored by the gods than Agamemnon.

1. Agamemnon in the Iliad has never prayed to the gods and he has never been favored by the gods.
2. Achilles prayed to the Zeus before Patroclus went to battle.
3. Achilles prayed to Zeus when Agamemnon took Briseis from him.
4. Hera sent Athena to help Achilles make a decision.
5. Achilles' mother knows the gods and is immortal herself.
6. Achilles never asks the gods to help him, but he asks them to punish Agamemnon by helping the Trojans.
7. Zeus said to Achilles that he would grant him his prayer about Patroclus to drive the Trojans from the beach, but Zeus said he could not grant the prayer that Patroclus would live.
8. Achilles also has friends that were favored by the gods. Odyesseus and Ajax are both heroes of Greece and were favored by the gods.

The Iliad Book 16 - Read pp. 434-441 lines 800 - end

Summarization of main points

• There's a lot of fighting
• Patroclus fights and kills most of the imporant commanders of the Trojan army
• Hector fights Ajax
• Ajax dies
• Patroclus dies; he is killed by Hector
  
• The Trojans retreat

Questions

• Did Ajax die or not? I'm confused.
• Why do think Hector kill Patroclus?
  

Pride

One time when I was making something out of foam, I didn't know that I was cutting into our carpet. I thought I was doing something good, but then in the end, I got in trouble because I cut the carpet. I was so busy feeling good about what I was making that I didn't care about what I was doing to part of my house. I know people do this often where they don't think about what is going on because they feel so good about something else. I felt very badly later when I realized that I had ruined the carpet my parents paid for. I tried to fix it and I was able to fix it in a way that you couldn't really see where it was cut, but still I wish I had not done this.

My pride is similar to Achilles. He thought he was doing something right, but in the end when he battles for the final time, he falls to an arrow in his heel and dies.

Iliad Reading Notes--Book 16, lines 1 -333

1. What does Patroclus propose to Achilles and what is Achilles’ response? Why does Achilles grant Patroclus’ request?

Patroclus asks Achilles if he can lead them into battle and Achilles agrees. Achilles agrees because he still has rage about what Agamemnon did to him and he can't seem to stop being angry.

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

Patroclus means that Achilles is so confident of his strength that he can't control it. I don't agree with this because he seems to control his strength. He was able to decide not to kill Agamemnon and he stuck to that decision.

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

I don't really understand why Achilles accepts Patroclus' request?

Who is Patroclus?

Is Patroclus a friend of Agamemnon?

Did Ajax die?

Iliad Reading Notes 521-869

1. Who is the character Phoenix?

Before reading this section, I thought Achilles a lot smarter than Agamemnon. I also thought he was more independent than the other soldiers. I also thought he was very brave but after reading it, I don't understand why he is staying out of the fighting. I think he might be afraid that he is going to die and that he might want to spend some time with his friends. I think it is kind of similar to the way Jesus died, how he had a last supper with his friends. Achilles' story reminds me of that.

Who is speaking? Phoenix
What does that person say and to whom does he say it? Achilles--trying to convince not to sail home from battle
What persuasive strategy is it? appeal to emotion
Why is it an example of that strategy? he's calling Achilles a coward for his actions

Who is speaking? Achilles
What does that person say and to whom does he say it? Phoenix--Achilles tells him why he doing what he's doing
What persuasive strategy is it? appeal to ethics
Why is it an example of that strategy? Achilles says he'll think about overnight and decide what is right to do

Who is speaking? Ajax
What does that person say and to whom does he say it? Odysseus--he's telling him there work is done
What persuasive strategy is it? appeal to logic
Why is it an example of that strategy? because he is telling him the way things are

Iliad Reading notes Lines 1-522

1. Who is Ajax?

Before reading this section, I thought at first that Agamemnon was someone who cheated on his wife, who slept with other women, who ws selfish and greedy and ruthless. I basically thought he was the worst type of person you would find around today. I also thought he was a cry baby. After reading this section, I don't really think he has changed much. He shows that he really is a cry baby. He tries to give everything away ust to get Achilles back into the war. I think he plans that once Achilles gets inside Troy and if he dies that then Agamemnon will get everything back.

