Platos Apology

The quote I chose is on page 41 section 19a. It started the line above 19a and goes all the way down to the end of the paragraph.

The reason why I chose this is because its talks about how this started, and also he says he has a short amount of time to sway their minds. He lays down what he will do and that he WILL follow the law. Showing that Socrates shows respect for the law and that he doesn't disregard it. This is why is would be good information for the defence, because he said that he will follow the laws for his defence.

Athenian Values

Here are what I think the Athenian values are.

Tradition
Honoring ancestors
Courage/"manliness"
Being Kind to other people
freedom
equal rights

Equal rights and freedom, would be great points. For the defense, the reason being that Socrates was expressing his equal rights and freedom. Being able to teach the youth is in his freedom. He has the right to teach the youth just as much as any other person. Equal rights, an Athenian value, they are being hypocritical, lets let everybody teach except Socrates. Also, we wont let him be free and accuse him of heresy. So, these points would be great for the defense to point out the weakness in their argument if they bring these up anyway.

Goodbye

Burning Flag

After working long and hard on this, my stupid computer froze up and exited. So this will be a shortened version, but still good.

I read about flag burning and if it was freedom of speech or not. There were points saying it was, but also saying it wasn't. So, this is a good topic. A resolution to this could be, if burning flags expresses your feelings, and freedom of speech says that you can express your feeling, also if the U.S. Supreme Court states that burning flags is freedom speech, if the government says it should be banned, wouldn't they be contradicting themselves.
The reason why this is important is because it talks about your right. Changing freedom of speech can change our daily lives so much, not being able to do or say certain things would change everything for the worse. When you are told not to do something, you really want to do it, you feel like you have to do it. This small change could affect more than one thing in our society too, while (if there is a change) changing this, the government might want to change something else that can affect the society.

Two Points For Flag Burning is Speech:
The U.S. Supreme Court said, flag burning is freedom of speech, therefor protected.
The next, is that, freedom is what founded this county, taking even the smallest bit of our freedom could change everything. "I am offended when I see the flag burned or treated disrespectfully. "As offencive and painful this is, I still believe that those dissenting voice need to be heard. This country is unique n special because the minority, the unpopular, the dissenters and the downtrodden, also have a voice and are allowed to be heard in whatever way they choose to express themselves that does not harm others."

Two Points Flag Burning is Bad:
Burning the flag is an isult to our country, it discraces where we live.
Another, is that "Speech is when you talk." not burning flags. Since burning a flag is not talking, then it dosent apply to freedom of speech.

Plato's Republic

2. What is your reaction to the ending of the section? What is good and/or bad about the type of society outlined by Socrates?

When I finished reading this section, I thought about what life would be like without plays and poems, art in general. I came to the conclusion that is would be terrible, being able to express feeling, having emotions people need that. If there was no art, poems, plays the world would be boring, there would be nothing to make a person unique. Nobody would be able to express how they really felt. I, personally wouldn't see any good of Socrates society, it would be boring and dull. If Socrates was trying to achieve perfect society, this would not be it, this would be the opposite. Nobody would be interesting, nobody would be different.

Homer Assignment

Like what we talked about in class, Homer talks about the gods killing and fighting. But, the gods are good, and good things don’t fight, so it makes the gods image bad and teaches children about fighting. Also, Achilles, especially Achilles because he was the Geeks hero, he was the greatest fighter, but, as we read he refused to fight, he refused to fight for his honor. But, that could have been taken as selfishness, or being a coward, Homer was censored to not teach the children any of the bad qualities.

The reason why some parts of poetry should be banned is because the Guardians would become “god-fearing”. That would be bad, because the Guardians would grow up being afraid of the gods, the upper-beings that control everything. Also Plato (Socrates) says that Homer should stop making the after-life seem so gloomy, because then the Guardians would become afraid of death, instead valiantly charging into battle, not afraid of death, even hoping to die.

Poetry should teach not that gods are evil, but good. They should not “persuade our young men that the gods are the source of evil, and that heroes are no better than ordinary mortals.” That is what is taught in the poetry, that the gods are evil and the heroes are great, when the gods are good and the heroes are no different that normal people.

I would agree with that because, the gods are always portrayed as terrible beings that do bad things and act like humans. When really, they are greater and better than humans, the gods should have nothing to do with humans or doing anything that has to do with humans. I think, like Plato, the gods should not be explained as bad, or evil, or like humans, they should be described as perfect beings that are 100% good.

Homer Assignment

Like what we talked about in class, Homer talks about the gods killing and fighting. But, the gods are good, and good things don’t fight, so it makes the gods image bad and teaches children about fighting. Also, Achilles, especially Achilles because he was the Geeks hero, he was the greatest fighter, but, as we read he refused to fight, he refused to fight for his honor. But, that could have been taken as selfishness, or being a coward, Homer was censored to not teach the children any of the bad qualities.

The reason why some parts of poetry should be banned is because the Guardians would become “god-fearing”. That would be bad, because the Guardians would grow up being afraid of the gods, the upper-beings that control everything. Also Plato (Socrates) says that Homer should stop making the after-life seem so gloomy, because then the Guardians would become afraid of death, instead valiantly charging into battle, not afraid of death, even hoping to die.

