Speak Blog

There are many different ways that I define myself by. I define myself by the way I act around others, friends, and while I am alone. When I am with other people, I try to act respectable to what their “standards” appear to be, but with my true self driving it all along. Once I get to know those people, I begin to show my true self to them, but never actually fully open myself to them. When I hang out with my friends, especially close friends, I tend to be more open, and give my input towards other people. I tend to define my self while I am with friends, but many people don’t actually see my true self. I show the way I feel, by the way I interact with people, what music I listen to, and how much I reserve myself. I define myself as a person who really sits in-between everyone in actions, but definitely not in thought. I do not fit William James description from, The Social Me, because my peers do not influence my feelings, but instead just influence my actions, and how I present them. In the book, the characters all have different ways of showing themselves. Melinda uses her extremely reserved attitude to show that she is clearly holding onto something that she does not think anyone else should know about until later in the book, when she finally comes to peace with her past. Heather defines herself, by trying to goad Melinda into joining a club, because she has a total need to fit in with everyone, and become just a normal person. She truly fits directly into William James’ description, because she is completely dominated by the views of other people, her life is built around doing what she is told to by the other Marthas, and that she had given up all of her life to just join a “clan”, fit in, and attempt to become popular. Heather even goes as far to break her friendship with Melinda, because she is not social enough, has no want to be social, and Heather feels the she is being dragged down the social “ladder” by Melinda’s attitude and actions. The same goes for Rachel, who completely turned her back on Melinda too, but unlike Heather she joins the foreign exchange students. Rachel also fits perfectly into William James’ description of the “Social Me”, because she is dominated by the foreign exchange students, and will do almost anything, including throwing away her past and friends, to join the others.

The Dumbest Generation?

As much as I hate it, I have to agree with what was written in “The Dumbest Generation? Don’t Be Dumb”. Almost everything that the author explained was true, especially about the many simple things that we “should know”, but many of us known absolutely nothing about. While listening to a podcast on my iPod, I came across a pretty scary instance where this was going on. The podcast was an interview with a Medal of Honor recipient who served in the Second World War, and was a math teacher at a school, and the eighth grade history teacher invited him to give a talk about his experiences in war. He complied, but when he gave his talk, he was horrified with the student’s lack of knowledge of World War Two. He told the interviewer that none of the students could say who fought in World War Two, or even what side the United States fought on. Although many of us don’t know these facts, I must argue the people of our generation feel no connection to many of these facts, so we feel no need to know them. I also am in agreement with his statement about how the people of Generation Y feel no need to learn these facts, when we have the ability to look them up in a split second on Internet. Although he only writes about Gen. Y, you also have to look at our society as a whole. Ever since the invention of the wheel, people and societies have been relying more and more on the technologies that they invent, and many times that comes back to harm them.

Why Americans are Restless: Interpretive Questions

2. A society devoted to total equality weakens individuals greatly. When people are too focused on equality, they forget why they are doing it, and often them become selfish. If people get used to having equality, than they will forget about the large issues that they are having, but focus on the lesser problems that would have less of an effect than the larger ones. Societies that have equality confuse people into thinking that they can do great things with very little work, but this often is corrected after the people attempt it and commonly brings about the ruin of the particular person, which would weaken the society as a whole. Alexis de Tocqueville explains this when he writes, “An ambitious man may think it easy to launch on a great career and feel that he is called to no common destiny. But that is a delusion which experience quickly corrects. The same equality which allows each man to entertain vast hopes makes each man by himself weak.” Although equality must be given to all, the people with equality must realize that with equality comes responsibility to use it correctly, and not “waste” it.

5. In his writing, Alexis de Tocqueville explains why Americans are so restless. He explains that we are restless because we are always trying to get what is often impossible to get, not matter the cost. He writes, “Men are often less afraid of death than enduring effort toward one goal,” this just shows that Americans, can never be satisfied with just one things, and they feel they must have more and more, even if it means the death or ruin of themselves. He also gives details on how if Americans see something that other people have, they automatically try to get it no matter how extreme. Tocqueville illustrates this opinion when he writes, “One can be sure that each and every citizen will be aware of dominating positions near him, and it is a safe guess that he will always be looking doggedly just in that direction.” And this illustrate how when someone has a more important place in society, the lower people will want to have that position no matter what. According to Alexis de Tocqueville, restlessness in America is caused by the want for things that are impossible to get.

