11 responses to “Unit IV Thoughts and Tips

  1. Hobbes and Locke theroies and how they differ.

    Locke’s way of thinking was human understanding in respect for God. He used this reason to search after the truth, rther than accept opinions from authority, to respect in spiritual and material welfare. He believed man was good and that their opinions should count. That every man was equal, and that justice would be served. Locke was more religious than Hobbes.
    Hobbes thinking was man needs discipline , and that man was selfish,brutal ,and that they had no say. If mans opinion was differ from the ruler off with their heads so to speak. That “just laws” was an oxymoron.
    Convinced that geometry holds best theroy in advancement in human knowledge. In other words man has to obey the government or in those times (ruler).
    Both men wrote at war time. Hobbes believed nature was a war. Lockes believed in every man was equal, along with every man would respect God.
    In my opinion, both men were right in some of their beliefs. Hobbes on his belief of being tough on discipline (example) if we allowed people to do what they wanted then our government would be out of control, prisoners would be one, if we did not have the death penalty some would serve time get out and continue to repeat again and again.
    On the other hand we used Lockes theroy of religion and having choices and not being communist. (which I am glad our country isn’t) I think our country lend more toward Lockes theroy than Hobbes.

    history2.professorpage.info

  2. Peggy Reynolds

    What was different about the approach baroque-era scientists and philosophers took compared to what someone would do today? Consider the political-religious system of the time. What do you think would happen today if you claimed the truth of some theory that was not approved of by the contemporary power structure?

    During the baroque-era scientists and philosophers had direct and indirect effects on art. During the baroque-era time period knowledge of science and mathematics were changing and growing. During the baroque-era period scientist and philosophies looked at the laws of nature and laws set by other scientist. Today we look back at these laws that were made in the baroque-era period because they are essential in science and philosophies use these daily. If it was not for the baroque-era scientist and philosophers we would not have the laws of sciences or it would have taken us longer. An example would be Galileo Galilei, who discovered a number of natural laws; uniform accelerated motion, gravity and oscillation. I think that today new natural and social laws to help shape the world.

    What are the basic points of the theories of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke? What do they have in common, and on what points do they radically differ? Which of their ideas do you agree with, and why?

    The basic point of the theories of Thomas Hobbes was that he thought men were the constant but natural state of war. The basic point of the theories of John Locke was that he thought state of man’s nature no better, but not a war. Thomas Hobbes believed that we all fear violent death and we all have the right to defend ourselves. Hobbes also believed that it was in our best interest to avoid war. Locke believed that people were reasonable and moral. Locke believed that people had the right to protect themselves.
    I think that both Hobbes and Locke thought are similar and both do not war. Hobbes believes that men will go to war and fight with each but does not want it. Locke thinks that people can live in peace and everyone is reasonable and moral, and will not fight each other. I think that Hobbes is more right because people are going to fight sometimes but that we should to avoid war.

  3. Peggy Reynolds

    I read the revenge tragedy play Hamlet written in 1600 by William Shakespeare, when I was in high school.
    The genre of the play is a revenge tragedy because of Hamlets father’s death and Hamlets efforts to make others see what Claudius did. The plot of the story, I would say starts when the ghost appears to Hamlet and tells him what Claudius did. Hamlet tells his friend Horatio about this and he tells him he should find out if it is true. Then Hamlet tries to see if this is true, by having a group of traveling actors react his father’s murder. The discovery of this preform is a turning point because Hamlet see Claudius’s reacting when he storms out of the performance and he knows what the ghost told him is true.
    The climax comes when Claudius starts to think that there is something up with Hamlet and that he may no something. So Claudius convinces Gertrude (Hamlet’s mother) that Hamlet is going crazy and is acting weird. Then Hamlet confronts his mother and he kills Polonium who works for Claudius and is also Hamlet’s loves father (Ophelia). After this happened Claudius sends Hamlet on a trip with Hamlet’s friends Rosencrantz and Guildenstern and sends order with his to friend’s that when Hamlet is to arrive at this other kingdom he is to be killed.
    When Hamlet finds out he changes the letter so that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are killed instead. When Hamlet gets back to Denmark. He see that Ophelia has died and learns that she went crazy after his father’s death. At the end of the play Claudius, Gertrude, Larertes (Ophelia’s brother), and Hamlet all die from poison. The only person left a live is Horatio.