Poetry should teach not that gods are evil, but good. They should not “persuade our young men that the gods are the source of evil, and that heroes are no better than ordinary mortals.” That is what is taught in the poetry, that the gods are evil and the heroes are great, when the gods are good and the heroes are no different that normal people.

I would agree with that because, the gods are always portrayed as terrible beings that do bad things and act like humans. When really, they are greater and better than humans, the gods should have nothing to do with humans or doing anything that has to do with humans. I think, like Plato, the gods should not be explained as bad, or evil, or like humans, they should be described as perfect beings that are 100% good.

Republic Assignment

A reason why somebody might want to censor Hesiod is because of what he wrote. I know that Socrates did not believe in the god’s, I am guessing the Plato didn’t either. That is one reason; another is because he is putting ideas in people’s heads that could change everyday lifestyle. People would be less concerned about what they did, because they thought that the gods might help or protect them. The God’s would be an excuse to relax, not do work, and just wait for the God’s to do something for them. Plato might have thought that people would become lazy and wanting thing to happen to them, instead of actually working towards something. That is why I think Hesiod might be censored.

Homer and Hesiod are guilty of making stories that create bad images. In most of the stories, somebody is banished from the heavens; also as I said they create something inside a person. The bad ideas portrayed in the books sparks wickedness, it brings the idea of hurting somebody. But, Socrates wanted the guardians to be good all around. He did not want them to have the ideas of hurting involved. Home and Hesiod are guilty of creating bad images in a persons mind. Fighting.

The first one mentioned was they Gods are good. They should be portrayed as good then, and not evil. The second one is that God is “is a kind of magician who can appear at will in different forms at different times...” God is a magician, he can do whatever he/she wants whenever he/she wants (I am saying he/she because nobody knows….). The laws of storytelling are, always make the God/Gods do something good, not have the banish somebody or harm people, the stories have to tell the good of the gods. The next, is that the Gods should be able to do whatever they want, they should not be limited by anything.

I was way off, what I said was that the people would become lazy, what Plato said, was that the reason why are because they are lies, and they say bad things about gods. When you think of a god, you think of an omnificent being, perfect, mainly good. The stories the Homer and Hesiod tell, say bad things, they say things that give the gods a bad image.

Might Make Right

Does might make right?

I actually think it does, the reason is because of the government. The government is strong, they create laws. Those laws people abide by, they abide by them because they are afraid of the government, afraid of their strength. Afraid what the government can do. Because of this, might makes right, strength makes people follow the law. If there were no laws, people would do anything, the government prevents that, they scare the people into being just. In Plato’s Republic Thrasymahcus says the justice, is in the stronger parties interest. In other words, whoever has more power makes something right. I find this true because it is the reality we live in; people follow the law because they are afraid of the punishment. To sum up, might, in my opinion makes “right”.

Justice & Happiness

Justice and happiness are completely different things. Justice, to me, is what is morally right. By that I mean what is the right thing to do, the choice between helping an old man cross a street or letting him fall on the ground. The obvious right thing, is to help the old man, it is what it overall the right thing. Happiness to me is when you no longer have any wants. The reason why I say this is because, when you no longer want anything, you are content with what you DO have. Because you are happy with what you have and you no longer want anything. I am not truly happy, because I desire things, I want things. But, once I get the things I desire, I become closer to happiness. Being right, or just, to me helps you on your way to happiness. The reason why I say this is because you could feel better about yourself. It would bring you happiness to have done the right things, like helping the old man. Whenever I help somebody, it always make me feel good, it makes me happy to know that I have done something to better somebody’s life. I can’t tell you if Socrates would agree with me, because he can’t be happy, I also couldn’t tell you if he would agree with my definition of justice, because he hasn’t given his opinion on justice. He still wants things; I think only a truly happy person could agree with me. But, I know for a fact the Thrasymahcus would disagree with me, on both happiness and justice. The reason why he won’t agree on justice is because he has a strong opinion. He didn’t sway his answer when Socrates questioned him.

Justice Opinion 3

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?

Socrates says that when the government or captain, that the orders they give are in the interest of the subordinates, not the leader. “So that a captain in this sense is in control, but will not give his orders with his own interest in view, but that of the crew which he controls.” This a good point because it is true, when the subordinate gets the task, it is there interest because it shows their skill. “No ruler of any kind, qua ruler, exercises his authority, whatever its sphere, with his own interest in view, but that of the subject of his skill. It is his subject and his subject’s proper interest to which he looks in all he says and does.” It is in the subordinate’s interest to live up to their title.

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

One of Thrasymahcus main points is, justice is good for the stronger party, at the expense of the subject that obeys the stronger party. One main point of Socrates is, injustice does not pay better than justice. That brings up Thrasymahcus other point, injustice pays more than justice. “…no profession or art or authority provides for its own benefit but, as we said before, provides and orders what benefits the subject, of which it is in charge, thus studying the interest of the weaker party and not the stronger.” That is Socrates next point, most jobs don’t do anything for themselves. The product of their work usually goes to the public, mainly the weaker party, not the stronger.