Tale of Two CIties Blog #1

Throughout the whole book A Tale of Two Cities, Charles Dickens keeps referring to the central message of being, “Recalled to Life”. In chapter three, Jarvis Lorry is on his way to “Dig someone out of a grave”, and that man is Dr. Manette who was being held captive by the French Government for eighteen years. He was on a mission to bring Mr. Manette back into society, and to bring him back to London to live with his daughter. This is symbolic of the main theme, because Jarvis Lorry was going to recall Mr. Manette back into society and give him his life back. Even though Manette was released from prison, he was still being held in a dirty apartment, for his own good. On Lorry’s journey to London, he has a pretend conversation with Manette in which he repeatedly asks Manette how long he was locked away for, and if he truly wanted to be released from his “prisons”. Dickens writes about how Lorry pictures Mr. Manette as a skinny, pale, and white haired gentleman, who was on the verge of death, and in some aspects his image was correct. Lorry also talks to the spectre about whether he had, “given up hope of being dug out”, and this was also symbolic of how many of the people of that days society had also given up their hop of changing the way they live, so they can actually properly feed, and protect themselves.

Inner Feelings

Not caring about what people think about you is a near impossible feat. First off there are two kinds of ways that you can care about your image, internal and external. It is far easier (for me at least) to control my external feelings about my image, because you can almost always mask or disguise you outer feelings, but it is the internal feelings that are neigh impossible to conceal for not only others but most importantly, your self. No matter how many times you tell yourself that you don’t care, you still care on the inside, and you know it. While you keep putting more and more layers in a futile attempt to cover up your true feelings, you really begin to wear down your self-esteem until all you want to do is be alone, and say that you don’t care. Every time you say that you don’t care, you are lying to yourself and everyone around you, which will lead to a great feeling of insecurity in your life, because you don’t know, and you are not willing to listen to what other people think of you, which could also end up helping you and your image look better in the long run. No matter what you say, people will always think what they think, and after a while you will realize that there is nothing you can do about it, and then you self-esteem comes under fire.

Freedom

I believe that life is far more important than freedom. I would almost always choose life over freedom because; you have no use for freedom if you are dead. It is one thing to fight a reasonable fight and die for your freed, but to fight for your freedom against a force that is nearly impossible to defeat is just pure stupid, and will get you no where except six feet under. Although freedom has a great cost, there is a point that you need to put that aside and submit, at least temporarily. The only thing in fact that can replace freedom is life. If you would rather die than live without freedom, than you do not have a very good outlook on life. I do believe that you need stand up and defend your freedom until there no chance of succeeding, because freedom is one of the most important things in the world, and should be defended for as long as it has the slightest ability to possibly succeed. This goes the same if you have no freedom and want to be free (which most people do), you should stand up for yourself and the others that can not stand up for themselves, and fight for your freedom. Although freedom can have a different meaning for every other person, there can be compromises to ensure freedom for all people in an area, as long as they can get along.

Why War???

Is war ever a good thing? Is there any cause for which you would go to war?

War in general is never a good thing by itself, and should be one of, if not the last resort in a conflict. Although war is a terrible thing, war can bring about good things as a result of war. For example the United States went to war with Great Britain in the revolution to gain its independence from an oppressive force, and that is one of the best reason to actually go to war. Another reason for going to war is if your country has been invaded by another country or another nation refused to back down its military before a conflict ensues. War can also be justified if you are going to free a “repressed” nation such as the United States did in Operation Desert Storm when we invaded Kuwait from Iraqi Occupationary forces, which were conducting horrific and disgusting acts against the population in Kuwait (Operation Desert Storm was also a strategic move to defend one of our most important allies, Saudi Arabia). All of these are “good” reasons to declare war on another country, and I would gladly go to war in every single one of these scenarios. There are also many “wrong” reasons to go to war, such as personal gain, revenge, to gain a route to wage war on another nation, to show dominance over another nation, and many others. I would fight in any war if I felt threatened, persecuted, or any of these things happened to an innocent group of people or an ally.