5/18 The Apology p.61-70

Q. Indicate one sentence that you highlighted or underlined (give page number and section number) and write a short paragraph (at least 4 sentences) that explains why you underlined it or highlighted it. Be prepared to share this in discussion.

A. I chose to highlight Socrates' final words, "If you expect to stop denunciation of your wrong way of life by putting people to death, there is something amiss with your reasoning. This way of escape is neither possible nor credible; the best and easiest way is not to stop the mouths of others, but to make yourselves as well behaved as possible. This is my last message to you who voted for my condemnation. I chose to highlight this portion of the section because I think the only reason why Socrates was put on trial was so that he could be silenced. That way, his thoughts could not affect society anymore as it is. I guess this was the jury's decision so that they can escape from his words that they believe can ruin their society. But in my own opinion, Socrates is innocent because he has the right to freedom of speech, and he hasn't affected anyone from his opinions because even before now, they would have complained. I'm still wondering off on how the society and the government has changed since Socrates' death.

5/17 The Apology p.51-61

Q. Indicate one sentence that you highlighted or underlined (give page number and section number) and write a short paragraph (at least 4 sentences) that explains why you underlined it or highlighted it. Be prepared to share this in discussion.

A. I decided to highlight Page 52; two lines down, "And do you seriously suggest that it is from me that the young get these ideas, when they can buy them on accasion in the orchestra for a drachma at most, and so have the laugh on Socrates if he claims them for his own, especially when they are so peculiar? Tell me Meletus, is that your opinion of me? Do I believe in no god?" It was interesting for Socrates to bring up this topic because it made me question my opinions about whether Socrates did have something to do with corrupting the youth. Now I realize that he may not be the only cause, there is a whole world of imitation and misrepresentation that that can be the actual cause of corrupting the youth. So I now have second opinions about this that make me believe Socrates was innocent.

5/16 The Apology p.41-50

Q. Indicate one sentence that you highlighted or underlined (give page number and section number) and write a short paragraph (at least 4 sentences) that explains why you underlined it or highlighted it. Be prepared to share this in discussion.

A. I pretty much highlighted all of page 49. This section was when Socrates was questioning Meletus due to the fact that he accused Socrates for corrupting minorities. This was interesting to me because it seemed like Socrates was using his old tricks of minipulating and stirring up the conversation between him and Meletus in order to achieve his point. That would be, Socrates is not the one behind this issue, but the ones who influence them such as the Jury members he takes for example, and the ones that expose them to violence. In my opinion, it is not at all Socrates' fault for the corruption of minorities because he's just letting out his own thoughts, freedom of speech but I think the cause for this is the parents or the government for exposing minorites to such things that they don't want them to know.

5/15 Pericles Funeral Oration

Q. Make a list of some of the Athenian values that you encountered in the text. Choose one and write a couple of sentences (or more) about why it might be good for the trial of Socrates.

A.

>It would be best to be a model to somebody else than to imitate someone

>Power lies in everyone's hands, not just minorities (which goes to the quote, "children are the future")

>Everybody is equal in their society, there is no one advantage

>Their city is open to the world

>Military : They fight for themselves, they don't need to gain support from their allies

The one quote that I found interesting was on page 147 lines 12-17 "We Athenians, in our own persons, take our discussions on policy or submit them to proper discussions: for we do not think that there is an incompatibility between words and deeds; the worst thing is to rush into action before the consequences have been properly debated." I'm not really sure how this is related to the trial of Socrates, but it got me thinking, because The Athenians seem like they have a strong form of government. They have power, and laws that were made to best benefit their people. But this one quote, just seemed like it was a belief of the Athenians that they rushed to a consequence for Socrates when all he did was express his own personal thoughts and opinions. There is a difference between words and deeds.

4/25 Jigsaw Activity

Q. Give a quick explanation of the topic and propose a debate resolution of the topic.

A. This packet is about the Patriot Act and whether it has increased censorship in the United States or it has not. I think a good debate resolution would be, The Patriot Act increased censorship in the United States.

Q. Explain why it is an important topic. You choose what to write about, but here are some suggestions if you are stuck: How does it impact your constitutional rights? Can it impact your daily life? Does it empower or disempowered you as an individual? Does it promote or inhibit public discussion? Does it help or hurt people getting along with one another?

A. The Patriot Act is a law that allows the government to enforce law powers. This includes allowing agents to follow a suspect through wiretaps and follow the suspect into a library or a bookstore. The government is also able to track down email and internet usage from anyone. Not only this, but the Patriot Act also gives the government the power to limit what a person reads or purshases.

This is a big impact on our constitutional rights because it violates the First Amendment, the right to expression free from government interference. The Patriot Act limits our reading, and that already is an issue. I think that limiting the amount of reading is completely unconstitutional. We have the right to read what we want, and write what we want. Pretty much anything that allows us to express ourselves. There is nothing that can't allow us to do that.

I think this is an important topic because I believe the Patriot Act increases censorship in the United States. It gives the government priveledges to track down a suspect through following them. But those rights are completely unnecessary because that is why we have FBI agents and local cops, they are the ones that help prevent crimes. The Patriot Act is a big invasion of privacy and it's pretty much as we call, "stalking." How would you like it if everytime you were to walk into a library or a bookstore, there were FBI agents there, practically waiting for you to be questioned if you were part of some crime or some act of terrorism? Wouldn't you feel like you were being accused of a crime? I sure would not want that. The library is a place for you to read, and do research and whatnot, not a police station.

In the passage, they say "it is possible for them to investigate a person who is not suspected of criminal activity, but who may have some connection to a person. Worse... there is a gag provision barring bookstores or libraries from telling anyone-- including the suspect about the investigation. Violators of the gag order can go to jail." What I believe this means is that it the govenment may also track down ANYONE they please. From my perspective, I think there might be times where they may take advantage of this right and "stalk" someone that may not have done anything wrong.

This also limits many powers for me as an individial because I would never feel safe when I'm on the computer. If I were to send an email to a friend or a family member, I think the government could easily have access to that. The Patriot Act would completely cover for them.

Q. Write one or two sentences that explain a good point made by the con side and one or two sentences that explain a good point made by the pro side.

A. Con : It is a fact that the violent crime rate has plunged down to it's lowest point in 30 years. This is not due to the Patriot Act, but the FBI and the local cops that have worked hard to prevent crimes.

Pro : The Patriot Act allows the government to monitor a suspect or even a terrorist through wiretaps.