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

I think that harming somebody should only be if they attack first. It should only be used in self defense. The reason why I say this is because fighting never solves anything, it only leads to worse situation. A just man should never use violence; a just man should find a way around fighting. That is something that Socrates would say, that is basically what the told Polemarchus. He said that fighting is never the right thing that a just man would never right. Thrasymahcus would probably say something along the lines of the only time you should fight is if you are the stronger man. To me it seems that Thrasymahcus is about strength, because of his opinion on justice. He would say fight if you are strong because if you are weaker, then you will surly lose and be hurt, but if you are stronger, take advantage of the weaker man and defeat him.

What is a Friend?

A friend is somebody that you cant trust, sticks by your side, and is always there. To me a friend is one of the most important things in the world. The way to act toward a friend is to be yourself. That is what is great with friends, when you are with real friends, you can be yourself. Your friends dont care what you act like, they dont care if you are weird or strange, the reason is becase they know you, as you. Also, you have to treat your friends with respect, you have to treat them nice. Friends are one of the best things in the world, only if you can be yourself and have fun.

Justice Opinion 2

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

I would have to say no. The reason why is because the first one is all about truthfulness and repaying your debts. The second one involves fighting, in no situation should fighting be used. That is my opinion, but I think the first definition of justice is right.

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

Siomonides definition of justice is “That it is right to give every man his due”. I think that Polemarchus interpreted this wrong. The reason why I think this is because Polemarchus stance on justice is to help your friends, but harm your enemies. I personally couldent see how Polemarchus could have pulled hurting your enemies from giving every man his due. Giving a man his due to me is repaying, giving back. I could be wrong, but I think Polemarchus interpreted him wrong.

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?

The problem he sees is defining who is good or bad. “ ‘But don’t men often make mistakes, and think a man honest when he is not, and vice versa’ ‘Yes, they do’ ‘In that case their enemies are good and their friends bad.’ ” You can say to harm a friend, but hurt an enemy, but it doesn’t specify who is good or bad. Unlike in the first, it says to help others and be honest. That is why this cant be right, because good or bad cant be defined.

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

This could be because Cephalus is older, he is wiser, and he has lived longer. But Polemarchus has not lived as long and couldn’t know as much as his father. Socrates/Plato could be trying to teach people to respect your elders because they are knowledgeable.

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

I find Socrates argument much stronger. The reason why I think this is one because in the end Polemarchus changes his mind and sides with Socrates. That is an example of a strong argument, two, because Socrates says “ ‘ Then, Polemarchus, it is not the function of the just man to harm either his friends harm either his friends or anyone else, but of his opposite, the unjust man.’ ” He says that a just man would never harm anyone, because that would be unjust. That was the turning point of Polemarchus, that was also a strong quote because it says that is morally right. The morally right thing is to never harm your enemies, because bringing harm unto somebody is unjust.

Justice Opinion 1

Who are Cephalus and Polemarchus?
Cephalus is an old man, he is the father of Polemarchus. Cephalus at the start talks about old age, how he perceives his age and how other people think of their age. Polemarchus is as I said Cephalus son, at the start he doesn’t talk to much, but at the end Cephalus leaves so I am guess that Polemarchus is going to talk soon.

What is the profession of Cephalus?
I am not to sure if he has a job, he never really talked about it. He just talked about the money he inherited.

What was Cephalus doing right before the discussion that took place?
He was sacrificing something. There was a festival and he was sacrificing something for a goddess. One of the events was a relay race on horses.

According to Cephalus, what are the virtues of old age?
I think he was saying because he is old, there is nothing else for him to do. Unlike when he was young, all he has to do now is think about everything.

What are Cephalus’ view of justice?
He thinks to tell the truth and repay all of your debts.

What is Socrates response?
He says that sometimes it is better to tweak the truth. That sometimes telling the truth can lead to bad things. He also thinks that sometimes it is not best to return something.

I agree with both of them, I think that it is right to tell the truth, and right to repay people. But, not all the times would I give something up right away and always tell the truth. Sometimes I would tweak the truth to make somebody happier, and as Socrates said about borrowing “For instance, if one borrowed a weapon from a friend who subsequently went out of his mind and then ask for it back, surely it would be generally agreed that one ought not to return it,…”I would have to agree with that, if I asked to borrow somebody’s paper and wrote on it, I would not give the paper back, if I gave it back it would not make sense. I would have to agree with parts of both sides.

Cephalus represents kindness and honesty. His opinion is the best choice that would be best for everything. What he says is morally right, his opinion is what most people would choose, but could never live by.

Question 1. Section 2

The prisoners in the cave are exactly like Mildred. Both people were censored, but in different ways. The people were censored from everything; they were protected from everything besides shadows of animals and other things. This is like Mildred, for one, because she was censored from books, two, she was censored from a real life. Neither of them knew the real meaning of a life, neither of them knew the truth of the world, neither of them ever had any stimulant. Both of them are ignorant, both of them have never been in a real world. The people in The Simile of the Cave would be afraid of the real world, they would only look at shadows and reflections because they were afraid anything that isn’t “real”. This is like Mildred because she is afraid what makes common life, she is afraid of everything except the parlor games.