Who is speaking? Nestor
What does that person say and to whom does he say it? Agamemnon's men--he tells them to take the message to Achilles that King Agamemnon is offering him gifts to get him back into war
What persuasive strategy is it? appeal to emotion
Why is it an example of that strategy? because it's appealing to Achilles feelings about getting gifts

Who is speaking? Odysseus
What does that person say and to whom does he say it? Achilles-- he tells him what Agamemnon said; what Nestor ordered him to tell Achilles
What persuasive strategy is it? appeal to emotion
Why is it an example of that strategy? because he is trying to scare Achilles into acting

Who is speaking? Achilles
What does that person say and to whom does he say it? Ajax and Odysseus--he tells them to take a message to Agamemnon to sail home because he will never take Troy
What persuasive strategy is it? appeal to logic
Why is it an example of that strategy? Achilles lays out the options for Agamemnon or he can fight and possibly die

Disagreement with a friend

Once upon a time, my friend and I were in an argument about whether how I was making my boofer weapons. Boffer weapons are medieval weapons made out of PVC pipe, foam and duck tape. My friend and I were arguing about whether mine that I made were safe or not. I thought they were just fine, but sometimes accidents happen. My friend said I didn't have enough foam on them to cushion the blow. This argument went on and on, and soon it ended because my friend couldn't take anymore of the argument. I then said to him that he needed to learn to take risks. My friend is still angry for the way I make my weapons, but we work around it. I hope this won't do anything big to our friendship.

Iliad Reflection 2/22--as an ancient Greek

If you were an ancient Greek, which of the following statements would you agree with?
A) Achilles’ rage is justified and I support his decision not to fight, even if it means the Greeks might lose lots of men, or even the war itself.

I agree that Achilles' rage is justified and I support his decision not to fight because he's making his own choice and everyone has a right to make their own choice. Not even the gods should be able to defy a person's choices. Achilles had a choice to listen to Athena or not. Athena said, "Down from the skies I come to check your rage if only you will yield. . .Stop this fighting" (Lines 242-245). He could have killed Agamemnon and ended the war right there, but he chose to listen to Athena. He said, "Goddess, a man submits though his heart breaks with fury" (Line254). But I understand why he didn't fight even if his heart was breaking with fury. He knew he could be remembered one day in a story like the Iliad and it might mean a lot to die with your name known in history instead of dying as a murderer (which unfortunately he ultimately did anyway).

Iliad Reading Notes Lines 408-506

Things that confused me about the reading:
· I was confused by how the dialogue was traded between characters. At times, I wasn’t sure who was saying what and what they were trying to say.
· When you just read the story without reading chapters, this story makes more sense. It doesn’t make so much sense when you have to stop all the time. I actually want to read more.

Important things that happen
· Achilles asks for help. I think it’s kind of strange that almost immortal man asks for help.
· He asks his mother for help.
· A new character, Odysseus appears in the story. He prays and makes a sacrifice to Apollo.
· Apollo answers his prayers by ceasing the plague. He also stops shooting his arrows.
· The men were singing when they noticed the plague ended. Apollo was the god of music and he was pleased to see them singing about him.
· It’s important to remember that there is joy in the world.

Iliad Reading Notes IV

What is the most important thing that happens in Lines 334-407?

I think the conversations between Achilles and Agamemnon arguing are the most important thing that happen in this section because it shows the emotions the characters have and it expresses how they are feeling.

Iliad Reading Notes III

Iliad Reading Notes
Book 2
2/15/07



Summaries of the stanzas

Stanza 220
· Achilles is just about to decide whether he should kill Agamemnon or not when Hera sent Athena down from the heavens.
Stanza 230
· Achilles asks why Athena has come down—to see the truth of what Agamemnon has done?
Stanza 240
· Athena tells Achilles not to kill Agamemnon because Hera loves them both and Achilles asks why.
Stanza 250
· Achilles put his sword away and he ceased from killing Agamemnon.
Stanza 260
· Athena goes back up to Olympus.