  4. Sydney Hoffman

    1. What was different about the approach baroque-era scientists and philosophers took compared to what someone would do today? Consider the political-religious system of the time. What do you think would happen today if you claimed the truth of some theory that was not approved of by the contemporary power structure?
    Baroque-era scientists and philosophers brought about many advancements and changes in the world of science and mathematics. They discovered many laws of nature and science that have further improved our studies and knowledge today. During the baroque-era, these scientists and philosophers were not afraid of learning and experimenting and crossing comfortable limits to discover something new. They were very curios and had an ‘itch’ to truly understanding our world. While the baroque-era scientists and philosophers did believe in faith and God, they believed it came with reason. They accepted what they could find to be mathematically correct and rejected the things that could not be scientifically proven. Today, scientists and philosophers are still experimenting and furthering their knowledge, but I believe it is not with the same ambition and curiosity that the baroque-era entitled. Scientists and philosophers do not base their studies on religious aspects or faith in God. They simply believe what can only be proven. Everything that cannot be mathematically proven is then labeled to have a personal opinion or theory. Science today leaves little to no room for God and religion. If I were to claim the truth of some theory today that was not approved of by contemporary power structure, I would probably be overlooked at first. If I then continued to commercialize my theory and obtain a substantial amount of attention for it, then depending on the support I had, be criticized for having no proof and/or physical evidence that my theory is true. I would most likely be pressured to further my studies on that particular theory until I have a reasonable amount of proof. The contemporary power structure would deny all grants toward my theory and then look right past me.

    2. What are the basic points of the theories of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke? What do they have in common, and on what points do they radically differ? Which of their ideas do you agree with, and why?
    John Locke and Thomas Hobbes have similar theories that agree and contradict each other. John Locke was a strong believer in finding the truth, and that all men can govern themselves. He thought every human being was essentially good and created equally among God. John Locke had a stronger faith in God than Thomas Hobbes did, which made him base his truth findings more with God. Locke considered a wider range of opinions because of his “openness”. Thomas Hobbes believed more in strict authority and discipline for every man. He agreed much more with authorities theories and based his own off of the higher ranks. Thomas Hobbes believed that every man should surrender and obey to a leader because they were not capable of governing themselves. His theories relied mostly on the pursuit of power. So obviously, Locke and Hobbes differed and disagreed on these theories. But they did agree on the theory that every man does and can make their own choices. With that, Hobbes and Locke agree that having a government and leaders definitely helps keep every person in line and creates a more stable and civil lifestyle. They agreed that life is uncivilized without structure and some type of control system. Personally, I agree with them both in different ways. I agree with the theory from John Locke that God is the ultimate ruler and he gave every man the right to govern himself properly. But on the other hand, I do agree with Hobbes theory that people need a little disciple to stay doing the right things. And with the both of these men, I do agree that a government helps the overall life of people. It brings a little discipline into the world while still allowing free choice and ownership of yourself.

    -Sydney Hoffman

  5. Amber Franzell

    What are the basic points of the theories of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke? What do they have in common, and on what points do they radically differ? Which of their ideas do you agree with, and why?

    John Locke and Thomas Hobbes have similar theories a couple of basic points of theories between the two are Sensations of objects arise from powers in the object itself. Men are by nature free and equal against claims that god had made all people naturally subject to a monarch. People have rights, such as the right to life, liberty, and property that have a foundation independent of the laws of any particular society. There were certain moral truths that applied to all people, regardless of the particular place where they lived or the agreements they had made. Divine law and natural law are consistent and can overlap in content but they are not coextensive. These theories Locke and Hobbes both agree with. Locke and Hobbes agree on one thing and one thing only. They agreed that a ruler of some sort appeared absolutely necessary for a county to thrive and flourish. With out a leader, the country would fall away into nothing. In the political sense, the two philosophers John Locke and Thomas Hobbes agreed only on this subject. They did agree on the theory that every man does and can make their own choices. The difference between the two is that Hobbes believed that man needed a ruler or a king to guide them. Locke disagreed with Hobbes and thought there was no need for one man to make the decisions of all. John Locke had a stronger faith than Thomas Hobbes did, which made him base his truth findings more on God. Thomas Hobbes believes that every man should surrender and obey to a leader because they were not capable of governing themselves.
    I have to agree with both Locke and Hobbes on both of their beliefs. I agree that God is the ultimate ruler and he gave every man the right to governor himself properly. I also agree that people need a little discipline to stay doing the right things in life. Both of these theories have helped the country weather it’s the discipline or the country ruler if there wasn’t a ruler then things would be out of control.