Goodbye

Personal Reflection

I think that I have found that I have found that life is not as easy as it appears. Almost all of the people in my life have made life seem easy; the reason is because they all have made it through life great. In elementary school, you don’t have a worry, nothing really happens. When I got to middle school, I found that life is harder than what I thought; I knew life was tough, but not so much. Finding out that life was harder, I changed, I got serious, and I became worried. I found out that what I do now affects the rest of my life. When all that hit me, I changed; I became a somewhat different person. I became more stressed, but hid that with energy. It is strange how one thing can affect your life in so many ways.

Pride

Pride, the definition of pride is a feeling of self-respect and personal worth. Pride is when you feel that you are too good, you think you are better than anybody else. Agamemnon and Achilles are full of pride, they both think they are great, even though Achilles really is, not Agamemnon.

Everybody gets prideful at times; everybody knows the feeling of being ‘superior’. If I ever get this feeling it is with my family, it is more in a joking way. Whenever there are those stupid television competitions are on. My mom answers all the questions and I answer some if she asks me; when she does I always say she is wrong. Implying that I am smarter, therefore being better, that is where pride can come into my life. I, don’t know really when pride comes into my life besides that. I guess I do it subconsciously, that or I just chose to not remember what happens.

Iliad Assignment

For this part of The Iliad, we read when Patroclus dies. This part started when Patroclus is taking out Hectors Charioteer. Then Patroclus starts to charge at Hector, but then, out of nowhere Apollo attacks. Patroclus is left lying on the ground, fighting for his life. Then, he gets a spear thrown through his back, Hector, being dishonorable, attacks and kills Patroclus. But before he dies, he says that Achilles is going to kill him, he tells him that his death is near.

Well, like I said before, Patroclus said that Achilles is going to kill Hector, so I know he is going to die. Achilles is going to be outraged, his love for Patroclus and wanting for revenge cancels his hate for Agamemnon. He loves Patroblus more than he hates Agamemnon.

Iliad Assignment

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

Patroclus asks if he can go and fight, he wants to fight at Achilles. Achilles says that it is ok, he says that he wants him to go fight to get the troops moral boosted. He also wanted Patroclus to take the Midrimydons with him, because they needed to fight. They needed death. To me, Achilles is making an incredibly stupid mistake, why is he sending his lover to go fight, as him??? Everybody knows of Achilles strength so everybody will fight their hardest. Also Hector wants to kill Achilles to prove his strength, so Patroclus is dead, for sure as the chapter title states.

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?

Well, I am not 100% sure what this really means. To me it seems that his courage curses him, meaning that being brave will be his end. I am not sure if I agree with this or not, because I know he dies, I also know why he goes and fights. It is because Patroclus dies as the chapter clearly states, that is why he goes to fight. He dies because he is avenging his lover, Patroclus, so I guess he is being courageous and it is the cause of his death. But we can never really know, he gets takes down with a cheap shot, arrow through the heel. I cant say if I disagree or not.

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

The question that I have is, why is Achilles sending Patroclus to go fight? Why is he sending him to go fight against the Trojans and Hector? He could die so easily, and he does. I dont get this.
Goodbye

Iliad Assignment

Do Agamemnon, Ajax, Pheonix and Odysseus know that Achilles asked Zeus to smite the Greeks? The reason why I ask this is because what I brought up in class. What I brought up was when Odysseus was trying to convince Achilles to fight, he was telling him that his friends were dying and they were losing terribly. But Achilles could care less he wants them to die, he asked a god to kill them. If they knew that why would they try and convince him to come back, they never really brought this point up in the book.

About Achilles, I still like him, I dont see why people could hate him. He is doing the right thing, he is doing what almost everybody would do. If somebody insulted you and stole from you why would you want to help them out. People are calling him a coward, HE ISINT, he is sticking up for his rights he dosent want to be treated badly, he dosent want to be bought he is above all that. He could care less about what is going on with the war, he could could care less about Agamemnon. This was self-inflected against Agamemnon, through out the entire book Agamemnon has been a jerk, he has treated Achilles badly. I support Achilles by not fighting 100% all the way. I think Achilles is great and he is still my favorite character in my book.

