Franklin Bettered Himself...

Franklin was able to create a complete list of virtues that reflected his ideas on a perfect being. I do think that these virtues were a great idea to picture people following, but I wonder if Franklin's list actually helped him better himself. I honestly believe that he did do some good in trying to abide by this set of rules, especially because he had to put a lot of thought into them to even write them down on paper. To write these out, you have to thoroughly ponder the ideas you are putting out. Many people today rarely let things like morals cross their mind on specific basis. Franklin, on the other hand, spent much of his valuable time specifically on things like this. He had to study these concepts extensively to even write them out. Today, people never really seem to care about things like this. I cannot imagine someone today writing out something like this today, they would only be mocked and would never be taken seriously. It is obvious that no one really considers these things now. The only time we actually evaluate out morals is when we have a difficult decision at hand. Only then do many of us look to our moral reasoning for a solution. These thoughts lead me to believe that Franklin truly had to have improved his self-worth in this analysis of perfect morals and attempt at following them. He had to have learned something in all of this research. He dedicated so much of his time to following these written ideas that his thought process had to have changed at least a little along the way. Franklin shows that he put excessive thought and consideration into his virtues when Franklin gives these words about his virtuous views: "I concluded, at length, that the mere speculative conviction that it was our interest to be completely virtuous, was not sufficient to prevent our slipping; and that the contrary habits must be broken, and good ones acquired and established, before we can have any dependence on a steady, uniform rectitude of conduct." (Franklin, 82) This passage makes it completely obvious that Benjamin Franklin improved his personal morals through the process of attempting to follow his virtues.
Some of the most established writers in history applauded Franklin's system of virtues, like Sydney Smith, who was mentioned numerously in Tuckerman's literary criticism of Franklin's works, which were claimed to be revolutionary (Tuckerman, 9-10) Almost all of the critics who analyzed Franklin's work gave it positive feedback, saying that it reflected the ideas purity and independence. Even the other writers who looked into his work said similar things, and praised this magnificent set of morals all in one place. It is clear that these ideas made him a better person.
The standards of society back then were certainly changed after these works were released. Many people took the same route to perfection that Franklin took, attempting to follow his virtues and use a recording system to keep themselves on track. Because of Franklin, the world became just a little bit better to live in due to his many followers. The virtues he included in his work, such as honestly, tranquility, humility, silence, etc., are what people tried to follow, and therefore Franklin was forced to follow (Franklin 83-84). These traits are not difficult to comprehend, they seem simple. The trick is trying to apply them to one's everyday life.



Franklin, Benjamin. Autobiography. London: J.M. Dent, 1948. Print.

Tuckerman, Henry T. The Character of Franklin. N.p.: n.p., 1856. Print.

Franklin Project Reflection

The Franklin project was really difficult to deal with, especially because there were people from other locations. It was not easy to connect with them. It was already a huge task to even communicate with people from other English classes. The focus of the project was supposed to be about learning communication skills with people who are not easy to communicate with. This presented a challenge to all of the students in our English class, even more so because we were all the essential leaders of the groups. Most of us were the people who had to put the video together, and we also had the responsibility of contacting everyone else, because it seemed as if the other students did not have much motivation. The kids from Farmington in my group were on task, relatively easy to contact, and did quality work. I feel bad that they had to deal with some of the students from Pleasant Plains. They should have had more qualified people to work with, mainly because it seemed like us people at Plains were moving substantially slower than them. I felt sympathetic towards them. Those poor souls had to deal with us through this projects course.
On the other hand, it was easy to help others, and the project made it learn. I think each person should only have their individual grade to deal with. It is not fair that we had to make others try to communicate with us. I wish it was easier to talk to people that we can't even see. I find technology to be unreliable, mostly because it is unavailable to some. It is also not always working properly, which is annoying to deal with. I think that this project could be easier on people if there was an easier way to communicate. The teachers could have been more involved as well. Sometimes the teachers had issues that were not handled, like deadlines and role selection. I think that these are issues that need addressed for next year.

American Dream

I feel like the American Dream today is the idea of being in a typical 4-person family, living in a house with a pool and 3 cars, and the father coming home from work to a home-cooked meal with his family. The problem with this is that this is unrealistic. There is no life like that. Maybe someone has a day like that occasionally, but even that has got to be lucky. I guarantee there is no perfect family with perfect jobs. There are no perfect kids who obey your every rule. There are is no easy way into a home like that. That has got to be something from a Disney movie.
Some people spend their whole life on a quest for a life like that. I personally do not understand that. I think of America and I think of baseball, pie, and dads. Not just any dads, but white, "successful," republican, office working dads. It seems like that is what America is based off of today. If that is the American Dream, then where do I come in? Some guy's stay-at-home wife? Cooking and cleaning all day while I take care of our two "perfect" children? Wearing an apron and curling my hair like some housewife in the 1950's? I do not think so. That is definitely not the life that I want to live. I doubt many women of today want to live that way, because it does not exactly sound like fun.
Men probably don't really want that anymore either. How could they? Knowing they were living the typical life would make then want to go insane, if only to make things more interesting. How can people have goals like that? I just don't understand.
So really, the American Dream kind of sucks, in my personal opinion. I feel like they are all trying to be something that plainly sucks. That is the end of it.