4/24 The Press in Times of Crisis

Q. Indicate wheter your reading selection is pro or con for the above resolution and write three things that support the pro or con position on this issue.
A. I decided to read the chapter that was against the resolution. The three main points that I chose to support the Con side of the argument. One, it is unconstitutional to censor the media's opinions. Two, there was the issue about a man named Maher Hawash who was arrested and his home was also raided. He could not explain why exactly he was being held. This related to our topic, because later the article discusses how the press first heard about this story, such as The New York Times and the story was ran in their newspapers. This is a great example to support the Con argument because this was an issue that was hidden under secracy. Very few people were not aware that this had happened. And finally, the issue about a man, Jose Padilla who was arrested at an airport in Chicago who was a "known terrorist" and was planning to explode a radioactive bomb. I don't really know this is related to our topic, but this was a great issue that appreared in the text that I think could be used later on.
Q. Write a paragraph where you state your opinion on the issue. It should include some evidence from the reading, but it does not have to follow each viewpoint to the letter. You can also include ideas and evidence from other sources or individuals.
A. My personal opinion on the issue is that I am definitely against censoring the media. The media should have a right to broadcast the news to us. After all,it is their job to deliver the news to us. Especially during a major event such as a war, or an attack. We want to be kept informed what's going on in our society, and what possible challenges we may face later on. But I also believe there should be a limitation as to the content that is expressed by the media. Sometimes they can take advantage of their air time to broadcast their own personal opinions. Sometimes that may be a good thing because it can change your own personal opinions about a particular subject, but it can be a bad thing as well because if they include anything from violence, to language in their opinions and it may not be appropriate for the audience. But in my overall opinion, even if there may be some negative sides to the media, I believe that the media is something that we cannot live our lives without.

4/23 Viewpoints

Q. For chapter 1, write three things based on the reading that supports the above resolution. This is the "pro" argument.
A. America is crumbling because people are becoming very opinionated and they're not giving any thought as to what can be affected from what they say. They also don't know where to stop, and they don't know the limit as to the law. Not only this, but the youth have been affected as well. There are many things that are open to young children that they should not even be taught yet. Young children are learning things that is not yet concerned with them, only as to the "adult world."

Q. For chapter 2, write three things based on the reading that goes against the above resolution. This is the "con" arguement.

A. Freedom of Speech is our right to have a say in what we believe in. But without it, we would not be able to express our thoughts on a particilar subject that we feel strongly about. But I also believe that we should follow the law as well because without it, we wouldn't have order in our country. People would not be able to know what is right or what is wrong. People would not know the limit.

Q. Write a paragraph where you state your opinion on the issue. It should include some evidence from the reading, but it does not have to follow each viewpoint to the letter. You can also include ideas and evidence from other sources or individuals.
A. I think everyone should have the right to Freedom of Speech, but we sometimes tend to take advantage of it, and we take matters too far. They push things too far that before they know it, they're doing something wrong, and they have to face a consequence. What I think should be the solution to this is there should be an extension to the limit to what we want to say. I think it's wrong for people to get in trouble over a small issue that was probably not made intentionally. But I think the right thing to do is to create a consequence if you go pass that limit. So in my opinion, we need refinement in our country.

4/19 Don Imus Controversy

Q. According to the NAACP, why should Imus be silenced?
A. NAACP believes he should be silenced because it not only looks bad on the network, but it really created a big controversy about racism and sexism.

Q. According to Frank Rich, why should Imus not be silenced?
A. Frank Rich believes he should not be silenced because he wouldn't actually say anything that would be offensive towards someone, mainly only to get a few laughs. It's not really a bid deal because he makes fun of everyone. Frank Rich also believes that he has freedom of speech, and he can say his own personal opinions.

4/18 Plato Reading & Blog

Q. Why should plays, and acting in them, be regulated? What is potentially beneficial or harmful from acting in a play?

A. I really don't think plays and acting in them should be regulated at all. People should be able to express themselves in a way that they want. If acting is their hobby, then they should pursue their goal. But as to Plato's quote, "And it will also apply to representation; a man cannot play many parts as well as he can one (pg. 89),"

this made me question. I think plays should be regulated because a person cannot control another person because that is not what was meant for him. That person can only control their own life. When a person acts in a play, he cannot BE that person. He can only do his best to try to portray that character.

I think Plato wants to regulate plays because if children were to watch plays that could involve violence or drugs, or anything not sitable for children, they could become influenced. Plato wants to adjust the play standards to something a little more appropriate. What's harmful in acting in a play is that a person can get so into that character, that they can do something harmful in reality. The only thing beneficial in acting in a play is that person's own enjoyment.

3/28 Plato Assignment

Q. Short Paragraph – Personal Reflection: Before reading the selection from Plato write at least one full paragraph on this question: Why do you think Plato (or anyone else) would want to censor Homer (yesterday the question was about Hesiod)? You might want to think about Achilles as a "hero," and why or why not his personal characteristics are something that should be promoted, or not.
A. I think Plato would want to censor Homer because from what I have learned yesterday, some poets seem to misrepresent the gods. I think Homer has twisted up some of the traits of gods. I also think that Homer writes alot of about violence and betrayal, I don't think that's a good influence on society. Achilles for example, he seems like he's this powerful warrior who he believes he can do anything he wants, and noone can stop him because he is all that powerful. But then Homer describes him as this lazy, self centered coward, who I think is a bad influence on the younger audience.

Then read pp. 76-85 (Section b). Secondary or Literary Education)
Short Answers – Text based questions. Answer both questions, answers can be just a few sentences
Q1. According to Plato, what are some aspects of poetry that should be banned and why? In other words, how can poetry undermine the education of a Guardian?

A1. Some aspects of poetry that should be banned are the facts. Some poets go overboard and tend to "lie" to make their poetry seem more interesting. But I mean, good poetry has to be unsuitable for young audience even if it means stretching it far from the truth. Poetry can undermine the education of a Guardian because the Guardians need to be influenced with suitable stories and facts that will make them strong, fearless and wise. But hearing poetry such as the one's from Homer and Hesiod can influence them that their poetry is what they need to believe in, that is what's right.
Q2. What should poetry “teach” and why?

A2. Poetry should teach younger audience what's right from what's wrong, and they need to teach self control. For example, there's a short paragraph about how Zeus could not control himself that he wanted to make love to Hera. That's not exactly what we need to be teaching the young. First of all, it's inappropriate for younger ears, and second, it's teaching us that if you want something, there is nothing that can stop you from doing that. You have no self control. So I think if poems are going to be written, they need to have a lesson or a moral that atleast teaches us something.
Q. If you were talking to Plato what would you say to him? Do you agree with his ideas? Do you think poetry, or literature in general, should be put to the purposes that he says it should?

A. Some of Plato's ideas are a little over the top. Some aren't even necessary. But I do have to agree on some of them, like if poetry shall be written, they need to be appropriate for younger audience because what we teach the young now, can affect us in the future.

3/27 Plato Assignment

Q. Short Paragraph – Personal Reflection: Before reading the selection from Plato write at least one full paragraph on this question: Why do you think Plato (or anyone else) would want to censor Hesiod? Remember that Hesiod was the poet who wrote about the fight between the gods and the titans.
A. I think Plato would want to censor Hesiod because Hesiod has alot of strong opinions about the Gods and Goddesses. They somehow can influence others that this version of their story is correct, or this is what they must believe. I also think that Hesiod has alot of violence that wouldn't be a good influence on society.
Then read pp. 67-76 (Section I. Secondary or Literary Education)
Short Answers – Text based questions. Answer both questions
Q1. What are Homer and Hesiod guilty of?
A1. They both are guilty of misrepresenting the gods. By this, I mean they made up stories and poems, misinterpreting the gods, the true purpose of the Gods.
Q2.What are the two main characteristics of “god” and what are the laws/principles of story telling based on those characteristics?
A2. The two main characteristics of God, are good and perfect. God is the cause of good, and is incapable of causing evil. The cause of evil has no explanation, no responsibility, no factors of what may cause evil, if only we caused it ourselves. God is also perfect, he cannot change himself for he is already perfect, the only need to change is if there was any situation that went wrong, God is also incapable of causing harm or any evil upon us.