Pheonix tells Achilles a story that is similar to what is happening to him. A mans citidal is being destroyed and he wont go and fight. People are offering him gifts but he still wont fight, but then his wife tells him the horrors that are going on. He straps on his armor and goes to fight, he saves the day but when it is all over nobody is giving him the gifts. Achilles wont fight pepole are dying and he still wont fight. I think Pheonix was trying to appeal to ethics and emotion, the reason why I say this is because Pheonix wants Achilles to realize what is right, the right thing to do. The reason why I say emotion is because people are dying, his friends are dying, it should effect his emotion it should make him want revenge.
Goodbye

Iliad Assignment

The first thing that I have to say, is that Agamemnon has a huge ego and self absorbed. He is giving Achilles so much stuff, but after he is done telling what he will give to Achilles, he says but I am the better man. How can you be so self-absorbed, does he really think that Achilles will come back. If Agamemnon really wanted Achilles he shouldn't make fun of him. He shouldn't say he is better, in my opinion, he isn't. He bothers me, he takes prizes that he didn't fight for, he claims he is the best, but so far, I have heard nothing of him going into war. If he is so great, then why is he losing, why does he need Achilles so bad? Why doesn't he get up and fight? He is a war chief, why doesn't he act like one? Agamemnon claims to fight and be great, but why does he steal prizes, why does he claim to be great. Its because he wants arete, he wants to be well known, he wants people to be afraid of his power, but them he wants people to like him because of his power. Agamemnon is doing terrible at both, he may be feared, but only because they fear his army, Achilles, and not many people love him, because he is unfair to his soldiers, he takes their prizes, and doesn't fight he cares nothing of them. The real person who is loved and feared is Achilles. People love him because he has awesome strength he has amazing power, but that is also why people fear him. But back on topic, I don't really have a question, when reading this part I was with Kit, Lauren and Beth. Every once in a while we stopped to answer peoples questions and talk about this. We all agreed that Agamemnon is a "jerk" in Kit's words.

From the start of the book I really didn't like Agamemnon, after reading this, I hate him more. As I said above, he is a jerk, he is losing the war, he wants Achilles help. He is going to give Achilles so much stuff for him to come back, but after the list of things, he says that he is still better than Achilles. How can he say that, if he is so great, if he is so strong then he wouldn't need Achilles help to end the war. Agamemnon is the one that should die, not Achilles, he thinks he is great but he isn't. He just a huge coward hiding behind Achilles in his greatness. I didn't like Agamemnon before, but now I really don't like him.

Towards the end of the reading Odysseus is talking to Achilles, he is trying to convince Achilles to go back to Agamemnon. He told Achilles the huge list of thing that Agamemnon was willing to give. I guess he was trying to appeal to emotion, the reason I say this is because the things the Agamemnon was willing to give up would make you happy. But Achilles says that Agamemnon could give the world to Achilles and he still wouldn't fight.
Goodbye

Disagreements and Fights ...

The consiquences of fighting never come out good, that is why I avoid them at all costs. Usually I can hold my opinion back and not talk. Most of the time I go with it and dont voice my opinon, because I hate fighting. But, I do get into disagreements every once in a while. My friend and I got on the topic of school, he says that he hates school, I say that school is what makes the future. After a while of butting heads, I made the comment that he was an idiot and that he was helping the downfall of the future. I felt terrible afterwards, I really regreted saying that to one of my goof friends. That is why I hate fighting, fighting destroyes thing, it can destroy the greatest of friendships.

Goodbye

Fight or No Fight

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 would have to agree with Achilles for many reasons. One, Achilles says that the Trojans have never done anything to him. They never harmed him in anyway, so why should he harm them without good reason. Second, Achilles isint to fond of Agamemnmom, why should Achilles go fight for a man who he hates. Who has never actually fought by his side, who has just used him and stolen his prizes. Achilles has so many reason to betray his 'king', one Agamemnmom is extremely selfish, two he never found he just took the prizes and last but not least he is a bad ruler and cares nothing for his men. All he cares about is his prizes and he is to prideful, hubris, it is going to take him down. He is going to get cocky, Achilles is an extremely patient person to not have gone off on Agamenmom yet. My opinion is that Achilles should not fight, he needs to show Agamenmom that he can not be controlled.

***Free Writing. Can I Please Have Feedback.***

I woke up; it was early in the morning. I woke up to the most serene hum. It started small, but became bigger. It was a melody lulling me to sleep. I laid there listening, in awe of its power. It kept getting stronger, the melody became faster and louder. Then, I saw a flash and heard the percussion of the music. It was as loud as a drum, echoing through the canyon through my ears. It was then quiet, the music was gone, and I wondered how it had gone so fast. Then, I heard it again, tapping on my window; the beat was the most beautiful music I have ever heard. Nature, it was making music, pure beautiful music, music that comes and goes. The only music you can listen to all night, the music that you will never get sick of. The sound of rain as it hits my window, the sound that creates the incomparable music. Calming, soothing and comforting, the rain is a haven. A haven from hate, a haven from all the rushes in the world, a haven where time is slow, and all you have to do is listen. There is nothing else in the world as beautiful as this haven; it is a break from life a break from all your worries. One of few pure things left in this world, everything else dead polluted. The rain is one of the last pure parts of nature. The rain is a sign of hope, it is a sign that in a world with pollution, in a world filled with waste, the rain never stops prevailing. The rain will never stop coming, the rain is, the most beautiful things left in the world.

