Argumentative Essay

Personal privacy and space is never granted throughout 1984. Every person is always subject to observation, even by their own family members and friends. Furthermore, since Big Brother is always watching and the Thought Police are always on the lookout, it is impossible for any kind of individualism to flourish. The sacrifice of individual rights cannot be constituted by the protection of a collective.

In 1984 by George Orwell, the citizens of Oceania have quite obviously given their individual rights to a higher entity in exchange for protection as a collective, not a person. These citizens are under constant surveillance, even in their own homes and thoughts, by the government, through “telescreens.” These citizens are also monitored by their own children and several government agencies. When an individual has negative thoughts about Big Brother, the personification, or face, of the government, they are taken to the ministry of love, where they are “convinced” of Big Brother’s righteousness, occasionally under the gentle touch of torture.  The citizens of Oceania are plagued with frequent power outages, which do not affect the telescreens, little food, and other issues; however, since Big Brother withholds the information that things could be better, as they once were, and that it has the citizens best interests at heart, they do nothing. The government often sacrifices a person to save the collective, and itself.

In the case of Katz v. US, extended 4^th amendment rights were extended to include objects of immaterial state obtained via technological means (Justia Law). This applies to information sent over the internet, such as instant messages, emails, and search queries. To obtain this information without a warrant is made illegal by this Supreme Court decision.

The word “individual” appears to be quite similar to the word “indivisible,” implying that to be one’s self, one must be inseparable from one’s self.  If this is truly the meaning of the word, then does individualism exist in the world of 1984, as evidenced by Winston’s submissiveness to “the Party,” or is it that individualism has fully escaped that world in such a way that one is separable from one’s self? If so, are the citizens of Oceania still human, or have they simply become part of the collective machine that fuels “the Party”?

Bibliography:

"Katz v. United States 389 U.S. 347 (1967)." Justia Law. N.p., n.d. Web. 9 May 2015.

Seminar Reflection #4

      The seminar did little to influence my perceptions of "The kite runner." One thing that was of particular curiosity was the discussion of  the importance of one's own father in one's life, and the difference such a presence, or lack there of, could inflict upon one's life.  I found it quite inquisitive that the other members of the discussion placed such value on such a presence, and whispered quiet traces of malice for the lack of such presence. Many of them also felt that the success of one's life is directly tied to this presence, an opinion that is, in practice, quite incorrect. The success of one's life is not determined by the presence of another being, but by the individual's choice to be successful, or an abhorred failure. For some persons, they do not wish to make this choice, and instead to blame their misdeeds, and lack of success, on others, whether it be a failure of action or mind, when it is solely their responsibility for those actions that they have caused to transpire, for by not choosing one is choosing to fail, and it is imperative that this fact, not opinion as those misguided peers so willingly spake, be held at the forefront of social interactions, for when one chooses to grant the opinions of other a great weight in their mind, they are choosing a course of pain, and failure. For instance, the solution to oral and cyber bullying is, in fact, quite simple compared to the multitude of proposed means many individuals ignorant in the subject propose. The perception of only one party being at fault in such deliberations inhabits the genesis of these false perceptions. There are indeed two parties at fault in these unfortunate incidents, the original aggressor, the "bully," and what most people consider the "victim." The "bully" is at fault for being the -- perceived -- instigator of such incidents, as is commonly accepted; however, what is uncommonly accepted by the general populace is the "victim's" own guilt in these incidents, no matter how unfortunate. This guilt stems from a choice made by the "victim," a choice that ultimately determines whether or not any mental stress or pain is gained, or afflicted, respectively, unto the "victim." This choice can be stated as thus: is this being's opinion of any importance? If the "victim" simply answers "no," then the "incident", or at the very least future "incidents," no longer increase the burden upon the "victim's" soul; in truth, they become quite trivial. If the "victim" answers "yes," then the responsibility of such pain as is inflicted falls upon the shoulders of the "bully" and the "victim." Now, if what the "bully" states is indeed a fact, and not an opinion, then denial of such a fact evolves from the denial of reality, something that is considered in today's society as a mental health disorder. This disorder is most commonly used as a "defense mechanism" against an event that posses enough traumatizing power to break the individual's mind. Bullying in itself cannot be the cause of this, for the above proposed solution quickly and effectively eliminates it, but it is not the lack of a presence that was aforementioned. For the individual's mind to break from this lacking need, the individual must have chosen to accept that presence as a necessity, instead of perceiving ther life from a more objective, self-serving focal point, thus implying that human compassion, and willingness to aid and interact with others, is the source of such pain, thus generating a larger spread of itself.

