Dbq Essay-European History-Assumptions on Children

During early modern Europe, children were viewed in many different ways which changed how parents chose to raise their children. During the 1500’s, the mortality rates for children were high, therefore children were viewed as if they were adults and very precious if they survived, many people believed that they needed to treat children harshly to make them strong. In the 1600’s, children were raised tenderly as they were rational beings that could use reason. Children were viewed in many ways during early modern Europe to be rational, precious, and in need of guidance where these views determined the parents’ choice in child rearing to behaving harshly to kind guidance. Society sought for guidance for their children in a very caring†¦show more content†¦He is biased though because he has a son himself and knows of the emotional attachment and bond bearing a child creates, he speaks with only gratitude and expresses his love of his child (Doc 1). Theoretically speaking though, Jean Benedicti â€Å"obligates the child to obey under pain of mortal sin.† Being a preacher, he expects a child to honor God and obey his wisdom (Doc 7). This follows the same circumstances stated in document 10. The English Catholic Gentleman expects highly of his daughter to have reliance on God and help her understand to make her amends to confess her sins to God. John Locke, a philosopher who wrote â€Å"Two Treasies on Government† writes that a person must reason with children to their capacity of understanding. As a member of the Enlightenment, Locke believes people are rational and tabula rasa (blank slates) where they can be taught what to do. Changing ideas of the1600’s into the enlightenment allowed for parents to treat children kindly and rationally (Doc 11). Although some parents taught their children in a kind manner beneficial for the child, some punished their children by putting a negative impact on their well-being. As depicted in document 3, it states that if a man truly cares about his child, he will whip him occasionally to make a man out of him. Generally, Russian households of the 17th century were harsh conditions to live under, therefore the nobility expected harsh discipline as a means to better their children. Michel de