My Rage - Cause--- Rage Leads To Hate

Rage, when rage comes to mind, when anger comes to mind, that is what fuels my rage or anger. People getting mad, people yelling, is it really necessary? Why do we yell? Why do people get angry, my reasons are logical, I hate it when people yell, I hate it when people get mad, and that is my anger. I hear it, it saddens me to think what they are yelling about, most likely something stupid. Anger is not necessary, madness is not necessary, profanity is not necessary. Why, why do we yell, the reason is stress releaser. Rage is the worst of all the emotions, people become outraged over the stupidest things. People become so mad, but for what, spilling water, accidentally dropping something. Why get upset, nothing that you can possess can outrage you, it means nothing. It can be replaced, but if you get angry at a friends, that can’t be replaced so easily. Why get angry at a friend, why get angry over something stupid. Rage is the cause of all hate, it starts as a small fire that continues to grow over time, and it gets bigger and stronger. It eventually takes over and consumes your entire mind. All that you can think about is being mad. You aren’t born with rage; you let rage in, looking for excuses to get mad, looking for ways to yell. Rage is the cause of all hate. Rage makes me angry because it creates hate, and that is the last thing the world needs more of, hate.

Revised D.P. 2/9

The scene that I am choosing was the scene where Montag was reading the poem to Mildred’s friends. I am doing this from the perspective of Mildred.

What is going on, what is Montag doing?!?!? Why is Montag doing this to me, it was enough for him to bring the books home, but then to turn off our ‘family’? Oh no, he is getting a book out, please don’t read it Montag. “ Montag, what are you doing, please stop, you are a fireman.” Montag replied “These ladies are ignorant, they know nothing, it serves them right.” I don’t know what is going on, I really hope that nothing bad will happen. Montag started to read, the ladies started to cry. After what seemed an eternity, Montag stopped reading. “Come on lets get back to our ‘family’!!” I was hoping for the best, but the best wasn’t going to happen. “Sorry Mildred, I am going home, your husband is terrible!!!” said Ms. Black. “I am never coming over here again. You can come to my house to see the ‘family’ but I will not come over here” “Montag…what have you done now???"

Fahrenheit 451 Frightening & Descriptive

On page 119, towards the bottom. The scene I chose is probably going to be the same many other people. I chose the scene where Montag murdered Beatty. This is the exact quote.

" "Hand it over, Guy," said Beatty with a fixed smile. And then he was a shrieking blaze, a jumping, sprawling gibbering mannikin, no longer human or known, all with writhing flame on the lawn as Montag shot one continuous pulse of liquid flame on him. "

This by itself is frightening, a man murdering somebody. Also, the words used to describe it were great in a bad way. Words like writhing, continuous, pulse, shreiking and also the phrase fixed smile. shrieking. The reason why these words represent fear is because, they give a bad picture. Not so much a bad picture but a scary one. Also, a fixed smile, it sounds like a grin that just isint quite right.

2/6 - Hesiod Writing Assignment

1. What do you think this myth tells about the ancient Greeks? What values did they have? Why would a story like this develop?

Well, first off they were very... imaginitive. But what it tells is that the ancient Greeks is that were inquizitive. If there was something that they didnt understand, they would think then create, in our case, something fake to explain the unexplained. Most of the stories that were devoloped come off of the main stories. But still, most of the main stories are very strange. The reason why they would be created would be because the people needed something. What they needed were aspirations, they needed something to believe in. Like what I was saying in class the other day that I came up with. If you dont have dreams, I hate to say this but you dont really have anything to live for. Everybody has dreams, everybody works towards something. That is what the ancient greeks were doing, having dreams, also they needed something to explain everthing, the gods were a convient way to explain them.

My words...

Some of my favorite words would have to be, astonishing, magnificence, immeasurable and luminosity.

Astonishing. I really like this word because, it means so much more than pretty. It is 2 if not 3 steps above great. Magnificence, this word like astonishing is a very strong and powerful word. When you use this word you think of something great, you think of something amazing. When describing something you like you cant not use this word. Immeasurable... When I was writing my piece about the ocean and the sunset, I needed to think of a word that could describe the ocean. I didnt know what other word could perfectly describe the ocean, that word was immeasurable. My last and one of my favorite words, luminosity. I didnt want to just put let light come in. When I said luminosity, I think of a slowly becoming lighter room.

Goodbye

Fharenheit 451 154-165

1. Ask a question
2. Visit a couple other blogs from classmates and try to answer someone else’s question(s) and/or comment on their blog.
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?

So I read the afterword. Towards the end of it, Beatty and Montag are talking Montag. Montag goes into Beattys house, there are thousands of book. Montag is in shock, he doesn't know what to think. What I'm wondering is if that is actually true. Beatty says that it is not illegal to own them but to read them, so does he just collect books? That made me a little confused, this was not really in the book, so did it happen or not?