Questions about the reading:

1. Why is this part of the story so important?
2. Do you think Achilles would have killed Agamemnon if the gods didn’t come and interfere in his decision?

Predict what will happen next

I think Agamemnon will make things much worse because he wants Helen back for himself. I think he will make things worse by going to Troy and chaos will start up.

Iliad Reading Notes II

Summaries of the stanzas

Stanza 80
· Achilles asks the seers why Apollo is angry with them.
Stanza 90
· Calchas said he would tell Achilles the answer if he swears to protect Calchas whenever he tries to talk to the king, Agamemnon.

Stanza 100
· Achilles agrees and swears by the god Apollo that he will never let a soldier or Agamemnon lay a hand on Calchas.
Stanza 110
· Calchas says that Apollo is angry with Agamemnon because he burned his priest so the priest prayed to the god and Apollo answered his prayer to keep the plague going on until they carry out a task.


Questions about the reading:

1. Why do you think Achilles agreed to protect Calchas?
2. Why does Calchas want to be protected when he hasn’t been involved with Agamemnon and the other priest?

Predict what will happen next

I think Achilles will try to complete the task to stop the plague and I think he will succeed.

The Iliad Questions and Comments 1 -118

Questions

1. Why are they fighting over two people who are in love?
2. Why can't they just let them be--Paris and Helen?
3. Are there any reasons why you should think they shouldn't be together? If so, please post in your comments.
4. Who are your favorite characters in the story so far? My favorite is Apollo.

Iliad Reading Notes

Iliad Reading Notes
Book 1
2/13/07

Summaries of the stanzas

Stanza 30
· Greeks ask Agamemnon to ask a ransom but he refuses
Stanza 40
· Priest asks the god Apollo to bring wrath upon Agamemnon

Stanza 50
· Apollo hears the priest’s prayer and comes down from Mt. Olympus with his bow and arrow in rage
Stanza 60
· Apollo fires upon Agamemnon’s army
Stanza 70
· Achilles says that if they sacrifice a lamb to Apollo maybe he will defend them against the plague


Questions about the reading:

1. What is Achilles’ trying to say in Stanza 70? What are they supposed to do?
2. Why do you think the priest asked Apollo to attack Agamemnon’s army?

Predict what will happen next

I think Apollo will keep on attacking, but he will put a plague, not on the army, but on the city instead.

My Rage- Cause

I'm angry because I don't always get what Want. I hate it when I am selfish. When I feel that way I don't think about anything but myself. It's bad for expressing myself and it's wrong.
But why do people want to be selfish? I think it's because they want attention, happiness, love, and power. It's hard to control rage. It's like a crisis that stop on its own will. Anger will forever be a phenomena of endless mystery.

Extra Credit: What would Bradbury have thought about blogging?

I think Bradbury would be amazed that I could write a story on a device that will keep it posted in its memory forever. So I will never have to worry about my work getting destroyed by being burnt. I think Bradbury would have thought blogs would be an excellent form of communication for Mildred and Montag because they could express their thinking easier by typing it instead of having to talk and listen to one another. I think they would communicate more often because blogging would be new and something exciting that would be easier and better than talking to one another.

Revised D.P. 2/9

Montag thought, "Oh my god, he's coming closer.

What's he going to do?

Is he going to kill Mildred?

Will he kill me?

Will he kill Faber?

What I need to do is pull this trigger.

Why does he keep coming closer?

Where's the hound? Where's the hound? Where's the hound?

I know it's here.

Why is he coming closer to me?

I think I'm going to . . ."

And then fire came from the nozzle.