The two principles that is proposed in the text is 1) God is good, and cannot cause harm nor evil. A person who is punished is not God's fault, but their own. That person needs to learn that they made a mistake, and they can also benefit from it, because being punished means what they had done was wrong. 2) God, nor any immortal God or Goddess can transform themselves into any way shape or form as they wish.

Q. Compare what you wrote in your personal reflection above (#1) with what Plato wrote. How close were you to what Plato wrote?

A. I think I was pretty close, my first thoughts were that Hesiod had alot of strong opinions about the Gods, and that what he has written doesn't seem all that true. But what Plato wrote was that Hesiod has misinterpreted the Gods.

3/22 Prep for Seminar

Q. Do you think that someone who is enlightened (has seen the "light of knowledge") will be better or worse as a law maker than someone still in the cave, though many of their subjects are in the cave as well? Remember that a man who has seen the light can't see in the darkness of the cave and a man in the cave is blinded by the light.

A. I'm not very sure which one would make the better law maker, because both of these have their negative and positive issues. Someone who is enlightened will know more about the issues going on in their society, and they will also know what's the appropriate decisions for their society. But sometimes when you know too much, you can go greedy with power, and knowing that you have power, you can become self-centered, and make decisions that's in your own interest, but not always benefit your society. Someone who has not yet seen the light won't always make the decision that would be in their own interest, or what could benefit themselves, but their society as well. But on the negative side, they won't always know what's going on in their society, so that can cause them to make the inappropriate decision. If they lived in a cave their whole life, their customs, and what they think is right and what is wrong has been based on the personal thoughts and opinions of another peoson with a higher power in the cave, that made the laws. So a person who has never seen the light, what they think is what is right or wrong, they have just been following someone and I don't think that could be best in the outside world, where there is knowledge, because they have not yet been exposed to a world that they never even knew existed.

3/21 The Republic Assignment

Q. In your opinion, how can acting “right” (i.e. justly) help or harm the achievement of happiness? In your answer you need to first establish, in true Socratic fashion, what you mean by "right" (justice) and what you mean by happiness. What do you think Socrates would say about what you wrote and/or what do you think Thrasymachus would say?

A. I think it all depends on your personal thoughts on what is "right" or what is "wrong." When you believe what you're doing is right, then that makes you feel good, and that creates happiness. For example, for me, when I do good on a test I feel good about myself, and that makes me really happy. So it all depends on what you think. When you know you're doing wrong, it's just the exact opposite of what's right, you don't believe in yourself, and you don't feel good about yourself, which makes you gloomy, guilty, and you know you did wrong. I think Socrates would not agree with me, he would most likely question me, for example "Don't you think what's right for you, would not be right for another?" I think Thrasymachus would just give his own opinion, for example "You could only believe what's right for you, if you have the stronger power."

3/20 The Republic Assignment

Q. Notice that our reading on Thrasymachus is divided into two parts. The first part is entitled – “First Statement and Criticisms”. In this first part, what are Socrates’ main argument(s) against the idea that justice is whatever the strong (i.e. the government) says it is?
A. He mostly says that leaders are making the decisions that benefit mostly themselves, and for what's in their best interest, which is the law, and anything else that doesn't fit in with his decisions is against the law. But then I also read that if a leader makes an order, and it hurts them, then that would be against the law. I'm really confused.
Q. In the second part – “Second Statement and Final Refutation” – what are Thrasymahcus’ two main points and what are Socrates’ two main points in response?
A. I'm not very sure, but I think Thrasymachus' two main points are justice is for interest of the stronger people, and injustice is for for your own interest. I also think Socrates two main points are noone wants to be controlled by another, noone wants authority from another, and wise men would rather have other men do their work, rather them having to do it themselves.
Q. In your opinion, is it ever right to harm somebody? Why or why not? What would Socrates and/or Thrasymachus say in response to your answer?
A. It is never right to harm another, because you're not only effecting that person, but you're also effecting yourself. If you hurt someone, you could have regret over what you have caused, because that person could backfire on you, and even hurt you as well, sort of like revenge. You also wouldn't make a big impact on that person if you hurt them physically, because you're only hurting them on the outside, when you hurt them mentally, then you're effecting them, causing an emotional state. I think Socrates would most likely agree with this, but would not exactly agree with fighting mentally, or with words. I think Socrates would say something like, you could cause this, but you could also force other men to take the consequences.

3/17 The Republic Assignment

Read The Republic Part I Section 2. “The Conventional View of Justice Developed” pp. 8-15
Answer question(s) from one or more of the sections that follow. You have to answer all the questions in each section, but you only have to answer one section. Don’t forget to cut/paste them into your blog and to print them out and keep them in your binder for easy access later.

Section 1
Short responses 2-5 sentences
Q. In your opinion, is Polemarchus definition of justice, derived from the poet Simonedes, an improvement from his father’s definition?
A. I don't really think Polemarchus' definition of justice is an improvement from his father's definition, because I actually think Cephalus' definition was much better. Cephalus thinks that justice is paying your debts and just telling the truth, but Polemarchus' view is getting back at your enemies.
Q. What is Simonides definition of justice? Has Polemarchus interpreted him correctly?
A. Simonides' definition of justice is that everyone has their own dues. Polemarchus interprets it as helping your friends, and hurting your enemies.
Q.What problem does Socrates see in the phrase, “helping one’s friends and harming ones enemies”? Why is this not an accurate definition of justice?
A. I think what this means is that you can't always be right, you only base your decisions on your likes or dislikes. I don't think this is an accurate definition of justice because a friend might not be good, and an enemy might not be bad. I think it all depends on your personal thoughts and your personal decisions.

Q. What lesson do you think Socrates/Plato is trying to prove by having Polemarchus give in to Socrates when his father (Cephalus) would not?
A. I'm not very sure if there is a lesson trying to be given, I'm a little confused at this point.
Q. Whose argument do you find more convincing, Polemarchus or Socrates? Why? (This should be a longer response, short paragraph, about 5 sentences).
A. I don't think there's an argument at this point, because all I'm reading is that Socrates is just trying to bring Polemarchus down by proving that's wrong, and he's not giving an argument.

3/17 Personal Reflection

Q. “Personal Reflection 3/16” – Since Socratic philosophy is largely about definitions, lets start with some of our own. In one paragraph (or more) define what a friend is and how you should act towards a friend? Instead of that, you can write a paragraph (or more) that defines what an enemy is and how you should act towards an enemy. Of course you can also write about both if you like. These are topics that you will read about in the assignment below.

