Going into this poem, I was not looking forward to it. Poetry has never been my thing, especially knowing how long this poem is. But as usual, I start to understand it when we start talking about it together. Looking at all the sections combined, this is a very powerful poem, and I actually enjoyed it somewhat. There was just something nice about the way Whitman put what he wanted to say together
I thought section three was the most interesting. I liked how he was talking about the talkers and they’re just talking about what they could do instead of doing. I feel like that is very prevalent in our society today, especially with the issues that have recently been going on. There are so many people who say “this needs to change” or “we need to do that” but those people either never do anything or wait for someone else to do it first. Maybe if they do something, it’s just for one day and they stop there. That’s not how change happens, however. He also mentions there’s no better time than now. Both of these topics remind me of a quote Ronald Reagan said “If not us, who? And if not now, when”. This quote extremely relates to this poem and basically sums up section three.
As I said in the last paragraph, there are still people today who act like the people Whitman is talking about. It’s the people who sit around crying about nothing being changed, but they’re just sitting around. He also talks about how we are all connected through nature and we’re just a piece of grass in a field.
A question I still have is why is God mentioned so frequently in the fourteenth section. I don’t understand why he mentions it if we’re all connected by nature. Since he mentioned it so much, it makes me think we solely come from a divine power, not nature and that everything isn’t connected by nature.
I would rate this poem an eight. It was a fairly easy poem to understand and I could sort of relate to it.
My initial reaction was, I hate transcendentalism. It seemed really complicated especially after reading the two excerpts, “Nature” and “Self Reliance”, but once we broke it down and started talking about it, I slowly started understanding it and kind of enjoying it.
I believe that every man is naturally good. If man is good and follows everything good, then they wouldn’t know of any thing bad. There are bad people in this world however. Though I don’t know how they “became bad”, their ideas seem to rub off on others, causing others to be bad and do bad things. That’s why man had to create laws. But maybe laws are the things that make us bad. Think about it. When you were young, your parents told you not to do something, that just made you want to do it even more. Laws might do that for some people, even if it risks other people’s lives.
I would argue for my side by saying that laws could potentially create bad people. When you come into this world, you don’t know of anything bad. You’re family is all around you and they are smiling and there is happiness everywhere. Though you don’t know what a smile means yet or what happiness is, you naturally know it’s something good. At this point in your life, all you know of is good. Then you go on with your life and you see things happen, small things maybe, but you know that it isn’t right either by the person being punished or you just know. That’s how “bad” gets introduced into people’s lives. Maybe it’s someone stealing something or even just speeding. We know these are bad things because there are laws saying those things are wrong, and there are consequences. No one wants to be punished so they stay good.
The point of independent reading is to encourage students to read for a grade. Reading is important and it’s better for students to read what they want to read instead of being forced to read something.
For the 3rd quarter I chose to read is The Host by Stephenie Meyer. This book is a little bit different for me. I usually go for sappy lovey dovey teenage books but this is sci-fy. I chose this book because Elissa suggested it to me. She said she really enjoyed it. I read the summary and thought I’d give it a try. After reading the first chapter, you can’t really tell what’s going to happen. It basically starts off talking about things you don’t know yet. My initial reaction is, it’s boring so far, but I’m going to give it a chance.
I’m concerned about making a trailer that would accurately describe the mood of the book
From debating, I learnedhow to properly debate. Normally when I argue with someone, it’s just a waste of time really. Neither of the people who are arguing have super compelling points to change the other person’s opinion. Everything that is said during that “argument” is just pointless.
When you fight with your parents, all they ever say is “because I said so”, but that’s not an answer. It just ends the argument and it doesn’t solve anything. In those situations, as the kid, we can’t really say anything that would change their mind. “Because I said so” isn’t a very compelling argument, but it is a good way to end an argument.
I feel like now, while arguing with my friends, which happens quite often, the arguments will be more constructed and strong. There won’t be any pointless information like there usually is.
The best debate was probably Jack and Evan’s debate. Jack had some pretty strong points and his rebuttal was very well written. It was also really intense for a topic that isn’t normally intense.
