blog #9

The tribe has always been an important concept in Arabian and Islamic history, creating divisions among its dwellers and followers. How has this caused problems in the history of Islam? 

When Muhammed died, the truces between different clans broke. Some tribes even rebelled, these rebellions ruined most of Islamic peace. Although the Tribe played a big role in Islamic and Arabian history, it has often also been one of the greatest problems.  An example of this is in the beginning of Muhammed's life. He is born into a  tribe that was very wealthy and privileged. Later in his life, this caused problems because all rich people were against the idea of Islam, and none of them wanted any part of it. Since Muhammed really wanted to be Islam this caused a sort of rivalry in which end with Muhammed getting kicked out of his tribe, and losing all protection. These wealthy clans would be the worst enemies of Islam until the last few years of Muhammed's life. Another example of this rivalry between tribes is in the struggle to find successors, or caliphs, to Muhammed. Every time a caliph died or was killed, there was a whole new argument over who would be the next caliph. What ended up happening was that two groups were formed over this issue, the Sunni and the Shi'a. Even to this day, there are lots of arguments between these two groups in Islam.  So we can see that although the Tribe has always been an important part of the infrastructure of Islam, it has also caused most of the problems throughout the history of the religion. 

Blog 8

How has the religious history of India influenced India's tradition of non-violence?

India's religious history has influenced the tradition of non-violence in many ways. One being the fact that many people who live in India are Buddhist and one of the main teachings in Buddhism is to be kind and compassionate to others and to express themselves in a peaceful manner. The teachings of Mohandas Ghandi are all about peace making and to approach life without violence. Ghandi was very inspiring, he was the leader of the Indian nationalist movement against British rule, He is well known for his way of non-violent protests to achieve political and social progress. He knew how to win battles without being brutal like Hitler who wiped out many Jews, just because he didn't like them. The kind of religions that Ghandi and many Indians practiced has influenced the Indian tradition of non-violence by setting the ideal of living in a kind and loving world.

Migration

Can Migration have a positive impact on the people and/or land receiving the immigrants?

Yes it can have a positive impact, as well as a negative impact. It could either help the native people of that land to grow and become more knowledgeable, or cause death, destruction and/or unnecessary fighting. An example of this is the mass migration to the US after World War 2. Lots of people migrated so that they wouldn't get caught up in the war. Another example is the immigrants from Mexico. They came here and help us with crops and daily jobs. Some cases aren't the same. Some immigrants just leave destruction and chaos in their paths, like the Mongols. Immigrants can have a positive impact on the land and people receiving it as well as a negative one, which has happened many times throughout history.

Blog #6

1. "Wisdom begins in wonder" 

I agree with Socrates here. When you wonder something, it gets you thinking, and once you think, you want to know if what you think is right. How did Thomas Edison think of creating a light bulb? He wondered what he could use as a light besides candles which are waxy and go out easily. He wondered about how he could create something that is contained, something more reliable than a candle. From that wondering, he used his imagination and previous  knowledge, this led to greater wisdom. 

The only thing I wonder is, what did Socrate's wisdom start as? If wisdom begins in wonder, what did he wonder?

2. He is basically saying that justice is when the ones who are considered the best, the most intelligent, and most courageous, are the ones who make the decisions. That the ones who have the best ability to control a society and decide what is best for that society, should be in charge of that society. This is where Plato came up with the idea of an ideal state being an aristocracy. 

3. I think the positive element of Plato's ideal republic is that there would be many strong intelligent people running a society. The Negative element of this would be that some people who weren't looked upon as strong or intelligent wouldn't have a say in how the society is run. 

4. I believe that the intelligent people would run the society nicely, and that they would make great leaders because they actually have brains. I also think it's unfair for people to be judged on what they do and do not know, or by how much strength they have or do not have. To me, it is unjust that members of the lower class of a society wouldn't have a voice, which means they would not have a say in the way their state was run. So my ideal society would be basically a democracy because all people, no matter what their role in society was, would have a voice to choose the leaders and have a say in how their state was run.

5. I think it means you need to be open to different ideas. Even if you don't understand something, don't dismiss it. Look beyond what you think in order to try to understand it, don't just criticize it. You need to be open and willing to realize that everyone has different perspectives, and be able to see life through their eyes.

SPARTA VS. ATHENS (blog #5)

1. If you were a young teenage girl of the citizen class, in which city-state would you rather live? Why?

I would rather live in Sparta because girls were educated. At the age of 7 they would learn to read and write. They were also educated in gymnastics, athletics and survival skills. Girls were basically treated as equals to men, instead of lower class. The goal for this was to produce a strong healthy offspring. Athenian girls received little education. Their education included spinning, weaving, and other domestic arts. They were usually kept at home and had NO political power. In Sparta, girls had way more options, because of this and knowing myself, i wouldn't want to be sitting around at home spinning or weaving. I would rather be educated.