A. My definition of a true friend is someone who you can really trust and rely on. Someone who will always be there for you when you really need them and someone who has your back no matter what happens. A friend is also someone who you just enjoy their company, someone who you feel comfortable with, someone who you feel safe with. You should act the same way a friend acts towards you. You kind of have to return the favor. If they're going to be there for you, and have your back always, then you should do the same.

3/16 Republic Assignment

Q. Who are Cephalus and Polemarchus?
A. Cephalus is Polemarchus' father. They are both residents in "Piraeus".

Q.What is the profession of Cephalus?
A. Cephalus is a business man.

Q.What was Cephalus doing right before the discussion that took place?
A. Cephalus was sacrificing in the courtyard.

Q. According to Cephalus, what are the virtues of old age?
A. When you become older you have a better outlook on life, you become alot wiser. Being old is the same as youth, but sometimes even better.

Q. What are Cephalus’ view of justice?
A. I don't really think Cephalus has any views on justice.

Q.What is Socrates response?
A. Socrates believes that not everyone can agree with Cephalus. He says "I'm afraid that most people don't agree with what you say, Cephalus, but think that you carry your years lightly not because of your character, but because of your wealth. For they say that the rich have many consolations." Later in the text, he mentions that Cephalus is a business man and has inherited and made a good amount of money, but Socrates says that he doesn't seem to be over-fond with it. I think what Socrates it trying to say is that when you have inherited or made a great amount of money, you seem to be really proud of it, and kind of want to show it off, but Cephalus doesn't seem to be like that.

Q. Write a one paragraph response to the following question:
Do you agree with Cephaus or with Socrates? Why? If you don't agree with either of them, write about which one you think makes the stronger arguement - even if you think it is not "right" - and why?
A. I think I have to agree with Cephalus because when you do get older, you have alot more experience throughout the years. You have a better outlook on life, and you have learned from your previous mistakes, and learned how to benefit from them. As for him inheriting and making his own money, I think it's great that he's not too over obsessed with it. I agree, because if you make the money that you made the biggest most important thing in life, what else would you have?

Q. Try to give this a shot, if you can’t answer it that’s okay: What do you think Cephaus represents? What is particular or unique about his view of justice compared to the others you have discussed in class?

A. I think Cephalus is someone who is comfortable in his own skin. He's not afraid to tell his opinions, and what he has to say. I think he represents someone who believes in justice, I'm not quite sure what exactly the true definition of justice is, but it seems like he has a good opinions about himself and what he believes in.

3/15 Simile of the Cave Reading

Answer ALL of these questions with short answers (3 - 5 sentences).

Q. Socrates asks Glaucon to suppose that one of the prisoners is freed and leaves the cave (p. 242 section 515d). What happens to the prisoner when he gets outside? Why does this happen to the prisoner?

A. The prisoner is blinded by the sun's rays. This happens because throughtout the prisoner's whole life, he's lived in a cave. The only light that he's ever seen in his life, was behind a curtain where a fire was lit while they were doing shadow puppets. Therefore, when the prisoner first gets outside, the sun's rays were so strong, it blinded him.

Q. Socrates states that the prisoners would try to kill anyone who tries to liberate them and lead them out of the cave (pp. 243 – 244 section 517a). Why would the prisoners kill someone who is trying to lead them outside?
A. I think the prisoner was kind of intimidaded. I don't think the prisoner has made any human contact throughout his whole life. I also think that he didn't know the person very well, who would trust a stranger?

Q. While reading pages 243-244 (section 517) keep in mind that the cave represents the way society actually is, while the sun (visible outside the cave) represents knowledge that could make for a better society. Don’t let the wording confuse you, Socrates sometimes calls the outside “the intelligible region” and associates it with “the divine.”
What is special about “the intelligible region” and why is it important for public servants/political leaders (p. 244 section 517 b and e) ?
A. The "intelligible region" is special because it's basically the world that we live in today. It's where people can have a say in what they believe in, people have a mind of their own. It is important for the public servants and the political leaders because they need to know what's going on in their society, in order for them to make the appropriate decision for what's best for their society.

Q. What is wrong with having uneducated people run society? What is wrong with having intellectuals (i.e. well-educated people) run society (p. 323 section 519c)?
A. It is wrong for uneducated people to run society because they don't always understand what's was going on. If they run their society, they could end up destroying it by one little wrong decision they make. But it is also wrong for intellectuals to run society because they can't always be the perfect leader. Just because they may have the brains of a good leader, doesn't mean that they can make all the right decisions.

Q. On pp. 323 – 324 (section 519 section d – section 520) Socrates tells Glaucon what the “job” of a lawmaker is. What is the job of a lawmaker and how is a lawmaker supposed to influence the best minds?

A. Based on Glaucon's description of what a lawmaker is, I think a lawmaker must encourage their people to be the best they can be. But it's also confusing, because then he says after they have achieved this, they must also prevent them from what they have been encouraged by.

Personal Reflection

Q. Recall a time that you heard a statement of “fact” that was later found to be untrue. It can be from a parent, a teacher, a friend, a government official, a book, or a film. How did you find out it was untrue and how did it make you feel? Did it change your outlook on anything?

A. I think there was a time the beginning of 6th grade, when my friend and I started taking voice classes. I knew I didn't have much of a voice, but I was willing to learn, and to get better at it. Every Saturday we would go to our voice classes, and we got to perform a song, and out voice instructor would give critiques on what to improve on. I chose a song, but I can't quite remember now. My voice instructor said it was really really good, and the song went really nice with my voice. So I was thinking, I guess I don't have such a bad voice after all. After a couple weeks of voice classes, I was feeling pretty confident in myself, so I decided to put my voice to the test. At my middle school, we were having a talent competition, singing, dancing, anything we were good at. My friend and I decided to do a duet. So for tryouts, we actually did pretty good, and we got in. Sadly, this girl that I really disliked was going to sing as well, but I didn't really care. The day of the talent competition, we all sat along the stage, waiting for out turn to show off what we've got. It was finally our turn. The song started, and we both sang. Every applauded, and I thought the show went alright. After we had performed, we were all backstage, waiting for the results. I overheard the girl that I dislike, say that I had a really bad voice, and I sounded really weird when I sang. Her friend started saying the same thing. I was crushed, but hearing that from someone who I really didn't like, didn't matter as much. When the results were in, my friend and I came in 6th place. I guess I don't have much of a voice after all. I still continued to take voice classes, but about a year after, I decided to take a break off it, and start something different, guitar.

The Iliad Book 16 3/2 Assignment

Q. Summarize the main parts

>Patroclus doesn't listen to Achilles and decides to go to war with Troy

>Apollo wanrs Patroclus to back off and go back home

>Hector gets on his chariot and wants Patroclus to be his next target

>Patroclus sees men crowding over the chariot driver, Cebriones' body

>Apollo slammed Patroclus and his helmet fell off

>When Patroclus tried heading back to the Achean's rank, Hector was there, and he stabbed a spear right though Patroclus

>Patroclus tells Hector that his own death will near, Achilles will return

>Patroclus dies

Q. Ask Questions

>What would be Achilles' reaction that Patroclus went behind his back to go to Troy?

>What would be Achilles' reaction that Patroclus is dead?

>Would Achilles want to return to war for revenge for the death of his friend?