Personal Philosophy Al Farabi - 1684 Words

Al Farabi was born in a small village near Farab around 870 AD. Al Farabi is credited with preserving the original Greek texts during the Middle Ages because of his commentaries and treaties, and influencing many prominent philosophers, like Ibn Sina. Through his works, he became well known in the East as well as the West. Al Farabi’s philosophy was heavily influenced by Greek philosophy just like how western philosophy was influenced by Greek philosophy. Specifically, Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates were the main Greek influencers of Al Farabi. Al Farabi as well as Ibn Sina have been recognized as Peripatetics or rationalists. The best known Arabic source for Al Farabi s political philosophy is his work titled The Virtuous City. In many of Al Farabi’s philosophical works the practical use of philosophy is a major concern, and while the majority of his philosophy has been influenced by Aristotelian ethics, his practical philosophy is more closely related to Plato. Plato’s Republic is slightly similar to Al Farabi in the way they categorize philosophy and their concepts of justice. Al Farabi thought that philosophy was both a theoretical and practical discipline. The philosophers who do not apply this to practical reasons are referred to as futile philosophers. Al Farabi also talks about what he calls the ideal society. The ideal society is defined as a society directed towards the realization of true happiness. What this means in philosophical terms is enlightenment. AlShow MoreRelatedAnalysis Of Hsun Tzu s Man s Nature Is Evil1720 Words   |  7 Pageswho is consciously striving towards goodness, someone who rejects vices and desires, someone who makes an effort towards being a good leader? Ab u Nasr al-Farabi proclaims that there are twelve natural qualities a perfect ruler must be born with in Perfect Associations and Perfect Rulers. Al-Farabi s work contradicts Tzu s teachings. Al-Farabi thinks that people are born where they will be the most useful in serving their purpose. He thinks rulers are born with perfect qualities and commonersRead MoreThe Life of A-Ghazali Essay751 Words   |  4 PagesAl-Ghazali was a Muslim Theologian, Jurist, Philosopher and Mystic of Persian Decent. He was born in 1058 A.D. in Khorasan, Iran. He received his early education from Baghdad and Nishahpur where he received a high-level scholarship in the field of religion and philosophy. For his efforts, he was made the professor at the Nizamiyah University of Baghdad, which was recognized as the greatest institute for learning during the ‘Golden Era of Islam’. Belonging to Sunni denomination, Al-Ghazali practicedRead MoreMontaigne and Augustine1359 Words   |  6 PagesMedieval and Renaissance Philosophy December 12, 2005 Take-Home Final In regards to Montaigne s statement on page 23 in Apology for Raymond Sebond, I would deduce that he was using the metaphor of nature and natural tendencies in opposition to man s vain, self-seeking faà §ade that displaces God the creator. Montaigne s statement appears to (on the surface at least) value mans naturalistic tendencies and graces in a much better light than our own vain-striving presumptions that claim thatRead MoreThe Importance of Considering Philosophical and Psychological Foundations in Developing a Curriculum.9983 Words   |  40 Pagesstudent. The instrument used was What Do You Believe?, 15 statements of ideas expressed in educational literature pertaining to a line of action for curriculum improvement. Reactions to six statements were in strong agreement. The functioning philosophy of participants would, therefore, include those statements dealing with exposing students to what man knows and does not know, personalized curriculum, benefits of learning from peers and groups, learning difficulties beginning in disturbed homeRead MoreCritical Thinking2910 Words   |  12 Pagesprecision and fairness also characterize critical thinking. It means that a critical thinker also shows good internal values besides thinking outside the box only. Critical thinking is used by almost everyone. Many great and famous philosophers including Al-Kindi, Avicenna and Ibn Rushd even apply critical thinking in their lives. They have used it to help them in their methods, works and ideas. In this assignment we will know more about the background of these people and how they use it . We will alsoRead MoreA Picatrix Miscellany52019 Words   |  209 PagesA PicA Trix MiscellAny Underground Edition 2007 e.v. CONTENTS On the Picatrix I. Introduction to the Picatrix (The Aim of the Sage) of al-Majriti, Maslamati ibn Ahmad II. Summary of the Contents of the Picatrix III. Excerpt from a Lecture on Alchemy by Terence McKenna On the Moon and the Lunar Mansions IV. Extracts on the Moon V. The Mansions of the Moon: â€Å"On the Creation, Proportion and Composition of the Heavens for the Fashioning of Images† VI. The Picatrix: Lunar Mansions in Western Astrology

