I am such a jackass
So for my humanities class discussion our teacher has us do this assignment called "Word of the Week" (aka WoW, and yes, to nerds, that would seem confusing.)
so, for two of these words (out of 5 so far) i've totally just neglected all thought towards a sincere answer and put down something I felt like at the moment. Here are the two examples:
The first word was "we" as in "we the people":
The term "we" has a foundation based upon the principles of togetherness, yet is riddled with prodigous complexities when placed in different contexts. To say that we are a people is to make the claim that everyone included in such a statement are linked by the common aspect of living within a nation together. However, when the preamble of the Constitution opens with "We the people," it makes assumption that the representatives of the newly formed America indoctrinating the article were expressing the absolute views of everyone in the new nation. This is a slippery slope as far as representation is concerned; suppose one man, simply one man, wished not to form a more perfect union? Benedict Arnold did not. Using "we" as an absolute term is a dangerous action to be made, for contexts can alter meanings drastically. Also, take the channel WE for instance, which I would assume (under pretense of laziness towards credible research) stands for Women's Entertainment. There is absolutely nothing entertaining on that network; can they honestly use the term "we" to represent the views all women? Think about it. Nothing can be dealt in absolutes, so using the term "we" to represent everyone in a claim is the same as knowing you represent their exact opinions. That, unfortunately, is fairly impossible.
And this word was "Empire" (in reference to England's empire):
An empire is much like a tree, in all aspects of its life. As a fledgling plant would, empires start with a single nation, fragile as any other. Soon the nation gains nourishment from other nations that contribute to it, and eventually it gains enough strength to force more nations to its cause. As enough time passes, the plant, much like the empire, sets its roots into the ground and begins to absorb from all ends, growing ever-stronger as it does so. Soon it becomes a complete tree, with a strong trunk -- the infrastructure of the ruling nation -- supported by the roots -- the conquered nations which have no purpose but to support the elites -- and supporting the branches, full of leaves -- such as the cities of the conquerors are full of its own denizens who sit higher up than any other peoples. However, much like a tree, empires must ultimately end. How it ends is dependent on fate, it would seem. As a tree may be struck down by lightning, so too may an empire crumble under its own political dysentery. However, an empire may simply slowly fade as a tree would naturally. The British empire, for those of you who do not know, is the only empire in history to ever end peacefully. Go trees.
so, for two of these words (out of 5 so far) i've totally just neglected all thought towards a sincere answer and put down something I felt like at the moment. Here are the two examples:
The first word was "we" as in "we the people":
The term "we" has a foundation based upon the principles of togetherness, yet is riddled with prodigous complexities when placed in different contexts. To say that we are a people is to make the claim that everyone included in such a statement are linked by the common aspect of living within a nation together. However, when the preamble of the Constitution opens with "We the people," it makes assumption that the representatives of the newly formed America indoctrinating the article were expressing the absolute views of everyone in the new nation. This is a slippery slope as far as representation is concerned; suppose one man, simply one man, wished not to form a more perfect union? Benedict Arnold did not. Using "we" as an absolute term is a dangerous action to be made, for contexts can alter meanings drastically. Also, take the channel WE for instance, which I would assume (under pretense of laziness towards credible research) stands for Women's Entertainment. There is absolutely nothing entertaining on that network; can they honestly use the term "we" to represent the views all women? Think about it. Nothing can be dealt in absolutes, so using the term "we" to represent everyone in a claim is the same as knowing you represent their exact opinions. That, unfortunately, is fairly impossible.
And this word was "Empire" (in reference to England's empire):
An empire is much like a tree, in all aspects of its life. As a fledgling plant would, empires start with a single nation, fragile as any other. Soon the nation gains nourishment from other nations that contribute to it, and eventually it gains enough strength to force more nations to its cause. As enough time passes, the plant, much like the empire, sets its roots into the ground and begins to absorb from all ends, growing ever-stronger as it does so. Soon it becomes a complete tree, with a strong trunk -- the infrastructure of the ruling nation -- supported by the roots -- the conquered nations which have no purpose but to support the elites -- and supporting the branches, full of leaves -- such as the cities of the conquerors are full of its own denizens who sit higher up than any other peoples. However, much like a tree, empires must ultimately end. How it ends is dependent on fate, it would seem. As a tree may be struck down by lightning, so too may an empire crumble under its own political dysentery. However, an empire may simply slowly fade as a tree would naturally. The British empire, for those of you who do not know, is the only empire in history to ever end peacefully. Go trees.