In the beginning of the unit, I thought debating was easy since before, since we did it in large groups. That was definitely a lot easier than one on one debates. With one on one debates, you had to be extremely prepared. It was really difficult forming all parts of your argument because you weren’t really sure what your opponent was going to say on their side.
The rebuttal was the hardest part personally. I’m not very good at active listening so i couldn’t come up with any questions other than the general ones i came up with before. Answering the rebuttal was also difficult too because we’re not experts on our topics. Some questions that i heard we’re really hard and stumped the other person.
Teen Amazon accounts are extremely helpful and great. Many parents would benefit from setting one up with their children. One reason is, many parents don’t always know what to get their children for Christmas or for their birthdays. If they have these accounts, parents can see what their children search for and see what they’re interested in. Maybe they can even see what they have in their carts and surprise them with gifts. They can also make sure they’re not buying things that they shouldn’t be buying, since everything needs to get approved by the parent or parents before the order can go through. The kids can also write a message while they are “checking out” to say “hey mom, i need this for my science project (or any of school related activity)”.
Most parents allow their children to make their own accounts anyways. They just need to be sure that they can trust their children with buying things with their parent’s money. Though it still is extremely safe, since it needs to be approved by the parents first. Most teens and pre teens should be responsible enough to take that kind of responsibility. This is also going to teach the kids how to manage their money better. There is a way for the parents to set limits (almost like an allowance). If the child wants more than one thing, but only has enough money for one thing, they need to manage their money and make the best decision. You may think that teaching children how to make difficult decisions is pointless, but it’s a very helpful skill in life. Although you may not think deciding between a new nerf gun or the newest video game is a hard decision, but for an eleven year old, it is.
This also teaching teens how to remember passwords and logins since it’s their own account. It is crucial that kids start memorizing things like that, especially in this technology based world.
At first, I did not enjoy this poem. Personally I’m not a fan of poetry.
As dumb as it sounds, I don’t like thinking about what I’m reading. I’ll think about it but just everything that’s on the surface. I’m not very good at finding “deeper” meanings in just in normal literature, like themes. When you bring poetry into it and poets use similes, metaphors, and personification, that confuses me even more, which can complicate things. We were told that everything in a poem is there for a reason, there’s always a reason why the poet broke a line up or ended a line
at a weird place. There’s always a reason for the word choice too, however, I can never seem to find those reasons why.
I have a lot of questions about the work. I didn’t understand what the italics text means. I know there’s a reason, since everything means something in a poem. Also, all of the lines are staggered and indented differently and again, I’m not sure what that means. The last fourteen lines of the poem are separated by 3 asterisks, which again clearly means something and I again don’t know what that means.
I think this work is about talking about your problems to people. It’s healthy to let people know how you’re feeling. It may make you feel better in the end. Keeping your problems to yourself could cause more problems for yourself. Releasing these problems or thoughts to your friends or trusted adults might make your life more enjoyable. If it isn’t about that, it has something to do about life. Maybe something about life experiences. There is a lot of figurative language used in this that poem that can point to something about life, so you can assume that it has something to do with that. Or maybe it’s just about someone who is depressed about life.
I think the allusions that are mentioned in the footnotes are the most important since they’re stated right there what they mean. They clearly have an extremely important role in this poem than we may think.
My opinions did not change on this topic. Although my opponent had some very strong points, it’s not politically correct to say that women should not be in combat. That’s just wrong, it’s 2018.
The most interesting fact I learned from my debate were the scientific ones. Like the fact that women can have better endurance then men because they have a higher body fat. The fat burns at a higher rate and since there is more of it, women can exercise longer. Also women’s muscles don’t get fatigued as fast because more muscle groups work together. Men only use the muscle that is needed when they do physical activities.
My topic activates emotions in society because there are many people who think very strongly about equallity and woman’s rights. Though this isn’t the most popular to protest in woman’s marches, there are people out there that strongly agree that women should have the same equal chances as men.
This debate was already emotionally charged, however I feel as high school students, not many cared that much.