So when he says this, I think he is talking about the government. It is like he was testing the "great sloth", testing its limits. Making it confused, this is important because, this is what Montag was doing throughout the entire book. Going against the government making them start all over. Also when you think of a sloth, you think slow. So the government is going to slowly start-over wondering what went wrong. This has so many metaphors all compiled into a one sentence. This quote is great, the reason why I like it so much is because it is true. If something big happens, the government starts all over, everything begins again. This is what they did to the city, something went wrong to lets blow it up so we can start over and let is happen again. This book is great I am very very happy that Mr.Jana gave us this book to read.
Goodbye

Fahrenheit pp 138-154

2. How has Montag changed from the beginning of the novel to this part? In writing about this you might want to notice that the environment has changed from the city to nature. Is this a coincidence or is the author trying to say something by contrasting the city to nature in relation to the ways Montag has changed.

At the beginning of this book, Montag was only a little different than the normal person. He was more aware of the world around him. Then he met Clarisse, she made him think, she put ideas in his head. She was the person who sparked the match, she got him going and thinking. He became more aware of the ideas going on in the world. Montag becomes calm, he stops burning houses. When he starts his calm lifestyle the environment changes to nature. It becomes calm like him. But I could and probably am wrong, it was the only relation that I could make. So please help if I am wrong.

Fahrenheit 451 pp 125-137

On page 137 towards the bottom. "The procaine needle flicked out and in, out and in. A single clear drop of the stuff of dreams fell from the needle as it vanished in the hounds muzzle."

This was one of the few ok lines in the last 20-30 pages. I really liked how Bradbury said the stuff of dreams fell from the needle. With the last 20-30 pages Bradbury lost his descripitive touch. He could of used a word better than "stuff ". But I really saw this picture out in my mind, I could see the hound chasing Montag. The deathy needle going in and out. I have been chased by a dog before, a very big mean dog, so I could see the whole picture in my mind.
Bye

Fahrenheit 451 pp 110 - 125

The two huge scenes in this part is where Montag finds out that Mildred turned them in. The next most important scene was when Montag killed Beatty and destroyed the Hound. He also knocked out the other people in the firehouse. At the end of my last post I believe I guessed that Mildred turned them in, and she did. I was not to surprized, mostly because of the way that Montag treated her friends.

My favorite part in this part of the reading was on page 120 "Montag caught it with a bloom of fire, a single wondrous blossom that curled in petals of yellow and blue and orange about the metal dog, clad it in a new covering as it slammedinto montag and threw him ten feet back against the bole of a tree, taking the flame gun with him." This put an amazing picture in my mind, I can see a giant metal dog bursting into flames. As if it were a flower with huge amazing petals.
Goodbye

Fahrenheit 451 pp 91-110

The first scene, that was important, was that Montag, got out a book and started to read. He started to read a poem, after reading it, one of Mildreds friends got emotional and started to cry. Montag got extremely mad at them because, they knew nothing, all they talked and knew about was the 'parlor games' or the 'family'. Montag got really, at the fact that all that the women would talk about was the 'family', they knew nothing about politics or anything.

The next important scene was when, they all got into the 'Salamander' then drove to go burn down their next house. As they pulled up Beatty said "What wrong?" then Montag said "We are at my house" Wow... I was not expecting this at all. Mildred was right, earlier in the book she said something like, the firemen are coming to our house next. But the question I have is did Mildred call the firemen or give a hint??

The quote that I am going to use is on page 83 "The comfortable people want only wax moon faces, poreless, hairless, expressionless." I really like this because of its amazing choice of words. I really like it because it puts a very clear picture in you mind. This would be much better then just saying people like plain and boing things. The pictures that I can see when I think of that is a very boring place, not much going on not unique or anything.
Goobye

Fahrenheit 451 80-91 Question

Nothing really happened in this part of the book that really confused me. Like I said last time the more I read the book, the more I understand Bradbury's writing. At first I was asking questions until no end, but now I can figure it out on my own. But I am open to asking any questions that you might have. You can put them in the purposely misspelled "Argure With Me Here" I spelled that wrong because I wanted people to talk comment on my posts so I figured that people would correct me... Guess not.

The idea that Faber was talking to Montag about was to make copies of the books, then bury them underneath the firehouse. The reason why is when they did that they would have to burn down the fire house. But the reason why it would not work, would be because Captain Beatty, being a smart guy, would figure out that something was up. He would want to figure out what was really going on.
Goodbye

What I Like...

I sit there, watching it fade away, like a snowflake on your tongue. I watch it leisurely slide below the horizon. I watch the reflection on the immeasurable deep-sea. I sit on a smooth blanket of sand watching the horizon as it fades away. As time passes it gets darker, the sky dims to a lilac shade. I look up at the sky in marvel, watching the purple sky filled with sun-lit clouds. The sun shines throughout the clouds creating, astonishing streaks of light, like the northern lights filled with magnificence. I continue to watch the giant orb of luminosity; it slides down the horizon faster and faster. Until finally there is almost none left, I watch even more anxiously, waiting for the moment to occur. Finally it happens, the amazing green flash, it was as beautiful as an emerald. As quick as it came it left, like the strike of a cobra. After the sun sinks away, I think of how beautiful it was.

Fahrenheit 451 Pg 71-80

For this part, I don’t really have any questions. The more that I have been reading this book, the more I get used to Ray Bradbury’s type of writing. At first I was extremely lost, with all the metaphors he used, I didn’t know what was really going on. But like I said, I know what is going on and everything makes sense.

