Essay #6

1) Essay #6 (Definition of Love) Outline
A) Introduction
i) Inevitable part of life.
ii) My opinion on the subject is not based on a first-hand experience, rather by watching and hearing people's opinions and stories. From what I've witnessed and heard I've come to the conclusion that love is merely a temporary obsession, an addiction which consists of more physical attraction than emotional or mental attraction between the two partners. Another thing I've noticed through out my life is that between couples the love felt is never equivalent. [Should this be my concluding essay or should I end up with something similiar proving that even after my research and interviews my opinion remains the same?]
B) Dictionary definition.
i) 14 Noun definitions
ii) 6 Verb definitions
C) Scientific Definition [helps support my addictive/obsession theory]
i) For a while now scientists have been trying to figure out why we fall in love. They believe that like everything else there must be a logical explanation. But how do you test loves involvement in the brain? Several things have been tried, such as, the test done at the University College in London by Andreas Bartels and Semir Zeki.
ii) The test done with the 'partners' pictures [a test was done where a person is showed a picture of the person they claim to be head over heels for and they see what parts of the brain react]
iii) What parts of the brain does it effect?
D) People's opinions [I asked a few people to 'define love' and sorted the responses into two categories] [this will bring up new perspectives and either further support my belief or bring up contreversies I can prove wrong]
i) First hand experiences
ii) No experience responses
E) Changes over time
i) How people defined love 100 years ago is different than now, I'll include stuff from the middle ages til present time.
F) Cultural differences
i) If enough information is found I'll add stuff on how different cultures view love. This will probably end up including marriage.
G) Conclusion
i) Were people able to convince me otherwise?
ii) Love is taken too lightly, people say I love you way too soon.
iii) Pretty much restate my introduction

It'd be cool if you included your own definition. Try not to think of wording it. When I asked people I said I'm gonna ask you something and you have to just tell me whatever comes to mind without having time to construct an answer. Kind of like those ink blots where you say the first word that comes to mind.

Thanks! :)

Who to Blame?

It is the responsibility of those who know about plagiarism to teach those who don't, in this case teachers. On the first days of school almost all of my teachers spoke about plagiarism and how it would not be tolerated in their classrooms, they were even kind enough to define it for us and have it defined on our syllabus. But what about those who's teachers don't go the extra mile, who were never told what plagiarizing is. You can't expect someone to not do something they don't realize is wrong, especially for 'not knowing enough'. It's like expecting someone to explain what a flower is in french when they don't even know how to say flower in french. If the school really wants a non-tolerance policy for plagiarism then they should be informing students of how to avoid plagirizing.

How To Be A Good Liar

Since you were small you’ve been told that lying is bad, a ‘no no’, like some parents like to put it. You’ve always known that the right thing to do is tell the truth, at all times, and you’ve probably realized that there are consequences, good and bad. But is lying always bad when there are consequences either way?
Several believe that it’s better to tell the truth at all times, no matter the outcome. The good news are that when you’re telling the truth all time you don’t have to keep track of what lies you’ve told, no need to ever keep your stories straight. People consider you honest, which nowadays can be hard for people to say of others. You feel somewhat free because you never have to hide anything. The downside? Plain and simple, the truth hurts, sometimes. People are sensitive and when telling your real opinion of something they might get offended. Therefore, one who chooses to be truthful at all times must learn how to approach things and word their responses carefully. For example A asks B whether B likes A’s new shirt, B doesn’t. Rather than saying no and hurting A’s feelings, B says something like, “It’s not something I’d wear, but I like it for you.” When someone trusts you with something, you’re somewhat required to lie in order to not say what you’ve been told because people can be nosy. So once again, rather then being blunt, you need to word your responses carefully. If someone’s being nosy about some secret you’ve been told and they ask, “Is it true that…” you shouldn’t say yes or no just to remain truthful, it’s best to just say, “It’s really not my business to discuss.”

I'D LIKE SOME FEEDBACK ON WHAT MORE EXAMPLES I CAN USE, I ALREADY HAVE SOME OTHERS IN MIND BUT I'M WORKING ON WORDING THEM AND EXPANDING ON THEM. WHAT SITUATIONS ONE FINDS THEMSELVES WHEN TELLING THE TRUTH HAS BAD CONSEQUENCES, AND WHAT SITUATIONS HAVE GOOD CONSEQUENCES..ETC.
I'M ALSO WORKING ON THE TITLE.

2. What affect do these ideals have on people in the U.S.?

At a younger age each year kids are beginning to not only learn the difference between skinny and fat, but also that fat is not fine, especially in the United States. The way we are supposed to look is being engraved into our brains everyday through TV commercials, magazine ads, billboards, radio commercials, and internet ads. The people running these ads and commercials only care about selling products, they don’t realize, care, or are being ignorant to the fact that they’re drilling into teenagers, kids, and even adults every hour of the day that they don’t fit the part, they’re not skinny enough, beautiful enough, etc. This leads to dyed hair, plastic surgeries, eating disorders, and even suicides. When striving for perfection one doesn’t just break a sweat, there’s consequences one must face, mental and physical pain, because even if one is capable of reaching such high standards they’re not happy, they have hidden scars and bruises, and always the idea of not being good enough carved into their brains.

First Draft of Essay #4

The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn has always been a subject of debate, especially in the matter of racism. However, this book isn't racist; people need to take the time to actually read the book with an open mind to realize this.
By simply reading the ‘n’ word in the book readers are dubbing it racist. Some, like Arac, claim that this book is “…an excuse for well-meaning white people to use the term n…” (435) But really think about this, who reads a book as an excuse to use such an awful word? Also, he contradicts himself by stating they’re well-meaning, so obviously they don’t mean to use it for racist reasons. One tends to forget that the date in which this took place and the date this novel was written in was a period where the ‘n’ word was used frequently. Though this word isn’t very nice and it brings up memories of African American hardships we need to remember that this story takes place prior to the abolishment of slavery. It’s like what Kaplan says, “…accuse it of being ‘racist’ because some of its characters use offensive racial epithets. These characters belong to their place and time, which is the Mississippi Valley thirty years before Emancipation.” (378). Which brings me to my next point, the book has to be accurate with the time period thus there were racist characters, however the characters weren’t extremely racist and cruel, and there was still white characters who cared about slaves. Anything racist was minor and only there to remain true to the time period. Various even believe that he contradicts his historical realism by making some of the characters too pleasant towards their slaves. For example Mary Jane and her sisters crying over their slave family being separated when sold, even the Duke, the bad guy, was against separating the family. Graff and Phelan share the belief that Mark Twain contradicts himself, especially when discussing how Miss Watson freed Jim in her will, “…Twain sins against the laws of realism – real Southern slaveholders were not characteristically prone to such changes of heart.” (279). Then there’s Huck who through out the story keeps his promise to Jim by not telling anyone how Jim’s a runaway slave. If Huck ever does come off as racist it's merely because of the influences society was imposing on him, he honestly didn’t know any better.
CLEARLY NOT DONE JUST JOTTED DOWN MOST OF MY MAIN POINTS AND SOME OF THE EXAMPLES.

Not Racist

The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn has always been a subject of debate, especially in the matter of racism. However, this book isn't racist. One tends to forget that the date in which this took place and the date this novel was written in was a period where the ‘n’ word was used frequently. The book has to be accurate with the time period thus there were racist characters, yet there’s still white characters who cared about slaves, most notably Huck. If Huck ever does come off as racist it's merely because of the influences society was imposing on him, he honestly didn’t know any better.