  6. charletta smith

    • The difference between scientists and philosophers today versus baroque-era scientists and philosophers has to do with beliefs then and now. Baroque-era scientists and philosophers weren’t afraid of learning and experimenting things to discover something new. They believed in faith and god and reasoning. They believed that government was man created and was not the result of divine rule. The baroque-era scientists and philosophers began the concept of natural order/natural law, and mathematics were the original measures of truth. They didn’t have all the resources we have today, so because of that they used astronomy, geometry, and physics to reach a conclusion; however the baroque scientist had to be very careful when they presented those types of ideas because the findings they came to may not be traditional or unbiblical. If their findings were mathematically correct they were accepted and the things they rejected couldn’t be scientifically proven. Today scientist and philosophers still explore and experiment their ideas to further their knowledge, however they don’t base their studies on religion such as faith or god they only believe what can be proven and has a scientific explanation. I think that nothing would come from it these days if someone claimed the truth of a theory and wasn’t approved by power structure where in modern society freedom of speech and our innovative society. As long as others believe in theory and they support your findings and of course someone couldn’t prove you wrong.

    • The basic point of theory of Thomas Hobbes was taught men were the constant but natural state of war and that man needed discipline because man was selfish and they had no say. He was convinced that geometry holds the best theory in advancement in human knowledge (man had to obey the government). Hobbes believed in being tough on discipline, in fear of violent death and has the right to defend ourselves and it was in our best interest to avoid war, and that men will go to war but don’t want to. John Locke believed somewhat different about the theories. Locke believed human understanding in respect for god and used to use it to search for the truth rather than the authorities opinions. He believed that every man was equal and justice would be served and everyone should and would respect god. John Locke was also more religious and was a stronger believer in finding the truth than Thomas Hobbes in all aspects. Locke also believed that people can live in peace and everyone is reasonable and moral and won’t fight each other because he considered a wider range of opinions. John Locke and Thomas Hobbes did have some things in common they both wrote at war time and neither of them wanted a war. The theory every man does and can make their own choices, having government and leaders help keep everyone in line and create a stable life style. Life’s that is uncivilized without structure and some type of control system. I don’t just agree with just one of them because Locke and Hobbes both have different theories that some i agree with and some i don’t.

  7. Basic points of theories of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke:
    The basic point of theory of Thomas Hobbs was that human beings/man were essentially self-centered and only driven by fear of death and the quest for power. He believed that everything about man/human beings could be explained by natural laws. Meaning everything that man did or responded to was a direct result of something else whether another human being or nature itself. Also, he believed that if man’s instinctive behavior went uncontrolled that men would become poor, uncivilized, nasty and brutish. Although having the view of man being instinctive or animalistic he also believed man to be rational and reasonable. He thought that if man recognized their miserable, hopeless state of being that it would force them to form a civil society creating a contract between man and ruler. The ruler would be the protective guardian and the so called civilized society, which would be free from its horrible natural existence, would give up all their rights and ensure that the civilized contract would be adhered to. Hobbs dark view of humanity was rejected by John Locke and gave way to Locke’s theory of humanity. Although Locke took on a few view of Hobbs ideas in that man could be violent and disorderly, he also believed that human beings were good and capable of controlling and governing themselves. In a nutshell he believed what man worked for he earned. He believed that at birth the mind was empty and was filled by life experiences. Believing that everything that humans learned or became familiar with was through their senses. He rejected the social contract and believed people had the right to choose their rulers and that the chosen rulers should have limited authority. If the rulers broke their governing agreements then the people reserve the right to overthrow that ruler and take back their natural authority.
    After reading Thomas Hobbs and John Locke’s theories between the two I would say that I have to agree with John Locke. Like John Locke I do agree with some of Thomas Hobbs points but I think they are more barbaric and animalistic as I referenced above. In my opinion Hobbs doesn’t give man much room for growth, change and development, although Locke did make some references that human beings were slow to change, he recognized that through experience humans gained knowledge that lead to developing and changing. He recognized that human beings were mentally equipped to handle simple and complex ideas and had the ability to use reason.