3/2 Personal Reflection

Q. Write about a time that your pride had negative consequences (or related to that, your inablity to forgive). You can also write about someone else or write about pride in another book.

A. Last year in 8th grade, my friends and I had a school field trip to Belmont Park. We hung out at the beach, and went on a few rides, and then we went to the arcade to play some games. My friend and I were getting pretty good at a shooting hoops booth. My friend decided to quit, so it was up to me. I was doing pretty good, so I decided to try my luck and keep going till I was able to win a couple more tickets for this big green bear. When I shot the ball, I actually missed, and I lost the game so I ended up not getting the bear. Which made me pretty angry because I was stuck with this small ugly brown monkey.

The Iliad Reading Book 16 3/1

Q. What does Patroclus propose to Achilles and what is Achilles’ response? Why does Achilles grant Patroclus’ request?

A. Patroclus' request was for Achilles to allow him to fight in the war. Not only that, but to also wear his armor and to command the Greeks in war. I think the reason why Achilles grants Patroclus' request was because the Greeks were losing the war, and really needed back up.

Q. On p. 413 line 35 (approximately), Patroclus tells Achilles that Achilles is “cursed in [his] own courage.” What does Patroclus mean by that and do you agree with him?

A. I think what Patroclus means is that Achilles has held on to his anger towards Agamemnon far too long. I agree with this because the consequences towards their feud may cause the lives of many Greek soldiers, without Achilles' help.

Q. Either ask questions about the text or write down vocab words from the text with definitions.

A. Achilles seems like he still has rage towards Agamemnon, that's why he won't fight in the war. Why does he chose to stand there rather than help the soldiers out? Men are getting wounded and are dying without the help of Achilles.

The Iliad Book 9 Assignment 2/28

Q. Write a question you have about the text, either an interpretive question that you have an opinion on, or something that you don't understand. You don't need to write the answer.

A. There's a section in this passage where it talks alot about a war with Hector. I'm really confused about how he ties in with this section.

Q. What was your opinion of Achilles before reading Book 9? Does it change after reading Book 9? Explain why or why not.

A. Before reading this section, I thought Achilles was this strong, courageous fighter who never gave up until he got what he truly wanted, he never settled for anything less. But now, in Book 9, he seems very week, and not so sure of himself. He seems very confused about his next steps. His anger has taken over his will to fight, and be who he once was. He needs to let go of that anger and move on. He has this perfect chance with settling things back with Agamemnon, but he still won't take it. He won't take it because Agamemnon took his war prize, Briseis. Achilles is downing himself over a girl. He needs to let go of all the anger and move on.

Q. Same as yesterday - Make a list of the persuasive strategy used by these characters.

A.

1.) Who is speaking : Phoenix
2.) What does that person say and to whom does he say it : Phoenix tells Achilles about his background, and how Achilles' father helped him out through the hard times. Phoenix in return took care of Achilles. Phoenix now wants Achilles to return the favor, for him to let go of his anger and fight for the war.
3.) What persuasive strategy is it : Reason

4.) Why is it an example of that strategy : Phoenix wants Achilles to return the favor, so he's telling Achilles to

1.) Who is speaking : Phoenix
2.) What does that person say and to whom does he say it : The only reason why Achilles is downing himself is over his war prize Briseis. So Phoenix reminds Achilles that Agamemnon is offering so much, including many women that could replace his war prize.
3.) What persuasive strategy is it : Emotion

4.) Why is it an example of that strategy : Phoenix wants Achilles to know that he shouldn't fill himself with anger over a girl that could be replaced with what Agamemnon is offering.

1.) Who is speaking : Phoenix

2.) What does that person say and to whom does he say it : Phoenix tells Achilles about a tale that reminded him of Achilles and what he's doing.
3.) What persuasive strategy is it : Emotion
4.) Why is it an example of that strategy : Phoenic is trying to compare Achilles to the tale he was sharing to remind Achilles that he needs to move on, and let go of his anger.

The Iliad Book 9 Assignment 2/27

Q. Write a question. It can be an interpretive question that you have an opinion on or something about the text that you don't understand. You do not need to write the answer.

A. In this passage, Helen is actually mentioned in a part of this section. I'm confused if she's going to play a bigger role later on in the book, or if she's part of Agamemnon's bribe?

Q. What was your opinion of Agamemnon before reading this section? Does your opinion of him change after reading it? Why or why not? A one paragraph reply is fine, minimum of 6 solid setneces, but you are encouraged to write more.

A. Before I started this section, I thought Agamemnon was this greedy, rude, self-centered man who only thought of himself, and didn't care about other's thoughts, opinions or feelings. My opinion has changed a little about him because in this section, he seems like now, he's willing to take the blame for his actions. He says "That's no lie old man-a full account you give of all my acts of madness. Mad, blind I was! Not even I would deny it. (pg. 255 lines 137-139)" He use to be very self-centered and very secretive. But now in this section, he seems like he's very caring and giving and alot more open. There's a section in the book, from pg. 255-256 lines 145-193 where he talks about all these offerings he's willing to give to Achilles for his forgiveness, for stealing his war prize Briseis, and also all the broken promises, and blames Agamemnon put on him. To me, I don't really think he's willing to give all those offerings to him, without something in return. It's more of a bribe knowing the man Agamemnon was in Book one.

Q. At various points in the text some characters attempt to persuade other characters to take a course of action. Examples of characters using persuasion include Nestor, Odysseus, and Ajax. Make a list of the persuasive strategy used by these characters.

A.

1.) Who is speaking : Agamemnon
2.) What does that person say and to whom does he say it : Agamemnon offers Achilles to take gifts from him in return for his forgiveness.
3.) What persuasive strategy is it : Emotion
4.) Why is it an example of that strategy : Agamemnon is offering so many different luxuries, and expensice items that it seems more of a bribe rather than a gift.

1.) Who is speaking : Nestor
2.) What does that person say and to whom does he say it : Agamemnon wants to back down from the war. But Nestor steps up and tells the soldiers/Agamemnon's army that they have come all this way for nothing if they back down from the war now.
3.) What persuasive strategy is it : Emotion
4.) Why is it an example of that strategy : Nestor's trying to create a moment where the men are going to be willing to fight through his words.

1.) Who is speaking : Phoenis, Ajax, and Odysseus
2.) What does that person say and to whom does he say it : The men want Achilles to accept the offerings from Agamemnon.
3.) What persuasive strategy is it : Emotion

4.) Why is it an example of that strategy : The men want Achilles to accept what Agamemnon is trying to offer and much more to come, but he will not accept it because of anger he has towards Agamemnon. But the journey that his friends had taken to get to him was complete waste if he did not accept the offer.

The Iliad Book 1 Reflection

Q. Achilles’ rage is justified and I support his decision not to fight, even if it means the Greeks might lose lots of men, or even the war itself.