How will the book get us out of “the cave”? What is the cave and how can the book get us out of it?

When I first saw this I instantly thought about the saying brining something to light. That means making sense of something that you don’t understand. The cave is being used as a metaphor, pointing out the obvious; the cave is where everybody is. They are not knowing anything and not thinking. But the books can take “us” out of the cave by making us think and question things. This question relates to Clarisse, in the first question it says. What does Montag mean when he says that books "points, one way or another, to Clarisse?” The reason why is because Clarisse is like a book. She makes people think, she makes people, like Montag, ask questions. That is why books point to Clarisse is because she makes people think, she makes people want to know more.

Argue With Me Here

This is for if people ever want to tell me im wrong, have questions about a post or anything else. Ask away.

Fahrenheit 451 Pg 40-68

First off, I am going to start off by saying that this book is great. It may be confusing, but it is definitely worth reading. Ignorant and happy or being aware, educated and disturbed. From Captain Beatty perspective, it seems that he would side with ignorant and happy. The reason why I say that is because on page 61 on the 8th line, Captain Beatty said “Give the people contests they win by remembering the words to more popular songs or the names of state capitals or how much corn Iowa grew last year. Cram them full of noncombustible data, chock them so damned full of ‘fact’ they feel stuffed, but absolutely ‘brilliant’ with information.” By saying that he means fill people with useless information so they think that they are smart. The people get excited about knowing more of nothing than other people. So they are completely filled with nothing, but by being filled with information that means nothing they become happy. The reason why they feel happy is because they feel that they are thinking. “Then they’ll feel they’re thinking, they’ll get a sense of motion without moving. And they’ll be happy, because facts of that sort don’t change.” The people feel that they are coursing with information; they feel that they are geniuses waiting to be discovered. Captain Beatty probably thinks that the people are better off not knowing what is really going on in the world. He knows that people are better off not knowing the truth. People are better off being happy and not knowing, he knows that everything is better off that people don’t know what really is going on it the world. If I am wrong somebody please tell me so I don’t sound like an idiot.

What I Dread..

I wake up from my deep sleep, knowing that the day will be full of waiting. I am ready to leave home, and then is when my day starts. Even though I am ready my day of waiting begins. As we drive to school, I am waiting to arrive at school. Once I get to school, I am left waiting for class to begin. Standing there, with nothing other to do than to stand. Time seems to stop when I am waiting, anticipating something to happen, nothing ever does. Waiting is what I dread, when waiting time seems to stop. When waiting, you can do nothing other than stand. That is why I dread waiting.

Fahrenheit 451 Assignment pp. 21-40

Some question’s that I can think of for this part was about the “Hound”. It was a very fast transition, it caught me off guard. The only question is what is the whole point of the hound? Is it just to kill targets? I know what it is but I’m not sure of the real purpose of the “Hound”. Do the “firemen” really need something to go and kill random targets? The “firemen’s” purpose was to catch books on fire, so why do they need a hound. The other question I have is why the “Hound” is reacting to Guy. Why would somebody put Guy’s DNA in the “Hound”? Also, who would want to kill Guy, if somebody is trying to kill him.

I am going to answer question number 2. The reason why the people from today are different from people in the book is because the people in the book don’t have minds. They don’t have a purpose to serve; they don’t even have the power to think. The people today have minds and think for themselves. The government doesn’t have control over the people’s minds. The people in the book are like ants, mindless and are under somebody else’s control. The people today have minds and think for themselves.

For question one Clarisse has a mind. Mildred is already past the point she is like a mindless person. The reason why Clarisse is more mature is because she thinks for herself and is inquisitive. Mildred doesn’t think and ask questions, but Clarisse does she is like that because of her uncle. Her uncle has given, Clarisse, a mind he taught her to “smell the roses”. That is why she seems more mature, because she is not mindless and takes time to “smell the roses”. The reason why Bradbury compares the two is because Mildred is Montag’s wife and she does not make him happy and she is mindless, verses Clarisse that makes Montag laugh and has a mind and thinks outside the box and asks questions. I am open to suggestions why he compared the two. I am not 100% sure so please comment and tell me so I can understand.

Fahrenheit 451 pp. 3-21

What I find confusing… I was pretty confused at most parts of this book. Just the way that Ray Bradbury phrased some sentences. It was as if he was trying to make this as confusing as possible. Everything I had to read twice, I had to do a double take it was as if I saw a frog singing with a dress on. I had to think about what I just read a lot more than I ever would have preferred. When I read I like to analyze but I really had to over analyze, I don’t find that as fun as just reading. This was the first book make me think so hard that I was on the verge of having a headache. Although the book was confusing after re-reading I understood what was happening. Why did Guy keep on laughing at what Clarisse said, ever though it was funny. It sounded very suspicious, whenever she brought something up about his job he would laugh.

I couldn’t find any connection until way after he burnt the house down and walked home. When he got home he yelled Mildred. That was the only sign that I could find that related them together. I probably am wrong and I am open to somebody filling me in.