  8. Emily Holbrook

    My favorite thing about this class that differs from my other online classes is the course blog. I feel like this is a place where we can communicate with you, as the teacher, so we are not completing the course with no guidance. I am taking four online courses this semester and I have the same teacher for two courses while one is still MIA. I even emailed the last professor to confirm a due date and never received a response. Basically, it is just nice that we have a way of communication without bothering you all the time, as I am sure you have more things to do than read emails all day long.
    Providing us, the students with opportunities to improve our grade or even direct us in the right place for information is definitely something I love about this course. I also really like that everything for one unit is due by a certain day and there is not stops along the way requiring us to turn in the paper or any other part of the unit by a certain day. It is nice that I can post my blog comment now instead of waiting for a certain time period to open up. Being involved in other classes with their course materials eliminates more and more free time so I try to complete things when I have a little extra time even if it is weeks before the due date. I made a mistake with the correct time period on the last paper and you allowed me to fix it so I wouldn’t receive a zero, and with this course, nothing is worth a lot of points so every point counts.
    I completely forgot about the extra credit so although I emailed you to re-take a test, I can earn two more points by watching a movie and responding to it. That is a very interesting assignment to me as I have never had the opportunity to do something as this. I know I, as well as some other classmates, appreciate you posting the reminder about the extra credit because I am sure some of us forgot.
    Again, as I always say, I love being able to look at the blog and access some of these links like the “Five Steps to Success Writing Papers” in the paper resources section and the “Five Steps for Success (Exams)” and “Writing Essay Questions on the Exams” in the Exam Resources section. It is much easier to me to get to as opposed to the links in blackboard. Honestly, I never really pay attention to the links in blackboard because of how easy I can see them in the blog. They are labeled in the right place and the hyperlink is right there. It is so much easier for me to see and use.
    Also, thank you again for posting the exam questions on the blog. It is a lot less stressful going into an exam already knowing the answers for up to 5 points of the exam. Thank you also for helping us right up to the end of the semester and clearly wanting everyone to do amazing.

  9. Melissa Rogers

    What was different about the approach baroque-era scientists and philosophers took compared to what someone would do today? Consider the political-religious system of the time. What do you think would happen today if you claimed the truth of some theory that was not approved of by the contemporary power structure?
    Baroque-era scientists and philosophers weren’t afraid of learning and experimenting with things to discover something new. They believed in faith and god and reasoning. They also believed that government was man created and was not the result of divine rule. The baroque-era scientists and philosophers began the concept of natural order — natural law, and mathematics was the original measures of truth. They didn’t have all the resources we have today, so for the reason of that they used astronomy, geometry, and physics to reach their conclusions; the baroque-era scientist had to be very careful when they presented those types of ideas because the findings they came to may not be traditional. If their findings were mathematically correct they were accepted and the things they rejected couldn’t be scientifically proven. Today’s scientist and philosophers still explore and experiment their ideas to further their knowledge, however they don’t base their studies on religion such as faith or god they only believe what can be proven and has a scientific explanation.

    What are the basic points of the theories of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke? What do they have in common, and on what points do they radically differ? Which of their ideas do you agree with, and why? Hobbes set forth a govenment based theory on the pessimistic view. They are driven by the fear of death and the quest for power. He also imagined what life would be like if these to natural inclinations were allowed free rein and there was no free power to control them. Hobbes described human life under these circumcustanes “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.” He also thought rational human beings would recongize their miserable sitituation in a state of nature, give up on existence. Locke rejected Hobbes gloomy view of humanity. Locke taught instead that human nature is potenially good and that human beings are capable of governing themsevles. Despite there contradictory messages they had been subjected to similar influences.