A. I agree with the decision that Achilles had made. Achilles chose to not fight, even if it meant the loss of many men or even with the war itself. I agree with this because in the text, Achilles states "And I tell you this-take it to heart, I warn you-my hands will never do battle for a girl, neither with you, King, not any man alive. You Achaeans gave her, now you've snatched her back. (pg.87-lines 348-351)" From this piece of evidence, Achilles is not willing to fight for just one girl. The Trojans have not done any harm to him, and Agamemnon wants him to battle. It was a good decision for Achilles to back down. I also think Achille's decision to not fight was great, because that could cause less controversy against him and the Trojans. Even if this meant that Agamemnon now wants Achilles to give up his own war prize in exchange to let Chryseis go.

My Rage

Once when I was angry, my mom had promised me that I could go to a Fall Out Boy last year, but when the concert came, I didn’t go. What happened was that my friends told me that there was going to be a Fall Out Boy concert coming up. This was around, January of last year. And, the second I found out about this, I asked my mom immediately if I could go. She said I could, only if my brother came. I said, alright, having my brother around wouldn’t be so bad. So I talked to my friends more about the concert. It was going to be at the San Diego Convention Center. Tickets were I think only $30. I still remember the exact date, April 1st. So, I told my mom about the new information that I got. Days passed, and I was really excited about the concert. I checked the tickets, just in case if they were sold out or not. They were still up. So, I waited and waited until the days turned into weeks. I checked again, tickets were still up. So that day, I decided to buy the tickets. Everything was great and I knew for sure that I was going! The day before the concert, me and my friends were in school, and were talking about how it would be awesome when if we went to the meet and greet. How awesome it would be to meet the members of Fall Out Boy. We came home, and I got everything that I needed for the concert ready. I packed a camera, money, food and other things. When I went into the kitchen, I could hear my mom and my brother bickering and fighting. My mom told me that she got a phone call from my brother’s teacher. He had done something, I can’t quite remember now. But then, my mom said, we couldn’t go to the concert. I was mad. I was furious. I told her, why? She said she didn’t want me going alone. Where things could happen to me, like beat up, or whatever. I told her my friends were going! I won’t be alone! She still didn’t want me going. She didn’t want me to go without my brother. So of corse I was yelling at the top of my lungs, I was so mad. The day of the concert, while my friends went, I stayed at home and just listened to my Fall Out Boy CD.

Fahrenheit 451 Descriptive Writing 2/8

Scene : Montag going to his own house to get burned down.

Montag's Perspective :

The loud and annoying alarm sounds off above me. My world shatters knowing there will be another innocent victim clawed by the hands of fire. I can hear the stomping of firemen making their way towards the brass pole that leads them to the cherry colored vehicle as we call the Salamander. I follow them with a shameful and guilty feeling on my expressionless face. I get into the vehicle. Firemen trample all over me. Beatty stomps on the gas pedal. A nasty smirk draws upon his face, as if he were luring us into a trap. He cuts from corner to corner. Hurrying, he never makes a stop. The tires of the Salamander making an awfully loud screech. A frosty burst of wind blows upon my face. I can only think of Mildred. How much she's drifting far from me. She's become too obsessed with the world and it's useless technology. But much worse, I keep thinking about how much I cannot bare to see another book go up into flames. A book, something that was taken time to be written onto paper. Someone who took their own precious time to write about their personal outlook on life to share with the world. Their thoughts, their feelings. Trashed and burnt by these crazy and selfish firemen. Why can't the world be free like it once was? Why can't we live through a day, with the sun blazing in our hair, the fresh air blowing on our face, without being judged or criticized by another one. Everyone had become too pointlessly ignorant. They forget the smallest most important details in life. I keep wondering off in my field of thoughts. But we finally reach our stop. I wish we just had kept on going till we reach the other end of the world. Away from all this. I step onto the cold heavy ground. Beatty confronts me. That nasty smirk still on his greedy face. He tells me to look up. I squint up at the next sacrifice. It turns out, it was my own home. My heart pounds faster and faster. It felt as if it were about to jump out of my chest and explode into a thousand pieces. But why? What did I do to deserve this? I had not done anything wrong. Was it the books I had been hiding? But how could they have found out? I question on and on, but no answer can come to mind. As I try to forget my current stage, I see Mildred hurriedly making her way towards a cab, as if she were trying to escape life. I face her. She starts talking about all these things. I could not understand anything she was saying. I had blanked out. I could not listen to anyone with their painful words that I could not trust. She finally finishes. She gets in the cab. I felt as if I was going to cry. Like I just had lost a big chunk of my heart. But as I watch the cab drive off in the far distance, I could not feel any tears drip from my eyes. Maybe it was meant to be. Maybe her leaving me like this was a sign that I had to make things right. I had to fix what I had caused. These were the consequences to my actions. So, I grab the flame thrower, and I run inside my home. I burn everything that comes in my way. My first stop, was at the parlor. This wasteful device that did nothing but brainwash my wife. I burned it. The glittery sparks that flew up in the air. It was rather enjoyable. I burnt my bedroom walls, filled of lonesome memories. I burnt anything, everything that reminded me of Mildred, this woman that lived with me, who I shared everything with. This woman who will forget me as the days pass into weeks. I slowly walk outside. I stand in front of my house. Watching it burn up in red coals and black ashes. I had burnt them. I had burnt my deepest darkest possession, my books.

2/6 - Hesiod Writing Assignment

Q. Explain how Zeus came to power and discuss how similar. Write about these following issues: How is he similar/different to Uranus or Cronos? Is his grip on power secure or fragile? Explain why or why not.
A. In the very beginning of this passage, Gaea (mother earth) married her son, who she made him her equal, Uranus. Gaea first gave birth to three Hundred-Handed Giants. Then she gave birth to the three Cyclopes. Uranus feared the strength of these six children, so when each child was born, he buried them deep in the earth. Gaea then gave birth again to the thirteen Titans. Gaea decided to use her Titan children for revenge on Uranus. Almost all of her children were terrified of their father. But one, Cronus. He decided he would do the deed. Cronus stabbed a stone sickle in his father's back. He then became the new ruler. Cronus then married his siter, Rhea. Cronus feared that he would lose his rein, and so he did not plan on any children. But, Rhea gave birth to their first daughter, Hestia. Cronus feared of losing his power, so he opened his mouth, & swallowed his daughter whole. Four more children were born to Cronus and Rhea, Demeter, Hera, Hades and Poseidon. He also swallowed them whole. Rhea was then about ready to give birth to their sixth child. But afraid she would lose another child, she came to her mother, Gaea for help. Gaea told her she would hide her baby on the high slopes of Mount Dicte. Guards and watchmen would guard her baby. Rhea gave birth to her sixth child, Zeus. Cronus already had knowledge that Rhea had their sixth child. But instead of having their baby wrapped in a blanket, she wrapped up a big rock. Cronus then, swallowed that rock. Years pass, and Zeus finally confronts his father. Rhea hands Cronus a drink. He wanted more. So this time, Zeus is the one who hands him the drink. Cronus drank, and realizes that a complete stranger has handed him that drink. He soon vomits the rock, and his five children that he had swallowed. They soon all battle. Cronus & the Titans against Zeus and his brothers and sisters. Zeus and his siblings win the battle. Zeus then becomes ruler of the sky.