2. If you were a slave, in which would you rather live? Why?

If I was a slave I would rather live in Sparta. This is because, in Athens, when you were a slave you were the lowest of all classes. Slaves had NO rights, and an owner could kill their slave if they wanted to. In Sparta, they didn't exactly have slaves, they had Helots, who were treated like slaves. They gave half of their produce to Spartiate citizens who owned land, but thats all. You couldn't be killed by your owner. 

3. If you were a boy in the citizen class, i which would you rather live? Why?

If I was a boy, I would rather live in Athens, because in Sparta, you were basically dedicated to the military from

the age of 6 to 60. Citizen class boys in Athens would be educated from the age of 5 to 14. And for two years (until

they were 20) they would attend military training. In Sparta boys were taken from their parents at the age of 7, to be

trained for warfare. They were only given cloaks, no cloths. And little food so they had to steal to learn survival skills.

I definitely wouldn't want to have to steal to survive, or spend more than half my life in military training.

4. If you were a young soldier, in which would you rather live? Why?

If I was a young soldier, I would want to live in Athens because In Sparta you weren't loved at all. You had to

steal for food, and you only were given a cloak to wear. No shoes, no cloths, just a cloak. You had to be in the 

militaryuntil you were 60! That's very long. In Athens you had to be in training till you were twenty but only for two 

years. In Sparta you were basically dedicated to the state from the age of 6 to 60. You could marry at the age of 30, 

but you had to live in the barracks with the other soldiers. That would suck. To marry and not be able to see your wife.

What's the point of that? They were educated in choral dancing, reading and writing, but athletics and military training

were emphasized. In Athens it was way more calm and not as strict. In my opinion it was better.

5.If you were a wealthy person in the citizen class, in which would you rather live? Why?

If I was a wealthy person in the citizen class, I would rather live in Athens because you could basically indulge 

in your luxuries. In Sparta they believed that everything should be dispersed equally. So if you were in the citizen 

class no one would have more or less. They focused on military strengths, not having luxuries. In Athens, it was 

mainly about luxuries. Even though women didn't have rights and were basically owned by their husbands, it would

be better to be wealthy. In Sparta if you were a man and wealthy, you wouldn't be able to indulge in your wealth

because you would have to be in the military for more than half your life. So I would rather use my wealth, then

contain it.

6. Decide to represent either Athens or Sparta and debate which is the best place to live.

I would rather live in Sparta for various reasons. First, they weren't just about luxuries and self centered things,

they were very self sufficient and learned how to survive with the bare minimum. Second, they were very brave

warriors, they had a strong army and knew how to defend their Polis (city-state). They gave up the finer things in life  

such as their comfort, luxuries and culture so they could build up their military force. Which payed off in the end.

Finally, unlike Athens, Sparta actually treated women as equals to men. In Athens, The women and girls were kept at

with no participation in politics or sports. Wives were considered property of their husbands. The only thing they were

responsible for was spinning weaving and other domestic arts. In Sparta, girls were educated in reading and writing

and could indeed participate ini sports. As I said before, they were treated as equals to men, Unlike Athens, where

they were treated like useless property. In Sparta women were free to move around and enjoy a great deal of freedom.

The domestic arts were usually left for other classes to do. Spartan women could own and control their property,

and weren't treated like it. In time of war, they were expected to guard their husbands property from invaders until

their husbands got back. In Athens, it would suck to be a women.

Blog #4

New Ideas in politics and philosophy tend to emerge in times of social, political, and/or economic stress. How can this be explained? 

There were three basic ways of living that were thought up in the time of Confucius and shortly after. There was, Confucianism, which stated that power called for responsibility, and he made up five principles which were about a basic way of living in harmony and peace without the need for government interference. The second was Daosim, which stated that people had to find their own way in life, to fit in with the cosmic force, nature, and the universe. The third was Legalism, which stated that welfare of the state wasn't as important as the welfare of the people. This belief stated that laws were need to be made to keep order in society. 

When a place or situation faces chaos, this makes people think about new ways and ideas to bring about change. When things reach a certain point, an extreme, the people decide to take action.  An example of this is like when Marie Antoinette was queen of France. She was frivolously spending money, while the common folks didn't even have bread to eat. At this point, the townspeople rebelled and took over the rule of the castle, which forced Marie Antoinette and her family into exile. This is just one example of how people throughout history will force a change to a status quo, and that is when new ideas and concepts in politics and philosophies emerge.

Blog 3

Population growth was the most significant development of the Classical Period. True or False? I think that this statement is true. Population growth was the most significant development of the Classical Period because of multiple factors. One of these factors is the development of iron tools and weapons, which strengthened the military power and allowed them to conquer neighboring kingdoms. As the Empire and trade routes grew, they needed to invest more in their infrastructure, such as canals and postal services, to insure communication and control throughout their lands. Another one of these factors is that people stopped being nomadic and began farming. This change was largely because people felt safe and protected in the walls of the Empire. Also the new iron technology allowed farming to became more efficient and farmers were able to grow more food than ever before, this made it so farmers were able to support a larger population. As the population grew, people lived in denser communities, this helped them boost their immune system. As population density grew, people were exposed to more diseases, and thus, able to develop antibodies against these diseases, this increased life expectancy.