In two paragraphs (roughly 400-600 words), complete a focused rhetorical analysis of either William Cronon’s “The Trouble with Wilderness” or Michel Montaigne’s “On the Cannibals.” You will analyze one specific piece of evidence.

User Generated



ENG 131


  • In two paragraphs (roughly 400-600 words), complete a focused rhetorical analysis of either William Cronon’s “The Trouble with Wilderness” or Michel Montaigne’s “On the Cannibals.” You will analyze one specific piece of evidence (10 on 1) to support your thesis.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Short Writing 2: Analysis Total Points: 60 Description: A rhetorical analysis of an essay Format: MLA format, typed, double-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman Font Due Date: Wednesday, February 6th Task • In two paragraphs (roughly 400-600 words), complete a focused rhetorical analysis of either William Cronon’s “The Trouble with Wilderness” or Michel Montaigne’s “On the Cannibals.” You will analyze one specific piece of evidence (10 on 1) to support your thesis. o The first paragraph should be a brief and independent summary of the article in question (keeping in mind the CABIN criteria/your summary training). o End the first paragraph with your specific, unobvious, and non-list thesis. Your thesis ought to have two parts: 1. Recognize an important implicit (unstated) element in the essay (for example, a rhetorical strategy or assumption that you wish to examine). 2. Suggest one specific, important way the unstated element contributes to the function of the essay or the advancement of the author’s argument. o Remember the distinction between content and design. This analysis is about what the author does to design the argument and reasoning as to a key consequence of that design to the rhetorical function of the essay. It may help to include the author’s intended audience in your thesis (however, this is not a requirement; if you do include the audience in your thesis, be sure to specify precisely who the audience is). o After you compose your thesis and CABIN summary, follow up with a second paragraph that defends your thesis by examining one key piece of evidence from the essay (10 on 1). Your goal here is to give the reader a better understanding of the essay through this piece of evidence. Examine specific parts of the evidence to illustrate your thesis. Be sure to defend both parts of your thesis—after recognizing the role of an implicit element in the author’s argument, reason as to a key consequence of this implicit element to the essay’s function. o Use a topic sentence for the second paragraph. Rely on attributive tags and transitions where appropriate throughout. o Remember to link evidence and claims by providing adequate explanation. Connect the dots. At least half of the second paragraph should be your words explaining the evidence in service to your thesis. Do not give me two paragraphs of summary. o Cite all paraphrases and quotes. o Refrain from personal judgement. Pursue rational analysis of the evidence. o Give the exact word count at the end. Objectives • To recognize implicit rhetorical strategies • To defend a thesis • To quote and paraphrase accurately and gracefully • To lay the foundation for writing effective responses to civic and academic debates Criteria for Evaluation • • • • • Complete: Does the analysis offer all the necessary parts of the assignment (thesis, CABIN summary, evidence, analysis of the evidence in light of the thesis, etc.)? Accurate: Does the essay accurately represent the material? Brief: Does the analysis use language precisely and economically to say as much as possible in the allotted space? Independent: Would the analysis make sense to readers who have not read the essay? Clarity and Design: Is the analysis well-written, easy to understand, and easy to follow? Does it have an effective structure and an appropriate style? Are sources properly documented? Are transitions and attributive tags used well? Is it organized and coherent? Editing Skills: Is the analysis free of grammatical and mechanical errors? Grade Range • • • • • A - Model paper. One or maybe two minor errors and no major errors. B - A few minor errors and perhaps one major error counterbalanced by better than average execution. C - Complete assignment. One or more major errors accompanied by several minor errors. On balance, however, the paper does fair work satisfying the requirements. A “C” paper is a successful paper. D - A medley of major and minor errors. Usually an incomplete assignment. Often times “D” papers demonstrate reading and assignment comprehension issues or are a product of student sloppiness and laziness. F - Failure. Major Errors: Result in the loss of anywhere between 6-15 points, depending on the severity. These errors usually involve issues related to accuracy and misrepresentation, the thesis, independence, citation, evidence/analysis, and completion. Minor Errors: Result in the loss of anywhere between 1-5 points, depending on the severity. These errors usually involve issues related to grammar and editing, organization, clarity, and neutrality. However, sometimes a problem with accuracy, the thesis, independence, evidence/analysis, or citation is insignificant enough to fall under this category. Keep in mind that minor errors can snowball and cause major errors. For instance, minor errors in organization could conceivably make a paper very difficult to follow overall, giving rise to a work that lacks independence and clarity. 