Rebellion Against Power in Ancient Greece essays

Rebellion Against Power in Ancient Greece essays Rebellion against power in Ancient Greece The government of many city-states, notably Athens, passed through four stages from the time of Homer to historical times. The oligarchic successors of the kings were the wealthy landowning nobles, the " eupatridae," or wellborn. However, the rivalry among these nobles and the discontent of the oppressed masses was so great that soon a third stage appeared. Not only did this lead to the next stage of tyranny but also showed the beginnings of discontent that could culminate in rebellion. Between two and three centuries before this, the Athenian kings had made way for officials called "archons," elected by the nobles. Thus an aristocratic form of government was established. However, the peasants found that under this aristocratic leadership, many if not all of them faced endless cases of oppression. In about 621BC an important step in the direction of democracy was taken; not just as a result of a developing civilisation but in order to try and prevent an enormous uprising from the peasant population. Compiled by Draco, the new code was particularly harsh and draconic after its authors name but unfortunately it did not give the peasants sufficient relief. A revolution was averted only by the wise intervention of Solon, about a generation later. Solon's reforms only delayed the overthrow of the aristocracy, and about 561 BC Pisistratus, supported by the discontented populace, made himself tyrant. After a long reign where Pisistratus two sons continued ruling in his tyrannical footsteps, Greek power emerged into another stage democracy. The Athenians attained popular sovereignty with a minimum of bloodshed and internal upheaval. However, this does not mean that there was no opposition to popular government or to the policies it perused. For the first half of the fifth century, there are reports of two attempts to overthrow the democracy. Plutarch is the only sour...

Aristotelian Criticism of Jimmy Carters Speech for Gerald Fords Eulogy Essay Example

Aristotelian Criticism of Jimmy Carters Speech for Gerald Fords Eulogy Essay Example Aristotelian Criticism of Jimmy Carters Speech for Gerald Fords Eulogy Paper Aristotelian Criticism of Jimmy Carters Speech for Gerald Fords Eulogy Paper 1976 was the first time in the United States history where presidential candidates would debate head to head, sharing the stage and increasing competition. Gerald Ford was expected to come ahead, but his opponent Jimmy Carter was perceived as confident and a fierce contender. Many argue that Gerald Ford’s downfall was due to the pardon of President Nixon, while others thought he faltered during the live broadcasted debate in San Francisco, with his response to his â€Å"international policy leadership. (CNN Time) Nevertheless, come election day, Jimmy Carter was the new Commander in Chief. Although their rivalry was aggressive, the two stayed friends and worked closely on many national matters, such as â€Å"the Panama Canal treaties, nuclear armaments control with the Soviet Union and the Camp David accords. † (Carter) President Carter spoke at Ford’s funeral and Carter’s speech is a great example of how a speaker can convey condolence and affection for a worth adversary and friend. A Neo-Aristotelian Criticism, created in 1925, by Hervert A. Wichlen is an analysis that condones the use of the five cannons; invention, organization, style, memory and delivery. To begin with invention, one must describe the external proofs, meaning the context of the speech and background of the speaker and occasion and internal proofs, the affected audience and specific appeals used. Ethos appeal to ethics and morals, pathos, targeting emotions and logos, to engaging facts and logistics. The second foundation is organization, or the structure and arrangement of said artifact. This is looking at why and what manner the rhetor organized context. The third cannon is style, meaning the stylistic device the speaker chose to weave into his speech, such as alliteration, metaphors or allegories or just the style of language the rhetor uses. Next is memory. Has the rhetor memorized some, part or all of his speech? The final cannon is delivery, the actual presentation of the artifact. Examples are hand gestures, eye contact and other vocal devices. There are other elements in Neo- Aristotelian criticism, like public perception, audience, major ideas and long term effects. However, the method always utilizes most if not all of the five cannons. I will start my analysis of Former President Jimmy Carter’s eulogy with invention. Carter drew on ethos with his description of their faith and moral values, and the fact that both were former presidents increases credibility of both the rhetor and the man that was being remembered. Jimmy Carter also touches the logos, or factual side, reminding the people of the many challenges the president and America faced, such as â€Å"the Panama treaties, nuclear armaments control with the Soviet Union, normalized diplomatic relations with China,† and many other issues. f the occasion and nature of the speech, Carter appealed to pathos. He is also affecting the emotions of his audience, with his intimate stories of his time spent with Ford. Another example is the personal amusement the two presidents shared with the cartoon in the â€Å"New Yorker,† (Carter), or the light hearted jokes Carter strategically placed throughout the eulogy. He was sincere, but he did not let th e mood turn to one of somberness. On that note I’ll move into the next cannon, organization. While the occasion is one of seriousness, Carter brings humor to the table. He carefully structures his speech to follow the pattern of a serious or intimate anecdote, followed by a small joke or humorous story of Ford and himself. This successfully keeps the atmosphere respectful, however all can smile in remembrance of Ford’s life and happy moments. Not only does he regulate the mood, but also the audience’s attention. By revealing personal stories, he invites the audience into not only Ford’s life, but his too. Carter’s introduction and conclusion is the same line, â€Å"For myself and for our nation, I want to thank my predecessor for all he has done to heal our land. † (Carter) This is successful arrangement because it draws all the anecdotes and jokes back to the occasion, celebrating a friend and national representative. As I mentioned before, Jimmy Carter uses many small stories, or anecdotes, throughout his speech. Carter also uses a cathartic strategy, which can be explained as a release of strong emotion, and in this situation his eulogy is his release. His approach is personal, listing the names of his family members, and the Ford family members. This adds to the sincerity of the eulogy because he is talking directly to the family, instead of a broad out reach to the audience. Since the artifact was not memorized, the final cannon I want to address is the delivery. Carter’s delivery fit his purpose perfectly. He respectfully honored a great person. The slow pace of his presentation represents the solemnity of the matter. Carter also takes time to look out into the audience as he speaks which shows that he is trying to also make a connection on a personal level. Overall, Jimmy Carter accomplished his goal in giving a memorable and respectable speech in honor of former President Gerald Ford. Through his context, organization, style and delivery Carter effectively demonstrates a professional, yet personal method that consoles and reminisces of a former adversary and friend. Bibliography Foss, Sonja K. Rhetorical Criticism: Exploration Practice. 4th ed. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland, 1989. Print. Carter, Jimmy. Carter Center Editorials and Speeches Jimmy Carter Eulogy for Gerald R. Ford. Carter Center Editorials and Speeches Jimmy Carter Eulogy for Gerald R. Ford. The Carter Center, 3 Jan. 2007. Web. 09 Sept. 2012. . 1976 Presidential Debates. AllPolitics. Ed. Unknown. CNN. com, 1996. Web. 09 Sept. 2012. . Goodrigde, Elisabeth. Gerald Ford v. Jimmy Carter: There Is No Soviet Domination of Eastern Europe U. S. News and World Report. U. S. News and World Report, 17 Jan. 2008. Web. 9 Sept. 2012. .