Zeus is not at all similar to neither Uranus or Cronos. These two gods were so greedy for power that they would have done anything to keep that power. They would have destroyed anything that got in their way. But Zeus, he seems like he doesn't care much about power. At the end, when he receives the gift of thunder and lightening, he doesn't seem very greedy and selfish with that power. It's like he knows he needs to use that power for good.

I think Zeus' grip on power is about in the middle of being secure & fragile. He does have that gift of thunder and lightening, but in this passage it doesn't really explain how he uses that power. But what I think, is that he doesn't care much about power. It feels like he's only willing to use that power for the good of his ruling.

Fahrenheit 451 Descriptive Writing 2/6

Q. Make a list of the descriptive words in that scene – minimum of 3, but you should be able to find a lot. & Write a short paragraph of why you think that scene and the words Bradbury used were effective in representing fear. This is like the assignment from last night expect with Bradbury.
A. I chose the scene where Montag and the firemen were burning down the woman's house. Some descriptive words were :

>empty

>roar

>bombarded

>fervor

>insanity

>mindlessness

I chose these words because they really stood out for me. They were very descriptive. I also chose these words because they were in the climax for this scene. Montag had hidden a book under his arm, as he watched a woman get burned alive. I think the author had really put thought into describing what was happening. He went into alot of detail to let the reader feel like they were in the book. Bradbury had also represented alot of fear in this part of the book because Montag had hidden that book. & probably while he saw that woman get burned, he could probably imagine himself in that postition. He was probably thinking about the consequences that he could go through, what could happened to him now that he made that decision to steal that book.

Descriptive Writing Assignment

My Descriptive Paragraph :
I thought I did a pretty good job on my descriptive paragraph. Some words that I thought were really descriptive were :

>big white entranceway
>small circular lever
>bulky square of fluffiness
--->I liked how I was able to bring simple objects to life by adding powerful adjectives to describe them.

My Blog Group Thingy :
Junior :
>black
>thorny
>closed cage
--->"The whole world just turned black when I heard that." I liked how he had described the whole world turning black. That created emotion & a little drama to this piece.
--->"I just grabbed the thorny papers and put it in my backpack." The word "thorny" really helped this line. It made me feel how homework is something you really don't want to do, but you still have to. Sort of a fear.

Rg :
>awfully angry bear
>my body budges
>my eyes stir
--->I liked how he used alot of powerful verbs such as "My body budges and turns and once again, my eyes stir." This was a line that really stood out for me. I liked how this was phrased. Instead of just describing someone who wanted to go back to sleep, he went into detail.

Fahrenheit 451 pgs. 154-165

Q. Ask a question.
A. Why was there a war going on? What was it about, & why did it end so quick?

Q. What does Montag mean when he says, “And when they ask us what we are doing , you can say, We’re remembering” ? Why is this quote important? How does it fit into the novel, what is Bradbury trying to say with this?
A. I think what Montag means is that you have to remember what has happened in the past, in the present, or what's even going to happen in the future. You also can't erase what has already happened. You have to live with the consequences of what you caused. I think this fits perfectly into this novel, because it teaches us to always be aware. You can't let life pass by without knowing you want something to happen a certain way. You won't have the opportunity to turn back time and redo what you did. You have to live by what has happened.

Fahrenheit 451 pgs. 138-154

Q. Write one or more questions that you have. Don't just say "I don't get it." Ask a specific question about what is happening in the story.
A. I don't have any questions for this part of the story.

Q. How has Montag changed from the beginning of the novel to this part? In writing about this you might want to notice that the environment has changed from the city to nature. Is this a coincidence or is the author trying to say something by contrasting the city to nature in relation to the ways Montag has changed.
A. Montag has changed in many different ways. In the beginning of the book, he seemed like he was following the crowd. He couldn't be himself. Meaning that he couldn't express himself without being judged, or punished. But now, he's very open. He's very different. He can be what he wants to be, and do whatever he wants to do. Montag is more free now. The environment has also changed in relation to the way Montag has changed. I think what the author is trying to say is that in the beginning, Montag lived in the city, where he was secluded. But when he got into the life of nature, he was able to be free.

Fahrenheit 451 pgs. 125-137

Q. Find a line from the story or a paragraph that you like and explain why you like it.
A. "He could feel the Hound, like autumn, some cold and dry and swift, like a wind that didn't stir grass, that didn't jaw windows or disturb leaf shadows on the white sidewalks as it passed. The Hound did not touch the world. It carried it's silence with it, so you could feel the silence building up a pressure behind you all across town. Montag felt that pressure rising, and ran." I chose this part in section that I read because the way that the author described the Hound was very descriptive, and he used alot of powerful adjectives that made the Hound sound not like just a robotic dog, but as something that feels real.

Fahrenheit 451 pgs. 110-125

Q. Summarize what happens in one or two sentences.
A. What happened is that Beatty led Montag to his own house, which was next to be burned down. Beatty knew about the books that he had stored. The hound dog had been snooping around his home. Mildred also ran away. She had called a cab, and had left right when Montag came. Montag burned down his house, and he was so angry, that he threw a flame thrower, and he lit Beatty on fire. Beatty dies, and Montag becomes a fugitive. He tries to make it to Faber's house.

Q. On your blog, copy down one sentence from this reading selection that strikes you as particularly descriptive. Which of the 5 senses does it appeal to? What verbs, adjectives, or figurative language are used and why are they effective in describing a certain action, person, or thing?
A. "It made a single leap into the air, coming down at Montag from three feet over his head, it's spidered legs reaching, the procaine needles snapping out it's angry tooth. Montag caught it with a bloom of fire, a single wondrous blossom that curled in petals of yellow and blue and orange about the metal dog, clad it in a new covering as it slammed into Montag and threw him ten feet back against the bole of a tree, taking the flame gun with him."
I chose this passage because it stuck out. I liked the many adjectives and verbs that were used. For example, "a bloom of fire, a single wondrous blossom that curled petals of yellow and blue and orange about the metal dog." That was very descriptive. While I was reading this, I could actually feel the hound jump on me, like how it did to Montag. I felt how hard it hit, that it would actually throw a person ten feet back against a tree.

Fahrenheit 451 pgs. 91-110

It's nothing I'm really confused about, I'm just wondering why Montag's house would be the next to get burned down?

Q. Give a very short (1-3 sentence) summary of the two main scenes in this section. The first scence was at home in the living room and the second scene was in the fire house with Beatty.
A. The first scene at home in the living room was with Mildred and her friends. Montag came home, and he found the girls in the parlor. They start talking, and Montag takes out the book that he stole, and reads out a poem.
In the second scene, in the fire house with Beatty, Montag and the firemen play a game of cards, and they talk about books, and the effects. Then the sirens go off. So they get into the Salamander, which I think is the firetruck, and they Montag finds that the next house that is going to get burned down, was his own.