1:31 . On the Cannibals 31. On the Cannibals [The cannibals mentioned in this chapter lived on the coasts of Braz il. Montaigne had read many accounts of the conqiust of the New World, including Girolamo Benzoni's Historia de! mondo novo (Venice, 1565) in the French translation by Urbain Chauveton, the very title of which emphasizes the dreadful treatment of the natives by the Conquistadores: A New History of the New World containing all that Spaniards have done up to the present in the West Indies, and the harsh treatment which they have meted out to those peoples yonder .. . Together with a short History of a Massacre committed by the Spaniards on some Frenchmen in Florida (two editions in 1579). Montaigne's 'primitivism' (his respect for barbarous peoples and his admiration for much of their conduct, once their motives are understood) has little in common with the 'noble savages' of later centuries. These peoples are indeed cruel: but so are we . Their simple ways have much to teach us: they can ser~e as a standard by which we can judge Plato's Republic, the myth of the Golden Age, the cruelty, the corruption and the culture of Europe, and show up that European insularity which condemns peoples as barbarous merely because their manners and their dress are different. J [A] When King Pyrrhus crossed into Italy, after noting the excellent formation of the army which the Romans had sent ahead towards him he said, 'I do not know what kind of Barbarians these are' (for the Greeks called all foreigners Barbarians) 'but there is nothing barbarous about the ordering of the army which I can see!' The Greeks said the same about the army which Flaminius brought over to their country, [C] as did Philip when he saw from a hill-top in his kingdom the order and plan of the Roman encampment under Publius Sulpicius Galba.1 [A] We should be similarly wary of accepting common opinions; we should judge them by the ways of reason not by popular vote. I have long had a man with me who stayed some ten or twelve years in that other world which was discovered in our century when Villegaignon made his landfall and named it La France Antartique. 2 This discovery of a 1. Plutarch, Life of Pyrrhus and Life of Flaminius. 2. Durand de Villegagnon struck land, in Brazil, in 1557. Cf. Lettres sur la navigation du chevalier de Villegaignon es terres de l'Amerique, Paris, 1557, by an author who calls himself simply N .B. 229 boundless territory seems to me worthy of reflection. I am by no means sure that some other land may not be discovered in the future, since so many persons, [CJ greater than we are, [A] were wrong about this one! I fear that our eyes are bigger than our bellies, our curiosity more 3 than we can stomach. We grasp at everything but clasp nothing but wind. Plato brings in Solon to relate that he had learned from the priests of the town of Sai's in Egypt how, long ago before the Flood, there was a vast island called Atlantis right at the mouth of the Straits of Gibraltar, occupying an area greater than Asia an~ Africa combined; the kings of that country, who not only possessed that island but had spread on to the mainland across the bre;idth of Africa as far as Egypt and the length of Europe as far as Tuscany, planned to stride over into Asia and subdue all the peoples bordering on the Mediterranean as far as the Black Sea. To this end they had traversed Spain, Gaul and Italy and had reached as far as Greece when the Athenians withstood them; but soon afterwards those Athenians, as well as the people of Atlantis and their island, were engulfed in that Flood.• It is most likely that that vast inundation should have produced strange changes to the inhabitable areas of the world; it is maintained that it was then that the sea cut off Sicily from Italy [BJ Hax loca, vi quondam et vasta convulsa ruina, Dissiluisse ferunt, cum protinus utraque tellus Unaforet. [Those places, they say, were once wrenched apart by a violent convulsion, whereas they had formerly been one single land.)' [A] as well as Cyprus from Syria, and the island of Negropontus from the Boeotian mainland, while elsewhere lands once separated were j oined together by filling in the trenches between them with mud and sand: sterilisque diu palus aptaque remis Vicinas urbes alit, et grave sentit aratrum . 3. '80: our bellies, as they say, applying it to those whose appetite and hunger make them desire more meat than they can manage: I fear that we too have curiosity far more ... 4. Plato, Timaeus, 24E etc., and Girolamo Benzoni, Historia del mondo novo, Venice 1565. Cf. also Plato, Critias, 113 A ff. 5. Virgil, Aeneid, lll, 414-17. 230 1:31. On the Cannibals 1:31. On the Cannibals (Barren swamps which you could row a boat through now feed neighbouring cities and bear the heavy plough. )6 emigrated with their wives and children and started living there. The Carthaginian lords, seeing that their country was being gradually depopulated, expressly forbade any more to go there on pain of death and drove out those new settlers, fearing it is said that they would in time increase so greatly that they would supplant them and bring down their State. But that account in Aristotle cannot apply to these new lands either. That man of mine was a simple, rough fellow - qualities which make for a good witness: those clever chaps notice more things more carefully but are always adding glosses; they cannot help changing their story a little in order to make their views triumph and be more persuasive; they never show you anything purely as it is: they bend it and disguise it to fit in with their own views. To make their judgement more credible and to win you over they emphasize their own side, amplify it and extend it. So you need either a very trustworthy man or else a man so simple that he has nothing in him on which to build such false discoveries or make them plausible; and he must be wedded to no cause. Such was my man; moreover on various occasions he showed me several seamen and merchants whom he knew on that voyage. So I am content with what he told me, without inquiring what the cosmographers have to say about it. What we need is topographers who would make detailed accounts of the places which they had actually been to. But because they have the advantage of visiting Palestine, they want to enjoy the right of telling us tales about all the rest of the world! I wish everyone would write only about what he knows - not in this matter only but in all others. A man may well have detailed knowledge or experience· of the nature of one particular river or stream, yet about all the others he knows only what everyone else does; but in order to trot out his little scrap of knowledge he will write a book on the whole of physics! From this vice many great inconveniences arise. Now to get back to the subject, I find (from what has been told me) that there is nothing savage or barbarous about those peoples, but that every man calls barbarous anything he is not accustomed to; it is indeed