i agree and disagree that “that government is best which governs least” because for example, the U.S i feel has too little government. people breaks laws so often and they don’t care because it can result in only spending a few nights in jail. for example when the U.S had a prohibition, which means the made the consumption and sales of alcohol illegal. i believe that is a government with too much power, but then at the same time people would go drink illegally in speakeasies and only spend a few night in jail IF they were caught. so i think that is a government with little power. the people don’t take the government seriously. But there’s countries that have too much government power to a point where they will arrest you for things you say. places like China or North Korea where they censor what you read on the internet, you can’t say anything about the government and if you do they could kill you or arrest you for it. the role of the government “is limited only to those spheres of activity within which the individual citizen has the right to act.” when Thoreau “Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it. . .” hes talking about a government that has dictatorship because if you speak out against it you will be killed or arrested. the fear that dictators push onto its people cause them not to speak up and live in fear. the role for civil disobedience today is the ways people protest against something like the government. there’s many forms of civil disobedience like marches, rallies, walk-outs, etc. today there have been marches for women’s rights, pro life, black lives matter, and many more. the most recent form of protest will be taking place in march for students to show they want something to be done to prevent school shootings. they will walk out of school, so its a walk-out protest, and stand outside for 17 minutes for the 17 victims that died in the Florida school shooting.
the connections i can make between Thoreau’s thoughts and Emerson’s are the both had the same idea on life. they both thought you should appreciate the world you live in and build your own path. the main point of “Where I Live and What I Lived For,” is that you should live your life as simple as can be. to live in simplicity means you get the most joy and satisfaction out of life. the mait point of “the conclusion” is the same as “self-reliance” thoreau’s belief is that you should be thankful for your life no matter how you think it sucks. also you need to be independent and make what you want life to be like. the benefits of thoreau’s experiment and living in the woods would be that God will see you being independent and turning away from society’s ill effects or sins. the wood experiment would make life simpler again and make the effect of having to please society less of a problem for us. if i were to do this experiment what would i miss the most? well i think i would miss talking to other people. and what i don’t get from the experiment is, wouldn’t god want us to glory him as a whole? to all be together to praise him and thank him? i think i could do the experiment if i needed to because i could use some peace and quiet at times. but i do not think i would like to because i like being around people and i think that’s what god would like too. I think that any modern reader would be able to take out, in regards to transcendentalism, is the fact that you should live your own life and you shouldn’t be afraid of what anyone says. but we all know this a lot harder to do than what we say or think. we were born being told we need each other and we need to work together. but we also know that we’ve been broken down by what others say to us or about us, and we should take a break from it.
independent reading is for the english teachers and to let them know we are doing reading on the side of school, homework, sports, and work. it’s hard to actually encourage us to actually read because we are already very busy, so being forced to cram a two books in the marking quarter makes us hate reading. maybe if it was for bonus instead of a grade we’d like it more. the first book i picked out for the 3rd marking quarter is “The A B C Murders.” i picked this book because a friend read it before and said it was interesting. also i’m more interested into murder mysteries, so i thought i could actually get into this book. after reading the first chapter i think this book will be about a hunt to find a serial killer that looks for victims based on the alphabet. my initial reaction of this book was this is interesting. some regards ill have to the book trailer is that it will come off as all of the other murder mystery movie trailers. or i’ll just have no clue how i’ll have to make it.
my first thought on transcendentalism were confusion. now this be because i’ve been gone for 3 days now, but what i got from it was that it was dealt with snobby people. even with “nature” and “self-reliance” i had no clue what was going on. i had to read it a million times and ask my classmates what they are getting from it. it took me forever. and even now i do not think i know what is going on in them.
so i guess in transcendentalism, man is naturally good. which i guess could be true, man is good at heart but taught to be different. but what if it isn’t true? what about people like rapists, or serial killers? aren’t the born that way? i mean no one taught them that killing is okay, or raping is good. so i guess i would have to disagree with their philosophy. but in my opinion, it depends on the environment that they grow up and live in. It also depends on the rules of the society that you live in. If society taught children that it’s okay to harm or hurt other people, then the child would grow up believing that idea. This can already be seen in countries that have child soldiers. People will naturally follow the “wrong” and “right” way that they are taught. but i do not thing we are all born evil. i do believe we need rules, without them hell would run lose. for example, robbing. people would take things and not know it would be bad, and their excuse would be “well why can’t i have it?” or for a better example, years ago there were not many rule, and men got to do whatever they wanted simply because they were men, and women were hurt constantly. abused, raped, and worse. it is hard to say all men are created evil or good. they are mixed with both. men are imperfect, but that’s what makes us human. we make mistakes but that’s how we learn. the rules are there for a reason, and that’s why i believe we need them.