     Calm discussion worked best for the seminar. There was neither fighting nor displays of anger. This produced a continuously smooth conversation that allowed the staggeringly slow generation of new concepts and ideas.

     People could attend to the provided task.

Dramitc Reading

Part B:
My choice of a condescending, self-congratulatory tone was driven by the fact that Casio is playing into his hands. By acting in this way, Casio has just given validity to Iago's later words to Othelo, enabling him to manipulate him into suicide. I learned that Iago based his plans on possibilities, and that if they did not succeed, he would have been greatly disappointed. I also learned that if these possibilities did not occur, the outcome of the play would be different, or at least accomplished in a varied manner. This soliloquy aided in the characterization of Iago as a self-congratulatory, egotistical, intelligent figure.

Socratic Seminar Reflection #3

  The while the seminar did not directly influence my thoughts on any topic, it did provide context of a modern understanding of women and their roles that I had not considered. I continue to view the play from the perspective of an observing third party, one that does not wish to influence or draw conclusions from one's own experience, and rather that of the characters. The discussion into the role of women made me pause to consider what had been displayed in the text, and my own life experience.

   During the discussion of the role of women, and how everyone focused on the belief that Emilia was how "women really are," I would have mentioned that everything she said the would be willing to do would be for her husband, thus implying that a wife's duty is to server and better her husband, and by extension, herself through indirect means.

   The seminar worked well because everyone engaged in the discussion with little to no prompting, and this is most likely due to the fact that the discussion hinged around a polarizing issue - the role of women.

  The topics of discussion could be improved. The majority of the seminar was around a topic discussed in class, which demonstrates a significant lack of creativity and forethought, or, at the very least, quick thinking rebuttals and progression within the seminar. Overall, it felt dry, useless, unenthusiastic, and a chance for people to repeat "I agree" in many different words.

Socratic Seminar Reflection #2

     The seminar influenced my view of the "Grapes of Wrath" by introducing new ways of viewing the text. During the seminar, nothing was said that I hadn't deeply considered beforehand.

      

      Calm discussion worked best for the seminar. There was neither fighting nor displayed anger. This allowed a continuously smooth conversation that allowed the slow generation of new concepts and ideas. 

    The non-dominant group should be more assertive. If they become more assertive, discussion beyond five people would take place, causing the seminar to move forward. Overall, the seminar was quiet nice, but again pacing felt slow. 

Chapters 20-28: Family Discussion Reflection #4

Part 1:

Modern day Europe's GDP has remained almost exactly the same for six and a half years. Without any growth, Europe's economy will collapse. This is similar to the problems faced by the Joad family, in that debts remain extremely high and are unable to be paid. O'Brien, Matt. "Europe’s Greater Depression Is Worse than the 1930s."Washington Post. The Washington Post, 14 Aug. 2014. Web. 07 Dec. 2014.

Part 2:

1.  If you were faced with the possibility of a debt that could not be paid, would you flee to new lands?
2.  If you owned the last independent business of a type of production, would you sell out to a rising monopoly to escape debt?
3.  Would you defend your own economy or your traditions?

Part 3:

The most memorable part of my discussion was the amount of time it used. The topics of the discussion were satisfying, as they were different from what we normally discuss. We attempted to place ourselves in the positions of others to try and gauge our own reactions. We also looked at laws and our opinions of our neighbors for this discussion. My questions could be slightly more specific in what they ask, but otherwise they appear suitable. 

Chapters 1-9: Family Discussion Reflection

Part 1:

The European heat wave of 2003 killed 15000 people. These deaths were mostly elderly people, due to the lack of air conditioning. The heat also killed many animals, driving up food costs. This event shares similarities with that of the Dust Bowl in the U.S., where increasing heat destroyed many crops, forcing farmers out of there homes. "The Heatwave of 2003." - Met Office Education. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2014.

Part 2:

1. If a bank or other large corporation forced you off your land, would you travel with your family to another place or stay behind?
2. Would you destroy your neighbor and long-time friend's property for some much-needed money?
3. During a massive heat wave, would you go out of your way to obtain an air conditioner, or would you wait for it to pass?

Part 3:

The most memorable part of my discussion was the amount of time it used. The topics of the discussion were satisfying, as they were different from what we normally discuss. We attempted to place ourselves in the positions of others to try and gauge our own reactions. We also looked at laws and our opinions of our neighbors for this discussion. My questions could be slightly more specific in what they ask, but otherwise they appear suitable.