the case that we have no other criterion of truth or right-reason than the example and form of the opinions and customs of our own country. There we always find the perfect religion, the perfect polity, the most developed and perfect way of doing anything! Those 'savages' are only wild in the sense that we call fruits wild when they are produced by Nature in her ordinary course: whereas it is fruit which we have artificially perverted and misled from the common order which we ought to call savage. It is in the first Yet there is little likelihood of that island's being the New World which we have recently discovered, for it was virtually touching Spain; it would be unbelievable for a flood to force it back more than twelve hundred leagues to where it is now; besides our modern seamen have already all but discovered that it is not an island at all but a mainland, contiguous on one side with the East Indies and on others with lands lying beneath both the Poles - or that if it is separated from them, it is by straits so narrow that it does not deserve the name of'island' on that account. [B] It seems that large bodies such as these are subject, as are our own, to changes, [C] some natural, some [B] feverish.' When I consider how my local river the Dordogne has, during my own lifetime, been encroaching on the right-hand bank going downstream and has taken over so much land that it has robbed many buildings of their foundation, I realize that it has been suffering from some unusual upset: for if it had always gone on like this or were to do so in the future, the whole face of the world would be distorted. But their moods change: sometimes they incline one way, then another: and sometimes they restrain themselves. I am not discussing those sudden floodings whose causes we know. By the coast-line in Medoc, my brother the Sieur d' Arsac can see lands of his lying buried under sand spewed up by the sea: the tops of some of the buildings are still visible: his rents and arable fields have been changed into very sparse grazing. The locals say that the sea has been thrusting so hard against them for some time now that they have lost four leagues of land. These sands are the sea's pioneer-corps: [C] and we can see those huge shifting sanddunes marching a half-league ahead in the vanguard, capturing territory. [A] The other testimony from Antiquity which some would make relevant to this discovery is in Aristotle - if that little book about unheard wonders is really his. 8 He tells how some Carthaginians struck out across the Atlantic beyond the Straits of Gibraltar, sailed for a long time and finally discovered a large fertile island entirely clothed in woodlands and watered by great deep rivers but very far from any mainland; they and others after them, attracted by the richness and fertility of the soil, 6. Horace, Ars poetica, 65-6. 7. '88: changes sickly and feverish. When ... 8. The Secreta secretorum is supposititious. Montaigne is following Girolamo Benzoni. 231 232 1:31. On the Cannibals 1:31. On the Cannibals kind that we find their true, vigorous, living, most natural and most useful properties and virtues, which we have bastardized in the other kind by merely adapting them to our corrupt tastes. [C] Moreover, there is a delicious savour which even our taste finds excellent in a variety of fruits produced in those countries without cultivation: they rival our own. [A] It is not sensible that artifice should be reverenced more than Nature, our great and powerful Mother. We have so overloaded the richness and beauty of her products by our own ingenuity that we have smothered her entirely. Yet wherever her pure light does shine, she wondrously shames our vain and frivolous enterprises: solder. I would tell Plato that those people have no trade of any kind, no acquaintance with writing, no knowledge of numbers, no terms for governor or political superior, no practice of subordination or of riches or poverty, no contracts, no inheritances, no divided estates, no occupation but leisure, no concern for kinship - except such as is common to them all - no clothing, no agriculture, no metals, no use of wine or corn. Among them you hear no words for treachery, lying, cheating, avarice, envy, backbiting or forgiveness. How remote from such perfection would Plato find that Republic which he thought up - [C] 'viri a diis recentes' (men fresh from the gods]. 12 [BJ Et veniunt ederc~ sponte sua melius, Surgit et in so/is formosior arbutus antris, Et volucres nulla dulcius arte canunt. [Ivy grows best when left untended; the strawberry tree flourishes more beautifully in lonely grottoes, and birds sing the sweeter for their artlessness. ]9 [A] All our strivings cannot even manage to reproduce the nest of the smallest little bird, with its beauty and appropriateness to its purpose; we cannot even reproduce the web of the wretched spider. [C] Plato says that all things are produced by nature, fortune or art, the greatest and fairest by the first two, the lesser and least perfect by the last. 10 [A] Those peoples, then, seem to me to be barbarous only in that they have been hardly fashioned by the mind of man, still remaining close neighbours to their original state of nature. They are still governed by the laws of Nature and are only very slightly bastardized by ours; but theirpurity is such that I am sometimes seized with irritation at their not having been discovered earlier, in times when there were men who could have appreciated them better than we do. It irritates me that neither Lycurgus nor Plato had any knowledge of them, for it seems to me that what experience has taught us about those peoples surpasses not only all the descriptions with which poetry has beautifully painted the Age of Gold" and all its ingenious fictions about Man's blessed early state, but also the very conceptions and yearnings of philosophy. They could not even imagine a state of nature so simple and so pure as the one we have learned about from experience; they could not even believe that societies of men could be maintained with so little artifice, so little in the way of human 9. Propertius, I, ii, 10-12. 