The Cask of Amontillado Essay Free Essays

Rocio Cruz Professor Fred Kille English 102 February 3, 2013 The Cask of Amontillado Essay â€Å"A wrong is unredressed when retribution overtakes its redresser. It is equally unredressed when the avenger fails to make himself as such to him who has done the wrong† Some people are driven to do wrong by enviousness and Edgar Allan Poe’s short story â€Å"The Cask of Amontillado† is one good example of such. The story tells the event of the murder of Fortunato in the hands of Montresor, the narrator. We will write a custom essay sample on The Cask of Amontillado Essay or any similar topic only for you Order Now Although many critics argue that Montresor acted out of self- righteousness, one cannot conclude such due to the lack of credibility that can be accounted to him and his malice. Montresor is an unreliable, malicious narrator who shows to have contrasting feelings of guilt and remorse towards his crime against killing Fortunato. Montresor, through his own telling of the events, showed not only that he is not accountable for credibility but he also showed that his main motif to kill Fortunato was enviousness. Perhaps the most revealing reason to asses that Montresor is not a just person is that he lacked evidence to condemn Fortunato. For instance, Montresor opens the story by saying â€Å"the thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as I best could, but when he ventured upon insult, I vowed revenge. † These latter lines are all the reader knows of Fortuno’s presumed crime which suggests that there was no concrete wrongdoing from Fortuno after all; therefore revealing that Montresor acted without proof and out of malice. In further support of the claim that the narrator is bad-natured is that he also shows to be a cynic. Throughout the story he constantly refers to Fortunato as â€Å"my friend†. The fact that Montresor does not use negative words to refer to Fortunato tells the audience that he is attempting to protect his self-image and that he acted with hypocrisy. By the same token, the way Montresor talks about Fortuno conveys that he was somewhat envious. While they were already in Montreso’s mansion, he admits to Fortuno â€Å"your health is precious. You are rich, respected, admired, beloved; you are happy, as once I was†. This words are enough to disclose that Montreso was jealous of the place that Fortunato held in society; perhaps implying that Montresor himself once occupied the same place. Not only does Montresor show that he murdered Fortunato unjustifiably but he also seems to live with mixed feelings of guilt and remorse. Following his atrocity, the narrator of the story seems to live with guilty responsibility of killing Fortunato counteracting what many people believe. Montresor’s remorse came right after the crime was committed. â€Å"There came forth in return only a jingling of the bells. My heart grew sick-on account of the dampness of the catacombs,† says Montresor. To clarify, the narrator first admits that he felt unease in his heart and then, almost like trying to convince himself, he attributes this feeling to the â€Å"dampness of the catacombs† showing that his conscience was the true causer of this heart â€Å"sickness†. Another clue that tells the reader that Montresor felt guilty is that, although no one certainly knows who the intended audience of the story is, he is conceivably justifying himself to God. In the first paragraph of the story, Montresor says, â€Å"You, who so well know the nature of my soul, will not suppose, however, that I gave utterance to a threat†. By admitting that â€Å"You† knows â€Å"the nature of [his] soul† the reader can draw the conclusion that it might be someone divine who he is talking to for who else would know him so well? In the same manner, he is asking this divine being to not judge his crime so heavily for he did not simply â€Å"give utterance to a threat†. Likewise, another fact that serves as evidence that Montresor is that he is telling the events fifty years later. This goes to show that the event has haunted the narrator for half a century since he not only recalls everything but is taking the time to tell the story. The narrator of â€Å"The Cask of Amontillado† showed, through his own telling of the events, not only an unreliable narrator but also an envious man that is now living in remorse. The events that led to the assassination of Fortunato do not excuse Montresor as he believes they do. From the way in which Montresor â€Å"brags† his â€Å"perfect crime† the reader can draw the conclusion that he is not but a malicious member of society who tries to justify his wrongdoings by attributing them to the honor of him and his famiy. \ How to cite The Cask of Amontillado Essay, Essay examples

