Romanticism & Civil Disobedience
Romanticism, Civil Disobedience & 2 Men Of Peace
Respond to Henry D. Thoreau Letter
The most important ideas is that Thoreau prefers a laissez-faire government, but he does not call for abolishing government. Rather he wants a better government.
Dear Mr. Thoreau,
I agree with what you said about the government and gave me so much view of looking at it, because some governments don’t always see what is going on and they hold too much power. And the government is no government at all. Because of how you explain that they have no fairness and don’t do anything to pay you back from what you did to pay them. I agree that each person should do what he or she thinks is right, rather than what the law says; because whatever he/she does what they think is right is what they can’t control, even their minds can’t be controlled by the governors. And I think that the person who follows his/her own conscience is much more free than what the law says. Because they can’t put your mind to jail but could put your body to jail. And he/she has his/her own rights of doing something they think is right. And they probably need an auditor for listening to that person for what they have to say for what they think isn’t right. And that they’re being blind that they’re being enslaved by the governors that are telling people that if they don’t do this they will be put to jail. And I agree that they should pay back for what you payed them. They don’t do any favors while we do favors for them in your time period.
Response to Nelson Mandela
Thoreau and Mandela Conclusion
And that they would respond how much the people are trying to fight for freedom. And how the blacks are being killed and racism is starting. So much innocent people are being killed by cops from hesitating and panicking from them being over protective from themselves and the other cops. I think that they would say to let them have freedom and do what they want, stop killing innocent people and have faith over another.
The similarities between these two were both leaders, both fought for freedom and did nonviolence to get them. But the differences between these two are is Gandhi is a great gem was born in 1869 and raised in western India, after studying law in London he introduced "Civil Disobedience" to sure Indian population. And Mandela was born in
1918 and gained their inspiration to their ancestors regarding oppression. After doing
bachelor of arts from University of South Africa, he became voice against the suppression of people. I think how the world was shaped by what these two believed in shaped how the world looks like today. People now have freedom and speech, but they're starting to use violence to get attention.
Sometimes people with 20/20 vision don't always see the reality in the world. They need glasses to see the better reality and get to see more of it clearly. The idealism of people seeking the future and the ideas. I think about it by the people who needs glasses to see the reality more. Like in this generation, the government is like sort of not caring and don't care what's happening because they can't see unless someones tells them or if they hear about it. But sometimes don't always do something bout' it. And how the Polices are doing something to the innocent people and the government not doing anything about it.
I agree that some people could use Idealism to practice something like freedom or something that they want in their life and seeking their future. And I think that it is a good idea that they could do something to get what they want from seeking their own future and practicing their way of life and something to get freedom. The ideas of the people chose was probably affecting the government because of the people wanting more freedom and wanting to get something out of the government. And people who are struggling all across the world. It probably is falling apart slowly from seeking too much freedom and getting something they want. And technology is affecting the world by accusing and making people look like mess.
I agree with this because if you are trying to be knowing what people are up to they could turn you around and make you a problem if you're trying to see what that person is up to.
When do I think it is a good idea is when that person is trying to have a freedom of the individuals, like to act out their feeling that is much more important than the government to get what they want or what they're suffering from.
And what I would think that affecting the American Culture today is that most people are starting to use and acting out their feelings to show that person how they feel by their actions or how that person is looking at them. And they could tell how they would feel or what is making them suffer. They could sometimes tell too.
Hope, faith in the future if we ware trie to ourselves we can do great things.
What I would think about this idea is that Conor said "Theres a lot of optimism in changing scenery, in seeing what's down the road" he said. I would think about how his quote is understanding that more of what you see for your future is down the road. And you have to go down the road and see whats ahead of you. I agree that I could be optimism because I always seem to hope and always wait for successful outcomes of something. When do I think it's a good idea is when you go down the road and see what you hoped of or dreamt of doing. I don't think it effected the way of people think about being optimistic in the American culture today.
Intuition Vs. Logic
Intuition and Logic are two strategies for prediction and problem solving.
Logic is not better, just different. Both strategies have their advantages and apply in different situations. Sometimes we need to use both. Sometimes we can use either one, because the problem is so simple it doesn't much matter how we solve it. Sometimes it matters; if we happen to choose the wrong approach, it may prevent us from solving our problem.