  10. First of all let me just say I can’t believe we are about to start the last unit! This class has flown by, and I feel like I’ve learned so much. I decided to do the slideshow presentation for this unit. I picked composer Johann Sebastian Bach, and really learned some very interesting things about him. It was nice to have a different option other than writing another paper. I didn’t get around to doing the extra credit because with the do over assignment along with the normal unit assignments, time ran short. I’m looking forward to the last unit. I must say however, I will miss this class. It’s been one of my favorites so far in college.

  11. dana42

    ****During the baroque era many scientists were busy expanding their knowledge of science, astronomy, physics and mathematics. The primary methods used to retrieve this new knowledge consisted of observation, logic and experimentation. Without these methods scientists would have most likely missed their chance at making some of the greatest scientific discoveries that this world has ever seen. This era was a time of great change which was kind of ironic because most people during that time rejected change. One thing that did not change during this time was the reliance on mathematics to either prove or abolish a theory. Mathematics along with experimentation was a new approach to science during the baroque period. One of the most famous users of this new approach was Galileo Galilei. As stated before, mathematics was an important tool for validating answers, many scientists (such as Galilei) accepted only what could be proven mathematically and rejected what could not.
    With the invention of the telescope in 1609 Galileo un-earthed several new astronomical discoveries, most of which completely shattered Aristotle’s geocentric theory that the universe is earth centered, and replaced it with the notion that the universe was instead centered around the sun. His persistence in investigating and testing natural laws laid the basis for the modern experimental method, which is based on conducting tests and observing results. Prior to this innovation, scientific theory was based purely on suggestion and assumption. Galileo’s new revelations of the universe turned out to be a threat by the Roman Catholic Church who condemned his views and requested that he be tried by the Inquisition, as a result of this Galileo was eventually arrested and forced to sign a document stating that he rejected his earlier beliefs of the sun being the central object of the universe. This just goes to show how powerful the religious and political system was back then. However it was proclaimed by some (mainly political philosophers) that the governments were not the result of divine rule but that they were the creation of humans and their deeds instead.
    I think the approach that scientists use today is based on, if not the same approach that baroque scientists used. I think they all ultimately had/have the same goals and ambitions in mind, which is to make advancements and continue to expand the field of science. Furthermore, I think that if I were to claim truth in an unapproved theory that there would not be any consequences because of it. The world has changed drastically since the baroque era, it is no longer a crime punishable by law to believe in something that is not approved by the contemporary power structure. This is the age of free speech and thought, many great things sometimes start off as a crazy idea or belief and can sometimes even branch out from a weird experiment, and these days it is important to let out the creative side because who knows what can develop from it.
    ****Thomas Hobbes and John Locke at one point in each of their lives were both subjected to similar influences; however both had radically different views about politics and people.
    Hobbes was a pessimist who sometimes had a dark and miserable view of humanity. He was completely convinced that humanity was full of egocentric individuals who were driven by the fear of death as well as the quest for power. Hobbes was devoted to the theory of absolutism and the need to control destructive human impulses.
    John Locke however, strongly disagreed with Hobbes and his dream of absolutism. Locke was a liberalist who advocated a theory of the government being under the control of the people. He believed that the nature of humans was potentially good and that they were capable of governing themselves. Not only was he convinced that humans were fundamentally decent and law abiding but he also believed that the human mind was a blank tablet that recorded all human experiences so it could form abstract concepts and generalizations to help them survive and progress in life.
    Hobbes and Locke for the most part appear to be pretty different, but the truth is that there are a few ideas that they both agree on, such as that humans posses reason, human life is violent and disorderly in the state of nature, humans must form civil governments to protect themselves and that a social contract is imperative to having a civil society.
    I think I would have to agree with John Locke’s theory of government. I think it is the people’s right to decide how their lives should be ran. I don’t see why Hobbes believes that it is so farfetched for society to know what’s best for them as a whole.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s