Argumentation #2

          Oscar Wilde, an Irish Author, offers some insight on his views on disobedience. Wilde implies that only through disobedience can progress be made "...through disobedience that progress has been made." The author also mentions that throughout history, disobedience is the honor of a man. In a more extensive form, Wilde is saying that disobedience is an effective tool used to make progress. Wilde wrote this insight in 1891 but the idea extends to present times.

          I cannot agree anymore with Oscar Wilde about disobedience. There was always a time period in history where the people did not agree with how the government was ran. And so through the act of disobedience then were the voices of the people heard. There were two types of disobedience: civil disobedience and uncivil disobedience. Figures like MLK Jr. and Rosa Parks performed civil disobedience and in time, they were remembered as heroes in our Nation's history. Uncivil disobedience worked back then but nowadays its not that effective. I say that uncivil disobedience worked back then because of the cause and effect of the French Revolution and the American Revolution. But the Ferguson incident sparked an anger within people and violence erupted, setting fire to a police car. That caught people's attention but did it do anything?

Argumentation #1

          The Dali Lama claims that if one is discontent then they will always want more and more, and that their desire can never be satisfied. But when one practices contentment then they water down their burning desire by believing that they already have everything they really need. "...say to yourself, 'Oh yes, I already have everything that I really need."" In more specific terms, perhaps the Dali Lama is suggesting that the reader should practice contentment. He is not implying that being discontent is bad and being content is good ;but simply saying what comes along with being discontent and being content.
          I mostly agree with the Dali Lama. I agree that practicing being content will allow you to be pleased with what you have and will somehow extinguish a form of greed. Despite learning when to be satisfied, I also have been taught at school not to settle with what you have, especially when you know that your capability can get you to greater places. The first thought of wanting more is usually associated with greed, however that is not always the case. Wanting more can be applied with wanting more knowledge, wanting a better life. Being discontent won't be a permanent if you set goals.

Assertion Analysis #11

         The general assertion made by Arthur Miller, author of The Crucible, is a mirror image of when the colonies were first formed. The Europeans were ruthless to the natives. Miller suggests that the Europeans still are ruthless, hence the low percent of Natives agreeing to be converted. Miller also suggests that the Europeans are condescending "Preferred to take land from heathens rather than from fellow Christians". This expresses the Europeans looking down upon the Natives. The Europeans of the parochial even believed that any land not claimed by them is the home of the devil.
          This assertion is supported by Millers's use of rhetorical device of allusion and diction. Diction expressed the author's strong opinion of the parochial and partly blames them for the failure of converting Indians. Allusion was used when the author addressed the devil. By using these rhetorical devices, Miller is able to inform the reader of his great dislike toward the theocracy that these people abide by.