Ben Franklin Virtue Analysis

The excerpt I read from Ben Franklin's autobiography demonstrated Rationalism from the most basic, new standpoint. Ben Franklin was one of the leading figures in the Great Awakening, which went hand in hand with the Rationalism period. Ben Franklin may have not always been the perfect example for the people to follow, but he did set out a group of virtues for people to go by that made a great deal of sense. Sure, you could call him a hypocrite, but at least he proposed well planned ideas for people to keep in mind as they lived their day-to-day life in the Rationalism period. 
In the autobiography, Franklin talks about his virtues, and makes people really think about the lives that they are living. This was the entire point of the Rationalism period. People opened their eyes to the world and began questioning their surroundings and responding logically instead of just religiously. He wanted religion to be important still, just not the leading factor in everyone's lives (Franklin 80). I interpreted this as a way of making everyone more aware and awake to how much more the world can be outside of the Bible. Sure, he was raised Presbyterian, and he knew that religion was important to a lot of people, it gave them purpose, but he still saw that the world had a lot more to offer apart from religion.
His virtues made a lot of sense for people to follow. They were pretty basic morals, but they were so simple that people preferred them over the complex system of the Christian religion. His virtues included basic elements such as Temperance, Silence, Order, Resolution, etc. (Franklin 83). These virtues were straightforward, and they were easy enough to follow so people did no complaining. I do not know about everyone else, but I would have much rather attempted to live by Ban Franklin's virtues than the Bible. Their obviousness and simplistic manner make them much more appealing to the imperfect human. 
In the Rationalism period, people were trying to get past the heavy barriers of orthodox religion. The church was ridiculously overbearing on the people before the Rationalist period. The Enlightened ones became the most popular figures of that time period, especially because what they were doing was significantly easier than following popular religious beliefs. They knew what they stood for and they were able to focus on life more than trying to please a god that not even the religious figures focused on. Of course, they all focused most of their time on religion, but that was only because the churches were focusing on making them fearful of Hell rather than uplifting them towards heaven. They needed to be motivated with positivity rather than with fear. When Franklin published his autobiography, he was already a very popular Rationalist throughout the United States. Everyone wanted to listen to what he had to say, so when he basically presented an alternative to the forceful tactics of the Christian religion. Franklin's virtues were easily used by many people after the Puritan era overwhelmed the Americans. This came as a sort of salvation to the people of the United States. 

Franklin, Benjamin. The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin. Philadelphia: Henry Altemus, 1895. Print.

DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

Propaganda was used technically by Thomas Jefferson in "The Declaration of Independence" frequently, and I found them to be very obvious in the document. The Cuesta College explains these techniques in their article over The Declaration. It clearly states, "the methods and approaches used to spread ideas that further a cause - political, commercial, religious, or civil cause (Recognizing)." They are justifying his use of propaganda by saying that he wanted to make his views more widely accepted, and he wanted to further his cause. Through attempting this, he resorts to using methods manipulative to the listener's point of view on the subject. While I do understand his point, he was going about it the wrong way. He should have presented real, factual, relevant information. 
The technique I found to be the most emphasized in the document was not really a technique, but just plain name-calling. To me, this part of his writing stood out the most. Here writes about one paragraph of real support, and then moves on to just spitting insults to King George III.  I would compare this to the types of political campaign commercials all over the media. He basically only wants to make a mockery of his opponents instead of strengthening his side of the argument. He really does not have much to say about himself, only things about how terrible the Parliament is. The entire Declaration was just one huge celebrity roast on George III. You cannot actually pick out very many of Jefferson's political opinions, only harsh comments on the king can be observed. People who call names on others often use this approach in debates. "Rather than explain what they believe in, they prefer to try to tear their opponent down (Recognizing)."  Jefferson fits perfectly into this category. It is a sure thing that Jefferson wants to break down what the king has going. Although none of the Americans wanted the king's policies, they still should have supported an argument with better points as a country. He never really supports his own side, he only spends his words bringing down Parliament. It is possible that he is bashing the other side because he is not willing to accept his own lack of solution. Sure, he has no problem focusing all of his attention on the mistakes of others, but he cannot take the time to actually fix the problems that he complains of. He cannot solve the problems, he can only distinguish them and make them obvious to other people. His first sentence complains about the debate of personal freedoms, right off the bat. "The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpation, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states (Wilhelm 122)."  In the rest of the document, he proceeds to criticize the every flaw on the British rule. I find this to be hypocritical. He talks about the American values being unaccepted by the English, as he is not accepting the English values. While the values of the British are overwhelming to the Americans, they should not have taken this approach. 



"Recognizing Propaganda Techniquesand Errors of Faulty Logic." Recognizing Propaganda--Guide to Critical Thinking--Academic Support. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Sept. 2012.http://academic.cuesta.edu/acasupp/as/404.htm.


Wilhelm, Jeffrey D., Douglas Fisher, Kathleen A. Hinchman, David G. O'Brien, Taffy Raphael, and Cynthia Hynd. Shanahan. Glencoe Literature. New York: Glencoe McGraw-Hill, 2009. Print.