10. Plato, Laws, X, 888A-B. 11. Cf. Elizabeth Armstrong, Ronsard and the Age of Gold, Cambridge, 1968. [BJ 233 Hos natura modos primum dedit. [These are the ways which Nature first ordained.]" (A] In addition they inhabit a land with a most delightful countryside and a temperate climate, so that, from what I have been told by my sources, it is rare to find anyone ill there;" I have been assured that they never saw a single man bent with age, toothless, blear-eyed or tottering. They dwell along the sea-shore, shut in to landwards by great lofty mountains, on a stretch of land some hundred leagues in width. They have fish and flesh in abundance which bear no resemblance to ours; these they eat simply cooked. They were so horror-struck by the first man who brought a horse there and rode it that they killed him with their arrows before they could recognize him, even though he had had dealings with them on several previous voyages. Their dwellings are immensely long, big enough to hold two or three hundred souls; they are covered with the bark of tall trees which are fixed into the earth, leaning against each other in support at the top, like some of our barns where the cladding reaches down to the ground and acts as a side. They have a kind of wood so hard that they use it to cut with, making their swords from it as well as grills to cook their meat. Their beds are woven from cotton and slung from the roof like hammocks on our ships; each has his own, since wives sleep apart from their husbands. They get up at sunrise and have their meal for the day as soon as they do so; they have no other meal but that one. They drink 12. Seneca, Epist. moral., XC, 44. (This epistle is a major defence of the innocence of natural man before he was corrupted by philosophy and progress.) 13. Virgil, Georgics, II, 208. 14. One of Montaigne's sources was Simon Goulart's Histoire du Portugal, Paris, 1587, based on a work by Bishop Jeronimo Osorio (da Fonseca) and others. 234 1:31. On the Cannibals nothing with it, [B) like those Eastern peoples who, according to Suidas, 15 only drink apart from meals. [A] They drink together several times a day, and plenty of it. This drink is made from a certain root and has the colour of our claret. They always drink it lukewarm; it only keeps for two or three days; it tastes a bit sharp, is in no ways heady and is good for the stomach; for those who are not used to it it is laxative but for those who are, it is a very pleasant drink. Instead of bread they use a certain white product resembling coriander-cakes. I have tried some: it tastes sweet and somewhat insipid. They spend the whole day dancing; the younger men go off hunting with bow and arrow. Meanwhile some of the women-folk are occupied in warming up their drink: that is their main task. In the morning, before their meal, one of their elders walks from one end of the building to the other, addressing the whole barnful of them by repeating one single phrase over and over again until he has made the rounds, their building being a good hundred yards long. He preaches two things only: bravery before their enemies and love for their wives. They never fail to stress this second duty, repeating that it is their wives who season their drink and keep it warm. In my own house, as in many other places, you can see the style of their beds and rope-work as well as their wooden swords and the wooden bracelets with which they arm their wrists in battle, and the big openended canes to the sound of which they maintain the rhythm of their dances. They shave off all their hair, cutting it more cleanly than we do, yet with razors made of only wood or stone. They believe in the immortality of the soul: souls which deserve well of the gods dwell in the sky where the sun rises; souls which are accursed dwell where it sets. They have some priests and prophets or other, but they rarely appear among the people since they live in the mountains. When they do appear they hold a great festival and a solemn meeting of several villages - each of the barns which I have described constituting a village situated about one French league distant from the next. The prophet then addresses them in public, exhorting them to be virtuous and dutiful, but their entire system of ethics contains only the same two articles: resoluteness in battle and love for their wives. He fo retells what is to happen and the results they must expect from what they undertake; he either incites them to war or deflects them from it, but only on condition that ifhe fails to divine correctly and if things turn out other than he foretold, then - if they can catch him - he is condemned as a false prophet and hacked to pieces. So the prophet who gets it wrong once is seen no more. 15. Suidas, Historica, caeteraque omnia quae ad cognitionem rerum spectant, Basie, 1564. 1:31. On the Cannibals [C] 235 Prophecy is a gift of God. 16 That is why abusing it should be treated as a punishable deceit. Among the Scythians, whenever their soothsayers got it wrong they were shackled hand and foot and laid in ox-carts full of bracken where they were burned. 17 :rhose who treat subjects under the guidance of human limitations can be excused if they have done their best; but those who come and cheat us with assurances of powers beyond the natural order and then fail to do what they promise, should they not be punished for it and for the foolhardiness of their deceit? [A] These peoples have their wars against others further inland beyond their mountains; they go forth naked, with no other arms but their bows and their wooden swords sharpened to a point like the blades of our pigstickers. Their steadfastness in battle is astonishing and always ends in killing and bloodshed: they do not even know the meaning of fear or flight. Each man brings back the head of the enemy he has slain and sets it as a trophy over the door of his dwelling. For a long period they treat captives well and provide them with all the comforts which they can devise; afterwards the master of each captive summons a great assembly of his acquaintances; he ties a rope to one of the arms of his prisoner [C] and holds him by it, standing a few feet away for fear of being caught in the blows, [A] and allows his dearest friend to hold the prisoner the same way by the other arm: then, before the whole assembly, they both hack at him with their