2/8 Descriptive Writing Assignment

Montag thought, "Oh my god, he's coming closer. What's he going to do? Is he going to kill Mildred? Will he kill me? Will he kill Faber? What I need to do is pull this trigger. Why does he keep coming closer? Where's the hound? Where's the hound? Where's the hound? I know it's here. Why is he coming closer to me? I think I'm going to . . ." And then fire came from the nozzle.

2/6 - Hesiod Writing Assignment

Explain how Zeus came to power. Write about these following issues: How is he similar/different to Uranus or Cronos? Is his grip on power secure or fragile? Explain why or why not.

First at the beginning of time, Gae--young earth who later becomes mother earth after she marries the sky Uranus, and then eventually she gives birth to Cronos and Cronos overthrows Uranus. Then Cronos fears that one of his off-spring will do the same to him so he swallows each of his children each time his wife gives birth. When his sixth child was born, Rhea--Cronos' wife--asked Mother Earth for help. Mother Earth had been waiting for this and she has been controlling the destiny of all of her children. Gae helps Rhea and when Rhea gives birth, Rhea gives Cronos a stone to swallow instead of the child. Rhea takes Zeus, the new born child, to an island where he is raised. Once he grows up, he defeated Cronos and freed his brothers and sistesrs.

Zeus is similar to Cronos because he overthrows his own father; however he is not like him because Zeus is a god and not a Titan. Zeus is like Uranus because he was a father to many children just like Uranus. Zeus had conflicts with Rhea just like Uranus. After Zeus came into power, Gae got upset with Zeus for putting the Titans--her sons into the underworld.

Zeus' power is secure because he is immortal and he's a really good leader.

Descriptive Writing: 2/7

Page 113--scene of Montag arriving at his house and he has to burn it

numb
featureless
burdensome
fire eaten
clenching rigidity
warped glass
incomprehensible storm
queer
nuzzling gout

These words were good to represent fear because they show things. Numb means you can't feel or can't move and that means you are so afraid or are intimidated. You might be so numb that your face would be featureless. Anything that is described as fire eaten reminds me of something that is reduced to ash and this is scary. Something that is incomprehensible is scary because you can't understand it and it's really a good way to describe chaos and that is something that is feared.

I'm not really sure what "gout" is, but a nuzzling gout sounds scary.

Descriptive words

The three words from my descriptive paragraph are: hairy, lumbering and eight.

Lumbering describes a large thing's way of moving and it describes its shape as well.

From Junior's blog, I really like the word "thorny" because it is used in a lot of different phrases like you are a thorn in my side. Thorns are usually pointy. I think what Junior was trying to say was that the papers were an annoyance to him so he just put them in his backpack to do when he got home.

Amiry's description of a brass "circular" lever makes me think of a door opening. It tells the shape. It sounds like a doorknob rotating. It's very, very descriptive and almost mysterious.

Farenheit 451, pages 154 to the end

1. I would like your opinion on what you think about this last sentence in the book: "Yes, thought Montag, that 's the one I'll save for noon. For noon. . .When we reach the city." What is your opinion of this sentence.

2. I commented on RG's blog.

3. What does Granger mean when he says, quoting his grandfather, “Shake the tree and knock the great sloth down on his ass”? Why is this quote important? How does it fit into the novel, what is Bradbury trying to say with this?

I think that Bradbury is trying to say that when a person is lazy, you need to knock sense into him or her and make him or her come to their senses and realize the truth. I like the way Bradbury included the sloth. It was a very good way to show an example with laziness being a lesson. This quote is important because Montag didn't know whether books were important or not during the whole novel. Finally, and every time someone tried to knock sense into him, like when Captain Beatty did, he was still uncertain. When he talked to Faber, he trusted him and tried to help him find the truth. He did find the truth, but at a price. But he must realize that life is not always fair and that is another important thing that Bradbury shows.

