How's mah essay?

[brawndolicious]

It was in in-class essay on Crito.  You have to say what you think about the advice Socrates was given at the end regarding why he should obey Athens, even if he disagrees with his ruling, and you have to tie in what you think MLK or Thoreau would think about it.  You can tell that I was rushed at the end.  I'm wondering if my arguments make sense though.  I was half-asleep when we went over Crito and on Tuesday so I'm wondering if there was any part of it I didn't get.

I can sympathize with Athens for enforcing an unjust death sentence on
Socrates and with Socrates for believing that the sentence was
perfect.  While the Athenian government condemned Socrates on the lie
that he demeaned the value of the Greek gods by saying they were
simply omnipotent humans who apparently had no conscience, At his
trial, the jurors sentenced Socrates on the belief that the majority
must rule over all.  While Socrates disagreed with the opinion of the
jurors, he respected their opinions on the basis that he was an
Athenian too and could not simply ignore any law or ruling that
happens in Athens.  This view of not destroying your own state was
adopted by many, many other philosophers, even those who believed in
democracy.  Socrates' reason for drinking his own poison was that
society was not meant to help the majority, but that society was meant
to allow anybody to hurt or help themselves based on their own moral
code and that every person in that society had a responsibility to the
state to understand how their moral code shall never control their
life as much as the state will.
   The reason the Athenian prosecutors prosecuted Socrates was that they
disagreed with Socrates' opinion that the average person had no
business voting on political matters that they had no clue about, even
if the average person had no clue about politics.  The Athenian
government was a routine of pandering to the state religion and to the
majority rule, two things that Socrates hated even though they were
the two lone principles that his city functioned on.  The person who
gave Socrates advice at the end of "Crito" indirectly admits that
Athens is limited by the knowledge of its average man, who is stupid,
and that it is not those who have studied and respect politics that
sentenced Socrates, but the simple majority of the jurors at his
trial.  Socrates' understanding of this concept is shown when he
refuses to leave Athens, and is automatically sentenced to death,
because he believed that he had the right to act "guilty" as much as
any Athenian had the right to vote.
   I agree with the advice given to Socrates at the end of  "Crito" for
it logically explains that Socrates is required to show respect for
law by following every step of it, whether he is guilty or not.  While
I would not have chosen for Socrates to be guilty if I was a juror at
his trial, I can understand and the logic of the person giving
Socrates advice at the end of "Crito", because he clearly explains the
state does not choose what morality any of its citizens have, but that
it simply chooses whether you are or are not going to help it function
as it does.  Whether it is a warrior society run by a tyrant, or a
religious democracy, the state can only choose what happens to those
in the state who help it function, its citizens.
   I believe that Martin Luther King would agree with the advice given
at the end of "Crito" for it says that a person may be disobedient,
but that they have a responsibility to not destroy their own
government.  King believed that you can not try to destroy the society
you are a part of for you have the choice of whether or not you are a
part of it.  Like Socrates who refused to leave Athens, King disobeyed
the law but did not try to destroy the infrastructure that created the
laws.  King's beliefs are in line with the advice Socrates was given
for King believed that you must be part of the majority to be against
the state laws, but that the individual by their self had no right to
oppose the laws of the state.
   I believe that Henry David Thoreau would have also agreed with the
advice that was given to Socrates at the end of the dialogue, "Crito"
for he believed that governments designed to pander to specific
ideologies, majority rule and a state religion, were wrong and only
meant to give people a false sense of control.  Thoreau believed that
the government is meant to give people the ability to control their
lives with as little interruption as possible.  While he may have
opposed the idea that Socrates would be punished just for having an
opinion and teaching others that opinions, he would understand that
there is no responsibility the government has to allow Socrates to
continue teaching his opinion if the majority of people disagreed with
Socrates.  Thoreau believed that no government was  designed to be
upheld by people who disagreed with its principles, just as Socrates
believed that the majority of Athenians had the wrong idea of what
makes a good government function, which is why the advice given to
Socrates at the end of "Crito" was right in saying that your
principles do not matter to the government until you agree to be a
part of it and obey the laws of that government.  That is why Thoreau
would agree with that advice.
   While the law itself was not at all just in Athens for it sentenced
people to death for having certain beliefs, the advice at the end of
the dialogue, "Crito", was a simple observation of the facts that any
government is based on.  The advice simply explains that a citizens
personal comfort is not controlled by a legal system they agreed to,
but that the citizen agreed to join other humans.  I believe that any
person who believed in the idea of government would find no error in
this advice for this advice simply explains that no matter what a
citizen does, their government is responsible for those actions.