swords and kill him. This done, they roast him and make a common meal of him, sending chunks of his flesh to absent friends. This is not as some think done for food - as the Scythians used to do in antiquity - but to symbolize ultimate revenge. As a proof of this, when they noted that the Portuguese who were allied to their enemies practised a different kind of execution on them when taken prisoner which was to bury them up to the waist, to shoot showers of arrows at their exposed parts and then to hang them - they thought that these men from the Other World, who had scattered a knowledge of many a vice throughout their neighbourhood and who were greater masters than they were of every kind of revenge, which must be more severe than their own; so they began to abandon their ancient method and adopted that one. It does not sadden me that we should note the horrible barbarity in a practice such as theirs: what does sadden me is that, while judging correctly of their wrong-doings we should be so blind to our own. I think there is more 16. Cf. Cicero, De divinatione, I, i.1; I Peter 1:2; I Corinthians 12:20; 13:2. 17. Herodotus, History, IV, lxix. 1:31. On the Cannibals 1:31. On the Cannibals barbarity in eating a man alive than in eating him dead; more barbarity in lacerating by rack and torture a body still fully able to feel things, in roasting him little by little and having him bruised and bitten by pigs and dogs (as we have not only read about but seen in recent memory, not among enemies in antiquity but among our fellow-citizens and neighbours and, what is worse, in the name of duty and religion) than in roasting him and eating him after his death. Chrysippus and Zeno, the leaders of the Stoic school, certainly thought that there was nothing wrong in using our carcasses for whatever purpose we needed, even for food - as our own forebears did when, beleaguered by Caesar in the town of Alesia, they decided to relieve the hunger of the besieged with the flesh of old men, women and others who were no use in battle: than that with which Nature purely and simply endows all her creatures by bringing them into this world. If the neighbouring peoples come over the mountains to attack them and happen to defeat them, the victors' booty consists in fame and in the privilege of mastery in virtue and valour: they have no other interest in the goods of the vanquished and so return home to their own land, which lacks no necessity; nor do they lack that great accomplishment of knowing how to enjoy their mode-of-being in happiness and to be content with it. These people do the same in their turn: they require no other ransom from their prisoners-of-war than that they should admit and acknowledge their defeat - yet there is not one prisoner in a hundred years who does not prefer to die rather than to derogate from the greatness of an invincible mind by look or by word; you cannot find one who does not prefer to be killed and eaten than merely to ask to be spared. In order to make their prisoners love life more they treat them generously in every way, 20 but occupy their thoughts with the menaces of the death awaiting all of them, of the tortures they will have to undergo and of the preparations being made for it, of limbs to be lopped off and of the feast they will provide. All that has only one purpose: to wrench some weak or unworthy word from their lips or to make them wish to escape, so as to enjoy the privilege of having frightened them and forced their constancy. 21 Indeed, if you take it the right way, true victory 22 consists in that alone: 236 [BJ Vascones,fama est, alimentis talibus usi Produxere animas. [By the eating of such food it is notorious that the Gascons prolonged their lives.) 18 (A] And our medical men do not flinch from using corpses in many ways, both internally and externally, to cure us. 19 Yet no opinion has ever been so unruly a~ to justify treachery, disloyalty, tyranny and cruelty, which are everyday vices in us. So we can indeed call those folk barbarians by the rules of reason but not in comparison with ourselves, who surpass them in every kind of barbarism. Their warfare is entirely noble and magnanimous; it has as much justification and beauty as that human malady allows: among them it has no other foundation than a zealous concern for courage. They are not striving to conquer new lands, since without toil or travail they still enjoy that bounteous Nature who furnishes them abundantly with all they need, so that they have no concern to push back their frontiers. They are still in that blessed state of desiring nothing beyond what is ordained by their natural necessities: for them anything further is merely superfluous. The generic term which they use for men of the same age is 'brother'; younger men they call 'sons'. As for the old men, they are the 'fathers' of everyone else; they bequeath all their goods, indivisibly, to all these heirs in common, there being no other entitlement 18. Sextus Empiricus, Hypotyposes, III, xxiv; Caesar, Gallic Wars, VII, lvii-lviii; Juvenal, Satires, XV, 93-4. 19. Mummies were imported for use in medicines. (Othello's handkerchief was steeped in 'juice of mummy'.) 237 [CJ victoria nu/la est Quam qua confessos animo quoque subjugat hostes. [There is no victory unless you subjugate the minds of the enemy and make them admit defeat.) 23 In former times those warlike fighters the Hungarians never pressed their advantage beyond making their enemy throw himself on their mercy. Once having wrenched this admission from him, they let him go without injury or ransom, except at most for an undertaking never again to bear arms against them. 24 [A] Quite enough of the advantages we do gain over our enemies are mainly borrowed ones not truly our own. To have stronger arms and legs 20. '80: generously in every way, and furnish them with all the comforts they can devist but ... 21. '80: their virtue and their constancy ... 22. '80: true and solid victory ... 23. Claudian, De sexto consulatu Honorii, 248-9. 