Mobile phones and YouTube affect people's lives Term Paper

Mobile phones and YouTube affect people's lives - Term Paper Example With the rapid development of technology, many different kinds of technology has changed dramatically, and some of changes affecting the society. In the current society, technology has become an essential part in people’s life, almost everyone in the world use some kinds of technology. These new technologies can change people’s quality of life; for example, phones can change the relationship between people by easily connect with each other. â€Å"YouTube can make people became presumes which are producing and consuming media via agency and producers which implies more potential for action and independence.† In some case, technologies are also a double-edged sword that it might affect people’s thoughts. Such as phones change the area of surveillance, it is also the way that people are monitored by others. The tort of copy right is still a problem about YouTube. It is obviously shows that how technology changed our daily life and the rule we need to follow. People’s lives and phones have an inextricable relationship, millions of people use mobile phones every day. It shows that phones play an important role of people’s daily life. Some people use phones for emergency things or build the relationship with others. Early stage, mobile phones were basic communication tools. However, it combines photographing; games and many different function now. Mobile phones can be used to reschedule and communicate in last minute. Landline phone would not do those things, since no one would always have their landline phone with them. For instance, women will call her husband to pick their children up from school or give a call and tell the school that she will be late a little because she stuck in the traffic. It could also help people to keep in touch with friends and family even in a long distant by using social networking application such as Facebook (Line, Jain & Lyons, 2011). For example, a student who moves away from home to start un iversity course can use Facebook to meet new friends and maintain the relationship between old friends and family. Mobile phones have a lot of advantage; However, studies show that there are fourfold car incident by use of mobile phones during driving (Mccartt, Hellinga, & Bratiman, 2006), because it distracted driver’s attention. Now, the law banned these behaviors from drivers. Caller identification is also a feature of phones. It can be known that the number calling in by the caller ID and they can choose to answer it or not. It is also a way to stop the harassment or prank calls (Ferguson, 2001). However, the option of caller ID anonymity also came out, which is users can choose to block their number from showing up on other’s phones while they calling (Ferguson, 2001). It seems like cannot reach the purpose of caller ID. Still, some people may not want to answer a call from others due to some reasons, caller identification would assist them to do it. On the other hand, a number of people use phones to photographing and upload the pictures to website such as Facebook and instagram, it allows their friends or followers to know what they are doing and where they are. It makes the users under surveillance through mobile phones. â€Å"Some of this surveillance is purposeful and targeted and some of it is incidental a side effect of other features (Flew & Smith, 2011, p.231).† Especially for instagram and path, which are popularity recently, both applications have ability to share pictures and locations. Not only is social networking application, but also send messages and phone calls also can bring the users under surveillance. In some case, it also has advantage, which can locate users clearly and quickly if they are in dangerous. Phones have also encouraged multitasking; in fact, during the past, there was no possibility of talking to someone over the phone while doing other things such as shopping in a grocery store (Stewart, 2013). Mor eover,