Farenheit 451, pages 138-154

Questions about this section of the book

1. Who is the character Granger? Is he a poet?
2. Why did they fake Montag's death?

After Montag escapes, he finds a camp of people and they give him this stuff that will make him not be able to be sensed by the mechanical hound. On a TV that they have in the camp, it shows that Montag is being killed, but they don't show the man's face; so basically they are faking his death. But Montag is at the camp so they are just trying to cover up and keep the society the way it is. Most of the people were book burners and they had books and that's why they came to the camp because it is a refuge for people like Montag.

Farenheit 451 pp. 126-137

I like this part of the book because in this part of the book Montag is a really different person. He doesn't really care anymore about whether he is confused or not. It just seems like he is just trying to survive. For example, he's using his own instincts to protect himself. He used to do what everyone else did and now he's free. He's not like a worker ant anymore. If you have seen the movie "Ants," it's about this one ant who stands out in this ant colony because he doesn't really think that the way things are is right. He doesn't like his job or life. So he leaves the colony because he commits a crime and basically finds this place called Insectopia and it was a place that colony knew about but never told anyone. In the end, the colony changes and becomes independent. But it's similar for Montag because he's killed people and committed a crime. Now he's on the run from a new mechanical hound and a fireman and he's wanted for murder. He can't think of anything else except to get away and free. There's only one thing he can try to do: survive.

Farenheit 451, pg 110-125

1. Basically, Montag's wife left him and he's forced to burn his house. He also murders Captain Beatty.

2. "And then he was a shrieking blaze, a jumping , sprawling, gibbering mannikin, no longer human or known, all writhing flame on the lawn as Montag shot one continuous pulse of liquid fire on him."

This sentence appeals to my eyes and nose and taste. I can imagine the scene very clearly because of the words the author uses to describe the scene. The words that are most effective are "shrieking, jumping, sprawling, gibbering." The words show that he has gone from being human to being on fire. These words might even describe rage or anger. It feels like the flames are being shot out of a fire hose and I can feel them spreading everywhere.

Farenheit 451, pages 91-110

In the first scene at home in the living room, Montag came into the house and Mildred and some of her friends were watching a show called "The Parlor." It seems like the shows in this world are pretty violent. The comedy is kind of violent.

In the second scene in the fire house with Beatty, Montag is playing a game of poker with Beatty. He gives me a book that he throws away. Faber has Montag listen to what Beatty is saying and he is like a mole for Faber.

Strong adjectives or verbs

"Two minutes more and the room whipped out of town to the jet cars wildly circling an arena, bashing and backing up and bashing each other again."

This sentence describes the time--two minutes. The words "whipped out of town" sounds like they are going some place in the future. It feels like the cars are hovering and going very fast and then all of a sudden there is an accident. The words "bashing and backing up and bashing up again" gives me a sense that the drivers are angry and are trying to hurt each other. It feels like everything is going crazy.

My question about this section is: "is Captain Beatty considered a friend to Montag?"

Descriptive essay: something I look forward to

One thing I am looking forward to is the third Pirates of the Caribbean movie. It might seem a little silly to you, but it will give me a lot of joy when I see the first preview. I will be very energetic and excited and eager. The movie will probably inspire me and it will make me feel kind of like I am one of them--someone on the high seas with a cutlass in my hand and ready to take on anything. I can imagine hearing the guns blast, the water spray on my face, the wind circling around me and being seasick. I will also feel the hard wood on the ship because it is kind of like a Spanish galleon. I imagine I would feel cold and my stomach might not feel so good. I also feel very lucky that I was born before these movies were made so I can see them all.

Farenheit 451 pages 81-91

1. Why does Faber want Montag to listen in on the firemen and what is the thing he gives him--the small metal thing?

2. I answered Chris' question about ripping apart the Bible.

3. Faber's plan of action is to plant books in the firehouses all around the country so the firehouses would be burnt down and it would create suspicion. Although at first this was a joke, he says it really wouldn't work because he can't figure out who would plant the books and start the fires. Faber says you can't trust people which is probably true. Basically there are two problems: trust and a lot of people would have to follow what they want to do. They don't have any way to trust all the people even if they get them.