24. Nicolas Chalcocondylas (tr. Blaise de Vigenere), De la decadence de /'empire grec, V,ix. 1:31. On the Cannibals 1:31. On the Cannibals is the property of a porter not of Valour; agility is a dead and physical quality, for it is chance which causes your opponent to stumble and which makes the sun dazzle him; to be good at fencing is a matter of skill and knowledge which may light on a coward or a worthless individual. A man's worth and reputation lie in the mind and in the will: his true honour is found there. Bravery does not consist in firm arms and legs but in firm minds and souls: it is not a matter of what our horse or our weapons are worth but of what we are. The man who is struck down but whose mind remains steadfast, (CJ 'si succiderit, de genu pugnat' [if his legs give way, then on his knees doth he fightJ; 25 [BJ the man who relaxes none of his mental assurance when threatened with imminent death and who faces his enemy with inflexible scorn as he gives up the ghost is beaten by Fortune not by us: [C] he is slain but not vanquished. 26 [BJ Sometimes it is the bravest who may prove most unlucky. [CJ So there are triumphanL defeats rivalling victories; Salamis, Plataea, Mycale and Sicily are the fairest sister-victories which the Sun has ever seen, yet they would never dare to compare their combined glory with the glorious defeat of King Leonidas and his men at the defile of Thermopylae. 27 Who has ever run into battle with a greater desire and ambition for victory than did Captain Ischolas when he was defeated? Has any man ever assured his safety more cleverly or carefully than he assured his destruction?28 His task was to defend against the Arcadians a certain pass in the Peleponnesus. He realized that he could not achieve this because of the nature of the site and of the odds against him, concluding that every man who faced the enemy must of necessity die in the battlefield; on the other hand he judged it unworthy of his own courage, of his greatness of soul and of the name of Sparta to fail in his duty; so he chose the middle path between these two extremes and acted thus: he saved the youngest and fittest soldiers of his unit to serve for the defence of their country and sent them back there. He then determined to defend that pass with men whose loss would matter less and who would, by their death, make the enemy purchase their breakthrough as dearly as possible. And so it turned out. After butchering the Arcadians who beset them on every side, they were all put to the sword. Was ever a trophy raised to a victor which was not better due to those who were vanquished? True victo1 y lies in your role in the conflict, not in coming through safely: it consists in the honour of battling bravely not battling through. [AJ To return to my tale, those prisoners, far from yielding despite all that was done to them during the two or three months of their captivity, maintain on the contrary a joyful countenance: they urge their captors to hurry up and put them to the test; they defy them, insult them and reproach them for cowardice and for all the battles they have lost against their country. I have a song made by one such prisoner which contains the following: Let them all dare to come and gather to feast on him, for with him they will feast on their own fathers and ancestors who have served as food and sustenance for his body. 'These sinews,' he said, 'this flesh and these veins - poor fools that you are - are your very own; you do not realize that they still contain the very substance of the limbs of your forebears: savour them well, for you will find that they taste of your very own flesh!' There is nothing 'barbarous' in the contriving of that topic. Those who tell how they die and who describe the act of execution show the prisoners spitting at their killers and pulling faces at them . Indeed, until their latest breath, they never stop braving them and defying them with word and look . It is no lie to say that these men are indeed savages - by our standards; for either they must be or we must be: there is an amazing gulf between their [C] souls [AJ and ours. 29 The husbands have several wives: the higher their reputation for valour the more of them they have. One beautiful characteristic of their marriages is worth noting: just as our wives are zealous in thwarting our love and tenderness for other women, theirs are equally zealous in obtaining them for them. Being more concerned for their husband's reputation than for anything else, they take care and trouble to have as many fellow-wives as possible, since that is a testimony to their husband's valour. [C] Our wives will scream that that is a marvel, but it is not: it is a virtue proper to matrimony, but at an earlier stage. In the Bible Leah, Rachel, Sarah and the wives of Jacob all made their fair handmaidens available to their husbands; Livia, to her own detriment, connived at the lusts of Augustus, and Stratonice the consort of King Deiotarus not only provided her husband with a very beautiful chambermaid who served her but carefully brought up their children and lent a hand in enabling them to succeed to her husband's rank. 30 238 25. Seneca, De constantia, II. 26. '80: by us: he is vanquished in practice but not by reason; it is his bad luck which wt may indict not his cowardice. Sometimes ... 27 Cf. Cicero, Tusc . disput., I, xii, 100 for the glory of Leonidas' death in the defile ofThermopylae. 28. Diodorus Siculus, XV, xii. 239 29. '80: their constancy and ours ... 30. Standard examples: cf. Tiraquellus, De legibus connubialibus, XIII, 35, for all these un-jealous wives. (But Leah and Sarah were in fact Jacob's wives.) 1:31. On the Cannibals 1:31. On the Cannibals [A] Lest anyone should think that they do all this out of a simple slavish subjection to convention or because of the impact of the authority of their ancient customs without any reasoning or judgement on their part, having minds so dulled that they could never decide to do anything else, I should cite a few examples of what they are capable of. Apart from that war-song which I have just given an account of, I have another of their songs, a love-song, which begins like this: comforts while their halves were begging at their doors, emaciated with poverty and hunger: they found it odd that those destitute halves should put up with such injustice and did not take the others by the throat or set fire to their houses. I had a very long talk with one of them (but I used a stupid interpreter who was so bad at grasping my meaning and at understanding my ideas that I got little joy from it). When I asked the man (who was a commander among them, our sailors calling him a king) what advantage he got from his high rank, he told me that it was to lead his troops into battle; asked how many men followed him, he pointed to an open space to signify as many as it would hold - about four or five thousand men; questioned whether his authority lapsed when the war was over, he replied that he retained the privilege of having paths cut for him through the thickets in their forests, so that he could easily walk through them when he visited villages under his sway. Not at all bad, that. - Ah! But they wear no breeches ... 