Q. Find a sentence or two that has strong adjectives and/or verbs. Quote the book and explain why these are strong descriptive words and why they are effective. How do they appeal to the senses? What mental images do they invoke?
A. "In Beatty's sight, Montag felt the guilt of his hands. His fingers were like ferrets that had done some evil and now never rested, always stirred and picked and hid in pockets, moving from under Beatty's alchohol-flame stare. If Beatty so much as breathed on them, Montag felt that his hands might wither, turn over on their sides, and never be shocked to life again; they would be buried the rest of his life in his coat sleeves, forgotten."
I chose these sentences because I thought they were very descriptive. They used alot of strong adjectives to describe what Montag was feeling at that moment. They are very affective because the more adjectives and verbs that were put into this, the more I could picture what was going on in the scene.
When they say "His fingers were like ferrets that had done some evil and now never rested, always stirred and picked and his in pockets" I thought this was very descriptive. I could feel Montag's fears, his hands shaking. I could really picture this in my mind.

Descriptive Paragraph

Something I like to do

This musical instrument awaits me everyday, waiting to be played. Under it's trance I have this powerful urge to play it. So, I clutch it, and i set it on my lap. I plug the cord into this big black box that exerts the music 100x it's original sound. I brace myself. I soon find my fingertips on the strings, and my other hand on a pick. I shift from chord to chord, strumming. I could play my guitar for hours and hours.

Fahrenheit 451 pgs. 81-91

Q. Write a question. What are you confused about?
A. What was the little Seashell Radio that Faber had? & What was it used for?

Q. A. According to Faber, “three things are missing” from the popular media (like the “parlor games) of his society. Write what they are and explain what he means.
A. The three things that were missing from popular media, were :
1. Quality of Information ; I think what he means is that in a book, there are many qualities. Like some of the examples he lists, like a book has features. I think what this means is that a book has to have certain standards for it to be good.
2. Leisure to Digest ; I think what he means is that people should make time for themselves to take time to enjoy the world around them.
3. The right to carry out actions based on what we learn from the interaction of the first two ; I think this one is pretty self explanitory. You have to be able to do the first two in order to do overcome what you want to do.

Fahrenheit 451 pgs. 68-80

Q. Write a question about the reading. What are you confused about? If you don't get an answer on your blog, be sure to raise the question in class. Even if you do get an answer, and you think it's a good question with a good answer, bring it up in discussion.
A. Who's the Professor, Faber? Is he a character that will be played out more throughout the book, or is he just someone who gets mentioned in that short scene?

Q. What does Montag mean when he says that books "point, one way or another, to Clarisse?"
A. I think what Montag means is that you can take one way, or the other. The route, where you get pursuaded by a book. You believe you can express yourself in any way you want to make you happy. Live your life the way you want to live it. Be different. Or you can take the other route, where you feel secluded, and feel unable, and you feel as if you're under a watchful eye. Dull and boring.

Fahrenheit 451 pgs. 40-68

Q. Captain Beatty tells Montag that firemen are the “happiness boys” and that they are custodians of “our piece of mind.” Why does he say this? Be sure to include the problem with minority opinions, individual thought, and the historical conditions that made this possible. Use quotations and other evidence from the
text in your response.
A. I think Captain Beatty is trying to pursuade Montag that firemen are the good guys, they're the ones keeping civilization going. They better feed people's minds by taking the good out of reading books. He says this by saying "Colored people don't like Little Black Sambo. Burn it. White people don't feel good about Uncle Tom's Cabin. Burn it. Someone's written a book on tobacco and cancer of the lungs? The cigarette people are weeping. Burn the book." I think Captain Beatty is under the impression that reading books, other people's thoughts and deas, feelings and personal time, put onto paper, he thinks that's a way of brain washing people's minds and making them become ignorant and disturbed at the world.
He also says "Not everyone born free and equal, as the constitution says, but everyone made equal. Each man the image of every other; then all are happy, for there are no mountains to make them cower, to judge themselves against. So! A book is a loaded gun in the house next door. Burn it! Take the shot from the weapon. Breach man's mind. Who knows who might be the target of the well-read man?" Captain Beatty refers to the "shot" from a bullet, to a book and it's ideas. I think this means that when a person reads a book, that person gets pursuaded and gets under the influence of that book. That person thinks they can express themselves in any way like the characters in a book. He says that from this passage in the book: "Nothing you can teach or believe. They're nonexistent people, figments of imagination, if they're fiction. And if they're nonfiction, it's worse, one professor calling another's gullet."
"You must understand that our civilization is so vast that our minorities upset and stirred." That's exactly my point. Captain Beatty thinks that by shaping and molding minorities into these book-free people, they'll turn out happy, and into well disciplined people. They will not. By feeding minds of minors with the knowledge of books, they'll turn out into free people. By that, I mean they will have the courage to be different.
"Ask yourself, What do we want in this country, above all? People want to be happy, isn't that right? Haven't He also says "you heard it all your life? I want to be happy, people say. Well, aren't they? Don't we give the fun? That's all we live for, isn't it?" I really have to disagree with this. People live their lives to fullest. People can't live their life without guidance from a book. The knowledge from a book helps people see that the sky's the limit to what you can achieve. You can live in this world, where books are banned, and you can't see what there is to see. Or you live in this world of many possibilities of books, and unreal things coming to life.

In this book, possessing a book is illegal. and it's the firemen's job to burn those books down. But why? To stop people from expressing their own feelings, to wonder about in reading a book? My personal thoughts about this, is that people should be able to express themselves in any way they want. Through reading a book, to being who they want to be. They shouldn't be criticised just because they want to be who they are, even if that means being different.

Descriptive Paragraph

Something I Dread

Night falls upon the powerless world as the sun sets into the distant horizons. I lay in warmth and comfort as I set sail into the many possibilities of my wondering thoughts in deep slumber. But I find myself wasting in sighs unable to drift off into a field of dreams. I'm sorrounded in pitch black darkness. I fear. I gaze blankly at the empty rooftop of my box of silence. Hopelessly, I shift to my left. I soon face the terror. The big white entranceway to an unknown universe. Unknown creatures may lay behind it. A small brass circular lever, the only way in. I stare at it closely. I thought I saw it move. I shut my eyes to try to forget. I hear it creak. My heart pounds like a thousand drums beating on my chest. I hood myself with a bulky square of fluffiness. I hear it creak again. I'm shaken in freight. I quickly snatch the cord on the rugged floor. I wedge it into the wall. This bright shine oversomes everything. This diamond shaped glass filled with pink soothing bubbles flowing up and down. This special light calms me down. I soon fall into a deep, deep trance. This light, my savior.

Fahrenheit 451 pgs. 21-40

Q. Ask a question: What do you find confusing? What is something you don’t understand?
A. Why would the firemen rather start fires than prevent them?
In the passage, their alarm goes off and they have to burn books down at a woman's house? I'm confused.

Q. Montag compares Mildred (his wife) to Clarisse and says that Clarisse seems older. In what way does Clarisse act more mature and WHY do you think she is more mature? Why does Bradbury (the author) make the contrast between the two?
A. I think Clarisse seems older and alot more mature than Mildred for many reasons. Clarisse says her mind. She's not afraid of what other people are going to think of her. She also takes time to appreciate the small details in life. But Mildred, she seems very secretive and I don't really have a sense of her character. I think the author makes the comparison between the two because they're two very different people, but they are both involved with Montag.