Dbq on Colonies free essay sample

To understand the reasons why New England and Chesapeake evolved into two distinct societies, one must take into account the dynamics of each region. Pre-1700, the Chesapeake region was rampant with diseases including malaria, dysentery, and typhoid that took a cruel toll on its settlers. Many people born in early Virginia and Maryland did not live to see their twentieth birthday. Also, the settlement of Chesapeake grew very slowly in the seventeenth century because families were few and far between throughout the region.Most of the inhabitants of Chesapeake were single men in their late teens or early twenties because raising a family in the Chesapeake region was almost unfeasible. The Chesapeake region was also hospitable to the cultivation of tobacco. On the other hand, the New England region was mostly made up of families who migrated together from England. Puritanism influenced the families to form a tightly-knit society based on equality and togetherness. Also, the New England region required towns of more than fifty families to provide elementary school education. In fact, in 1636 the Massachusetts puritans established Harvard University which still stands today as one of the most prestigious schools in the nation. As one can see, the New England and Chesapeake regions had some stark differences in the seventeenth century. The major differences in the environment of the New England and Chesapeake regions caused them to evolve into two distinct regions. Firstly, the Chesapeake region was ravaged with disease which deterred families from migrating there. Therefore, the New England region was made up of mostly families who were willing to work together to build a strong colony while the Chesapeake region was made up of many young, single men. Documents A and D provide testimonials from John Winthrop and the Articles of Agreement. Winthrop, in his book A Model of Christian Charity states, that we must treat each other like brothers and be a close-knit community (Document A).The Articles of Agreement provide four orders for themselves and their successors which includes that their town should be composed of forty families and every inhabitant should have a convenient proportion for a house lot (Document D). These examples highlight the difference between the family life environments in the two regions which forced many couples to migrate to New England. Secondly, teen pregnancy was extremely rampant in the Chesapeake region as a result of the weak family ties. Would one want to raise their teenage daughter in a region where almost a third of all brides were already pregnant when they got married? In Documents B and C, which show the list of emigrants bound for New England and Chesapeake, one can clearly see the difference in the type of people who migrated to each region. These documents reinforce the fact that the Chesapeake and New England regions developed differently because of the stark differences in the environments of the two regions.Bacon’s Rebellion against Governor William Berkeley caused the Chesapeake region to develop much differently than the New England region. The rebellion was started because many single men in the Chesapeake region were frustrated by their lack of ability to acquire land, and the lack of women in the region to marry. According to Document G, Governor Berkeley did not believe he and his council could defend Virginia against an attack which is shown in his speech (Document G).According to Document H , Bacon’s justification for his rebellion was that the people in power, including Berkeley, were taking all the wealth and using it for themselves instead of sharing it with the rest of the region (Document H). This rebellion caused slavery to become prevalent in the Chesapeake region which changed the way it developed. The native-born African-Americans contributed to a distinctive slave culture which brought the region a unique language, Gullah. Some of the slaves even became skilled artisans, carpenters, bricklayers, and tanners.In fact, the slaves in the Chesapeake proved to be a more manageable labor force than the white indentured servants that had first migrated to the Chesapeake. Finally, Bacon’s rebellion caused slavery to become more prevalent in the south which developed the region into a very diverse place to live, with a defined hierarchy of wealth and status. New England, on the other hand, had no slaves, and developed much less ethnically than the Chesapeake did as a result of Bacon’s Rebellion. The difference in the economies of Chesapeake and New England caused the two regions to evolve very differently.The Chesapeake was very hospitable to the cultivation of tobacco which affected the type of people who migrated there. Many profit-hungry farmers in the Chesapeake sold the tobacco they planted. With an inordinate amount of tobacco being grown in the region, more labor was needed. Therefore, many displaced farmers came to the region as â€Å"indentured servants† and spent several years in the Chesapeake. Conversely, the New England economy was based on trading, fishing, and manufacturing which impacted the type of people who migrated to the region.Also, because New England was not hospitable to the cultivation of tobacco, many indentured servants and displaced farmers did not migrate to the region. This difference caused both regions to have entirely different economies. In the Chesapeake, the masters parlayed their investments in servants into huge fortunes in real estate. However, in the New England region, General Courts where developed to hamper the ability of tradesmen and laborers to make an inordinate amount of money.According to Document E, laborers and tradesmen should make a moderate profit to enable them to serve God and their neighbors (Document E). Finally, very different types of people migrated to the Chesapeake and the New England regions because of their differing economies which caused the two regions to evolve into two distinct societies. Although the New England and Chesapeake regions did evolve differently because of the differences in their economies, environments, and Bacon’s Rebellion, there are other reasons why they developed differently.The expansion of settlements in the two regions was very different. In the Chesapeake region, the expansion of settlements was somewhat random and usually undertaken by lone-wolf planters. Conversely, the expansion of settlements in the New England region was done in an orderly fashion and towns were legally chartered by local authorities. Also, the setup of each region was very different. In New England, the town usually consisted of a meeting house and a village green which were both not present in the Chesapeake region.Overall, the differences in the expansion of settlements and the setup of each region caused each region to develop into two distinct societies. Although the expansion of settlements and the setup of each region where major factors, the differences in the economy and environment of each region, and Bacon’s Rebellion where the main reasons why the regions evolved differently. The difference in the economies of each region was a huge factor because it caused different types of people to migrate to each region which obviously created a difference in the evolution of both regions.The environment in each region was another enormous factor because it caused very weak family ties in the Chesapeake compared to very strong family ties in New England. Thirdly, Bacon’s rebellion was a vital factor because it evoked slavery in the Chesapeake region which made it much more diverse and ethnic than New England. These three reasons were the main reasons that the New England and Chesapeake regions developed into two very different societies.