240 0 Adder, stay: stay O Adder! From your colours let my sister take the pattern for a girdle she will make for me to offer to my love; So may your beauty and your speckled hues be for ever honoured above all other snakes. This opening couplet serves as the song's refrain. Now I know enough about poetry to make the following judgement: not only is there nothing 'barbarous' in this conceit but it is thoroughly anacreontic. 31 Their language incidentally is [C] a pleasant one with an agreeable sound [A] and has terminations32 rather like Greek. Three such natives, unaware of what price in peace and happiness they would have to pay to buy a knowledge of our corruptions, and unaware that such commerce would lead to their downfall - which I suspect to be already far advanced - pitifully allowing themselve~ to be cheated by their desire for novelty and leaving the gentleness of their regions to come and see ours, were at Rouen at the same time as King Charles IX. 33 The King had a long interview with them: they were shown our manners, our ceremonial and the layout of a fair city. Then someone asked them what they thought of all this and wanted to know what they had been most amazed by. They made three points; I am very annoyed with myself for forgetting the third, but I still remember two of them. In the first place they said (probably referring to the Swiss Guard) that they found it very odd that all those full-grown bearded men, strong and bearing arms in the King's entourage, should consent to obey a boy rather than choosing one of themselves as a Commander; secondly - since they have an idiom in their language which calls all men 'halves' of one another - that they had noticed that there were among us men fully bloated with all sorts of 31. Anacreon was the great love-poet ofTeos (fl. 540 BC). 32. '80: their language is the pleasantest language in the world; its sound is agreeable to the ear and has terminations ... 33. In 1562, when Rouen was retaken by Royalist forces. 241 Sample Rhetorical Analysis 1. Summary/Thesis: [Note: the summary ought to include the author’s thesis and the main supporting ideas. It need not be quite as long as the summary from Short Writing 1—shoot for about 150-250 words]. In “Appearance and Reality” by Bertrand Russell, the author argues that philosophers seek to rigorously establish knowledge as deceptively simple as that of the true nature of everyday objects (8-9). Before beginning his inquiry, Russell defines philosophy as: the critical study of “ultimate questions” without adhering to dogma or the vague answers provided by common sense (7). Russell then proceeds to defend his claim by examining an everyday object, a table, in the mode of a philosopher (8). After describing how the table looks, feels, sounds, etc., Russell asserts that the table does not have the same “appearance" when viewed by different people or under different circumstances (9). If the appearance of the table is not fixed, how’re people to agree as to its “reality”? Russell argues that the “reality” of the table is not something directly perceived; rather, people experience “sensations” in their minds that are caused by their relationship to the underlying reality of the table that they never actually experience and that could conceivably not exist (11-12, 16). According to Russell, similar observations, espoused by thinkers like Bishop Berkeley, influenced the philosophical school of “idealism,” which teaches that matter is purely mental, that objects exist only in the sense that they are ideas in a mind or minds (14-15). In “Appearance and Reality,” the author chooses to undertake a sustained examination of a single everyday object (a table) to demonstrate how philosophers think (8). He employs sustained examination to engage his intended audience of non-philosophers, who, while they may be unaffiliated with abstract, philosophical thinking, are affiliated with concrete objects like tables. 2. Body Paragraph with 10 on 1 Though Russell relies on the table throughout the first two-thirds of his essay, a representative example of sustained examination occurs in the third paragraph (8).. Here, Russell introduces the object of his inquiry and alerts the reader as to his intention to perform a sustained examination by stating “let us concentrate attention on the table” (8). Sustained examination involves discussing one specific thing in detail by breaking it into its parts and scrutinizing them critically Following along these lines, Russell breaks down the table into its various attributes—“smooth,” “hard,” “cool,” etc. (8-9). Later, Russell returns to the table in order to more critically outline issues concerning the reliability of sense impressions like “smooth” and “hard” in defining what the table is in reality as opposed to what it appears to be (9). By relying on a careful description of an accessible object, Russell hopes to create common ground on which his readers feel comfortable enough to engage with and understand philosophical inquiry. Most people own tables and interact with them regularly. Most of those people are not trained philosophers, however, and therefore are not familiar with modes of philosophical thinking. When dividing the table into its features and documenting how those features change depending on his position in relation to them, Russell introduces the reader to a philosophical approach that emphasizes critical, sustained examination. If he had relied first on abstract principles—say by starting off with a definition of “sense data” versus “sensation,” a definition he provides only after grounding his argument in the table—he would have risked losing the uninitiated reader, who would likely be much less comfortable with fine, technical distinctions than he or she would an object used everyday (12). Instead, he offers something concrete (in the way that the table discussion breaks up the object according to the five senses instead of abstraction) and mundane to demonstrate how, through sustained examination, philosophers can uncover new ideas even in the most simple objects. Word Count: 600 Paragraph Color Key Black: Summary Green: Thesis (recognizes implicit rhetorical tool + reasons as to why it’s used) Purple: Topic sentence. Blue: Independently introducing the evidence for the implicit/rhetorical element. Yellow: Definition of key term in thesis (if necessary) Orange: Transition for description of evidence to analysis of the evidence. Red: Analysis that also reasons as to why Russell uses “sustained examination.” Russell's 10 on 1: The Table! 1. The Table as a "Practical" Person Understands It let us concentrate attention on the table. To the eye it is oblong, brown and shiny, to the touch it is smooth and cool and hard; when I tap it, it gives out a wooden sound. Any one else who sees and feels and hears the table will agree with this description, so that it might seem as if no difficulty would arise; 2. The Table from the POV of a More Critical Person but as soon as we try to be more precise our troubles begin. Although I believe that the table is 'really' of the same colour all over, the parts that reflect the light look much brighter than the other parts, and some parts look white because of reflected light. I know that, if I move, the parts that reflect the light will be different, so that the apparent distribution of colours on the table will change. It follows that if several people are looking at the table at the same moment, no two of them will see exactly the same distribution of colours, because no two can see it from exactly the same point of view, and any change in the point of view makes some change in the way the light is reflected. 3. Conclusions Implied by the More Critical or Philosophical Analysis To return to the table. It is evident from what we have found, that there is no colour which preeminently appears to be the colour of the table, or even of any one particular part of the table. 4. Presupposing an Objection that May Arise from the Practical View and Dismissing It When, in ordinary life, we speak of the colour of the table, we only mean the sort of colour which it will seem to have to a normal spectator from an ordinary point of view under usual conditions of light. But the other colours which appear under other conditions have just as good a right to be considered real; and therefore, to avoid favouritism, we are compelled to deny that, in itself, the table has any one particular colour. 5. Conclusions and Questions Implied by the Table Thus it becomes evident that the real table, if there is one, is not the same as what we immediately experience by sight or touch or hearing. The real table, if there is one, is not immediately known to us at all, but must be an inference from what is immediately known. Hence, two very difficult questions at once arise; namely, (1) Is there a real table at all? (2) If so, what sort of object can it be? 6. A Fine Distinction Established by Observing the Table It is plain that if we are to know anything about the table, it must be by means of the sense-data -- brown colour, oblong shape, smoothness, etc. -- which we associate with the table; but, for the reasons which have been given, we cannot say that the table is the sense-data, or even that the sense-data are directly properties of the table. Thus a problem arises as to the relation of the sense-data to the real table, supposing there is such a thing. The real table, if it exists, we will call a 'physical object'. 7. Relating the Table to the Works of Other Philosophers Other philosophers since Berkeley have also held that, although the table does not depend for its existence upon being seen by me, it does depend upon being seen (or otherwise apprehended in sensation) by some mind -- not necessarily the mind of God, but more often the whole collective mind of the universe. 8. Implications of the Philosophical Analysis of the Table for Our Daily Lives Among these surprising possibilities, doubt suggests that perhaps there is no table at all. Philosophy, if it cannot answer so many questions as we could wish, has at least the power of asking questions which increase the interest of the world, and show the strangeness and wonder lying just below the surface even in the commonest things of daily life. Russell's Independent Summary The philosopher who first brought prominently forward the reasons for regarding the immediate objects of our senses as not existing independently of us was Bishop Berkeley (1685-1753). His Three Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous, in Opposition to Sceptics and Atheists undertake to prove that there is no such thing as matter at all, and that the world consists of nothing but minds and their ideas. Hylas has hitherto believed in matter, but he is no match for Philonous, who mercilessly drives him into contradictions and paradoxes, and makes his own denial of matter seem, in the end, as if it were almost common sense. […] Berkeley retains the merit of having shown that the existence of matter is capable of being denied without absurdity, and that if there are any things that exist independently of us they cannot be the immediate objects of our sensations.
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer




Body Paragraph with 10 on 1

Word Count


Surname 1
Student’s Name:
Professor’s Name:
In “On the Cannibals” by Michel Montaigne, the author argues that every man
considers anything he is not familiar with to be barbarous (231). In recognizing the horrific
barbarity among the practices of the Scythians, Montaigne is saddened not by the way we notice
their evils and judge them rightly, but how we ignore our wrong-doings (235). Montaigne then
continues to support his claim by exploring our...

Just what I needed…Fantastic!


Similar Content

Related Tags