Ethically this debate was important because most people’s ethics are to show equally and give everyone a fair chance. Women in combat is a perfect example. Ethics come into my debate for fairness, equality and right vs wrong. Fairness can also be going against my topic. People may fight that it’s only fair for men to be in combat, it’s the best choice for our country. Right vs wrong is an ethic that is in favor for my topic. Anyone in their right mind would believe that it’s wrong to exclude women from the army.
I think that the appeal to emotion is the most important for my topic. The most common appeal used was logic and i think logic was the most common between both sides. Both sides used a lot of rhetorical questions.
I learned that it is pretty difficult, especially if you get a topic you aren’t passionate about. It’s also a lot of work to find reliable resources and different information. It seemed like every page i went on had the same information. I also learned that it’s hard to fully prepare. Though you can do research on the opposing side, you don’t fully know what information they’re going to give. This will affect future debates because I will be more prepared and attempt to find better sources.
For the second marking period, I read A Work in Progress by Connor Franta. This is a non fiction memoir. I’m usually not a fan of nonfiction books but this one was really good and well written, considering it wasn’t written by a true wr Connor is an American writer, Youtuber, photographer, and entertainer. In this book, he talks about his life. Everything from his first race he ran in to how he created his company, Common Culture Coffee. I recommend this book to everybody especially if you’re a fan of Connor Franta or just enjoy reading memoirs.
My debate topic is women in combat and it’s on the pro side. This is also my view on this topic. I know that this has been a problem for a very long time, but not just in combat. Women have been belittled for years and years. For example, not being able to vote or men thinking their too weak to work so all they can do is stay at home and cook, clean, and take care of the children. that’s just unfair Men would say our bodies can’t handle it, but what if it’s actually their bodies that can’t. Women can hold babies for 9 months AND give birth to them, but men think we’re “weak”. I don’t see men doing that! It just doesn’t make any sense personally. When you search up “women in combat roles”, the first thing that comes up is the Wikipedia page. Then there’s an article by CNN that says “Get Ready for More US Women in combat”, which states that more women are going to be in combat in the near future. Another article that comes up is from NPR.org, this is a podcast. One way I can approach this in a logical way is to say that it’s 2018 and any women should be able to do what she wants to do. If she wants to put her life on the line in war, then she should be able to. There isn’t any reason why women shouldn’t be able to fight for their country just like men. An ethical issue regarding this topic is the fact that women can do whatever they want to do. Anything that men can do, women can do too. It’s simply common sense. All emotions can new brought into play with this topic. Anger would be a big one personally.
Benjamin Franklin is crazy. The majority of his virtues aren’t do-able what so ever. I honestly didn’t put in any effort to strictly follow these virtues. I honestly think it’s a waste of time to think so much about your life and your choices. Looking back, I break some of them without even noticing. Others were unavoidable to break. The first one I broke was sincerity. I’m a nice person in general but ya know, sometimes when someone ticks you off, you need to go off on them, or say a smart or sarcastic comment. But I don’t think this made me a bad person. It makes me who I am. I don’t want to be a robot. Everyone gets mad at people, or at least they should. Everyone should be allowed to get mad too.
The next one I broke was industry. I’ve been sick the past week so all I’ve done is gotten home and sleep or watch youtube/netflix. Even though I probably should do my homework, and then sleep. Every now and them people should be allowed to just chill. Just spend a whole night watching youtube or netflix, not having a care in the world. It should not make you a bad person if you do that though. Everyone needs me time.
The third one I broke was silence. I say some pretty dumb and pointless things. I’ll admit it. My friends would definitely agree too.
The rest I didn’t break and I feel like it was pretty easy not to. For the ones my group created, I didn’t break any of them either. The first one was appreciation. That is just to respect everything around you. The next was optimism. I’m already a pretty natural optimistic person. This one was pretty easy for me.
overall these virtues are a waste of time. Anyone who strictly follows these rules would have a really boring life. Sometimes you need to buy something really pointless and that’s totally a waste of money. Sometimes you have to eat so much just because you feel like it and you can.