[warcock]

wait so its in-class? and its here. If this is the corrected version dont you have an idea about what you know based on your grade. Or do you continously go to your teacher's office hours to massage his balls which introduces a form of bias.

 

[Van Cruncheon]

i'd knock you down to a C just for using the first-person

[Ichirou]

i'd knock you down to a C just for using the first-person

I had professors in college who would've given me a failing grade just for having done that.

[Phoenix Dark]

Same here. Fail in the first sentence. I'm quite a prolific writer when needed. Online I'm just lazy. I wish I could link some of my greatest work, but it's not on this computer. I'd have to pull the paper out a drawer and re-type it onto this computer lol.

ethnographic study into the NBPP. I got a gun pointed in my face, but I got an A so it was worth it

[warcock]

Well am nintendho lives in San jose. The peformances means for science and math are probably the highest in the country. But when it comes to english its made of latent fail. You obviously wont hold back silicon valley's progression because people cant write like tvc/prole/mandark/loki. They dont need to write well. And if they need to get a federal grant or application letter they can hire professional writers

[brawndolicious]

I think it's supposed to be first-person, it asks whether you agree.  I turned it in before I posted it, we typed it in the computer lab.

[warcock]

your past chs right? de anza or uni?

[brawndolicious]

de anza.  you went there right?  are you in ucla now?  haha, surrounded by persians.

[brawndolicious]

U BE SURROUNDED!

[warcock]

nah fool i got into uci and ucla but im too ghetto to afford either. I go to a shitty csu.  Deanza is pretty fine, avoid newton for phys 4 series and despite you having brotherly love for the man DO NOT TAKE FARSHOD MOSH FOR MATH. English should be a total breeze at deanza, hey I got As. You should be able to get into pretty much any UC with 3.5+ from de anza. But yous persians are cool peoples, most of my friends in SJ were persians. Stereotypes for the win, but persians are smarter and nicer then arabs in general.

[brawndolicious]

yeah I've heard people say they hate farshod.  the thing about essays is that I'm REALLY shitty at them because I've literally written maybe 6 big essays in the last two years (high school teachers like presentations more).  I need to take some public speaking classes for easy A's.  My teacher will give you a D for minor grammar problems (she did on my practice essay).

[warcock]

hmm speech is like a given A , some teachers are more ridiculous then others(in terms of ease). If your a science major, get chem out of the way so you can start on o chem. It dramatically increases your chances of getting to a UC of choice if you got that done. Bunch of friends got into UCB with low 3s, (ucb is going through a lack of quality period as well though atm, HP funded them 100 mill to change this :/)

[etiolate]

I think it's supposed to be first-person, it asks whether you agree.  I turned it in before I posted it, we typed it in the computer lab.

The no first person rule is normally because the reader assumes you think or believe everything you are saying simply because you are writing it within an argument paper, so stating 'I" is redundant.  Since it is asking a question, in an almost response like way then maybe first person is acceptable.  Some people are more anal about it than others.

[brawndolicious]

hmm speech is like a given A , some teachers are more ridiculous then others(in terms of ease). If your a science major, get chem out of the way so you can start on o chem. It dramatically increases your chances of getting to a UC of choice if you got that done. Bunch of friends got into UCB with low 3s, (ucb is going through a lack of quality period as well though atm, HP funded them 100 mill to change this :/)

LOL wow Berkeley has slipped kind of heh but I do know how hellish O chem is.  I'm actually taking chem now but I'll be lucky to get a B this semester unless the teacher takes pity on me.  Doesn't help that I didn't study much at all for my first midterm.

The no first person rule is normally because the reader assumes you think or believe everything you are saying simply because you are writing it within an argument paper, so stating 'I" is redundant.  Since it is asking a question, in an almost response like way then maybe first person is acceptable.  Some people are more anal about it than others.

This one was very confusing actually because the prompt I chose first asks you to define what the advice is, whether you agree with it, and then what MLK and Thoreau would think.  In 2 hours.  I could have chosen the easier topic on Antigone but I was completely asleep during that lecture so I had no idea what to write.

[T234]

I actually quoted Sammy fuckin Hagar in my ENG102 Argumentative Research Paper on why the speed limit should be raised. It was only the intro, but still.

[FlameOfCallandor]

i'd knock you down to a C just for using the first-person

 

You wrote an essay in first person. Are you in third grade?

[Tauntaun]

"Rock on So-Crates!"