Farenheit 451 pages 71-80

What am I confused about?

I am confused when Montag reads this page in a book: "We cannot tell the precise moment when friendship is formed. As in filling a vessel drop by drop, there is at last a drop which makes it run over; so in a series of kindnesses there is at last one which makes the heart run over." What do you think this means?

B. How will books get us out of "the cave?" What is the cave and how will books get us out of it?

I think the cave is the question or the riddle trying to be solved. And the books provide the answers or hints to the answers for the question or riddle. I think this because caves are dark and they are very hollow and empty and full of mystery. When you are in a cave, you never know what might happen next and that is just like a question or riddle. When you are trying to get out of a cave, you just need to find a way out by using your intelligence just like when you try to solve a riddle or answer a question. If you were in a cave and you only had a book, how could you get out of the cave? I think books give us knowledge and you could use the knowledge to help you; for example, the book might be full of information or might have a map. Once you finish reading the book, you might find your answer.

Captain Beatty's opinoin about ignorance

Captain Beatty would say it is better to be ignorant and happy than to be aware, educated and disturbed at the world because what else would you want in life? There are so many people in the world and he says "our civilization is so vast that we can't have our minorities upset and stirred. What do we want in this country above all? People want to be happy, isn't that right?" (pg. 59) He says that people want to have pleasure and even Montag agrees with what Captain Beatty says. Montag actually answers yes after Captain Beatty asks "what else would you want in life."

Captain Beatty also says it is better to be ignorant because if people aren't, they start asking questions. Eventually this will lead people to something bad, to something good, or right back to the beginning where they were in the first place. People might get into something they might not want to get into. For example, one time Captain Beatty read a book and in the Farenheit 451 it says you can only have a book for 24 hours and then you have to burn it. Captain Beatty says "the books say nothing! Nothing you can teach or believe. They're about nonexistent people, figments of imagination, if they're fiction. And it they're nonfiction, it's worse, one professor calling another an idiot. . .You come away lost" (pg 62). Captain Beatty says it's better to not know anything or be happy because then you don't get lost.

Clarisse and Mildred

One thing I find confusing about the book is the mechanical hound. What is it? Also, I am confused about why they burn books?

Clarisse seems more mature than Mildred because she seems to know things that were from the past. She evens knows things that Montag doesn't know. Clarisse also pays better attention to Montag than Mildred does. Even though Mildred is married and Clarrise isn't, she seems more mature because she talks more to Montag and she actually acts like she is older. She asks questions and seems more interested in the world.

People in the novel are similar to people today because they have the same types of problems like drugs and trouble in their marriages. People in the book are different because for example the firemen didn't save the woman in the book when her house was on fire. Today firemen would save the woman. Also the firemen start fires and don't put them out and they burn books.

What I dread

I dread being in front of a lot of people. I dread bees and spiders. I also dread getting splinters. I dread spiders because mostly they have eight legs and some spiders have different number of eyes. Some of them are poisonous and they might bite me. However if I leave them alone, the leave me alone.

Personal post about Davy Jones

"Do you fear death? Do you fear that dark abyss?"

- Davy Jones
to the regions of hell at the bottom of the sea, the infinite abyss to "Davy Jones Locker".

Fahrenheit 451 pp. 3-21

1. What does the word "hearth" mean?
2. Mildred and Montag seem to disagree with each other and don't listen to each other. At one point, Mildred said she was "obviously waiting for him to go" (Page 20). They don't seem to like each other very much. Mildred never pays attention to Montag. She reads his lips because she has things in her ears, but she doesn't speak in response. She just nods her head.

homework draft

Interesting.Very intense, disturbing (a bit) and scary. It reminds me of that creature on your desk. I thought something was on my head controlling my thoughts. Strange don’t you think? Has this been 1 paragragh? The plastic part I don’t get though. I can't think of anything that I wanted to say in response except a puzzle you could do in your spare time:

hint: 2 I`s, 2 N`s, and 2 T`s

e s r g