[recursivelyenumerable]

The no first person rule is normally because the reader assumes you think or believe everything you are saying simply because you are writing it within an argument paper, so stating 'I" is redundant.  Since it is asking a question, in an almost response like way then maybe first person is acceptable.  Some people are more anal about it than others.

It's good to avoid the use of first person in most cases but not when doing so requires ridiculous grammatical contortions.  (and replacing "I" with "the author" is a pointless cheat).

[brawndolicious]

The no first person rule is normally because the reader assumes you think or believe everything you are saying simply because you are writing it within an argument paper, so stating 'I" is redundant.  Since it is asking a question, in an almost response like way then maybe first person is acceptable.  Some people are more anal about it than others.

It's good to avoid the use of first person in most cases but not when doing so requires ridiculous grammatical contortions.  (and replacing "I" with "the author" is a pointless cheat).

yeah this is the problem I figured I'd have.

[Van Cruncheon]

i thought the point of being a french intellectual was to be underpaid and to be very vocal about said lack of adherence to the tenets of either capitalism and/or fiscal prudence, observing that currency is codified political tyranny or positing that hedonism need not be expressed in consumer terms

or am i thinking of the two poles of german intellectualism

[brawndolicious]

You are only allowed to use the first person if you happen to be an overpaid French intellectual, otherwise it is a huge no-no.  You want to write not as if you have the force of personal conviction on your side, but rather if you have the force of fact as the central crux of your argument.  Whatever stylistic flourishes you may want to interject should serve merely as window dressing and shouldn't cloud any of your major points.* 
*Again, disregard this if you happen to be a French intellectual.

that makes sense but I have no where near the brainpower or energy to do that.

[brawndolicious]

You may be right.  I never did it with any other essay though so she might take pity since it's in-class.

[Madrun Badrun]

It was in in-class essay on Crito.  You have to say what you think about the advice Socrates was given at the end regarding why he should obey Athens, even if he disagrees with his ruling, and you have to tie in what you think MLK or Thoreau would think about it. 

Its been a long time since I read Crito, but wasn't the advice given to Socrates from Crito was too leave and it was Socrates who said he had a duty to see justice though?  You seem to have it backwards but it could be because of the wording. 

[Phoenix Dark]

You may be right.  I never did it with any other essay though so she might take pity since it's in-class.

Pity? In class is the perfect time to do something awesome which will set you apart from your dumb classmates. I love getting brownie points with teachers in liberal arts classes.

[brawndolicious]

It was in in-class essay on Crito.  You have to say what you think about the advice Socrates was given at the end regarding why he should obey Athens, even if he disagrees with his ruling, and you have to tie in what you think MLK or Thoreau would think about it. 

Its been a long time since I read Crito, but wasn't the advice given to Socrates from Crito was too leave and it was Socrates who said he had a duty to see justice though?  You seem to have it backwards but it could be because of the wording. 

nah, the part the prompt quoted was from a translation that put this advice, given to him by the Athenian authorities, at the very, very end.  the "advice was that since socrates is an athenian, he is required to obey his government.  I could get the exact quote for you if you want.

pd, wtf are you talking about brownie points.  my teacher would care more about the points you make then how pretty your words sound.

[Phoenix Dark]

i never said it should be pretty. overwhelm him/her with quality work whenever possible. they'll expect it of you eventually. it's hard for me to complete stuff if it's not challenging or completive, and that's how i kept myself awake in liberal arts classes

[brawndolicious]

yeah but the way the prompt said it kind of made it clear you're saying YOUR opinion.  I think I'm allowed to say "I".

[Phoenix Dark]

never say i unless your name is scott

[youtube=425,350]u-D5ugP0bFg[/youtube]
 

[Madrun Badrun]

I could get the exact quote for you if you want.

I'd like that. Thanks.

[brawndolicious]

"Listen, then, Socrates,, to us who have brought you up.  Think not of life and children first, and of justice afterwards, but of justice first, that you may be justified before the princes of the world below.  For neither will you nor any that belong to you be happier or holier or juster in this life, or happier in another, if you do as Crito bids.  now you depart in innocence, a sufferer and not a doer of evil; a victim, not of laws, but of men.  But if you go fort, returning evil for evil, and injury for injury, breaking the covenants and agreements which you have made with us, and wronging those whom you ought least to wrong, that is to say, yourself, your friends, your country, and us, we shall be angry with you while you live, and our brethren, the laws in the world below, will receive you as an enemy; for they will know that you have done your best to destroy us.  Listen, then to us and not to Crito"

I was wrong in saying that this is what the Athenian authorities were telling him.  This is what he was imagining to himself.