The Values of Modernism and the Launch of World War I

"What are the values of Modernism that we see reflected across different fields, and how do they represent a departure from neoclassicism and the Enlightenment?"


There is an abundance of values that are reflected in Modernism. They are likely a perfectly painted picture of the opposite of neoclassicism and the Enlightenment in many ways. The values of Modernism departed from neoclassicism in a way that took an approach that might seem more disorderly than those values which were cherished in neoclassicism. The values in this newer age of thinking followed along a path of mixed emotions, lack of truly noticeable centers, nonsense, and a kind of unique beauty.

Paintings in the age of Modernism had a real feel for the artist's depiction of something rather than perhaps its true nature. Those in science were debating that perhaps this universe may be in some ways, unpredictable. Not to mention the music of this time which was rather out of typical order and very unique in its style. These characteristics were very contradictory of those in neoclassicism and the Enlightenment.

I hope that I have adequately demonstrated the departure from neoclassicism and the Enlightenment to the classification we call Modernism!



"What factors contributed to the coming of World War I?"




The factors which contributed the coming of the horrid war of World War I had much to do with the coming of particular wars, alliances, and the like. So many entered into alliances, fought their wars and such that eventually we have a mishmash of fighting which pulled basically the whole world into its clutches. Henceforth, we have the despicable time period which encompassed World War I.

During the time period which led up to World War I, we had alliances between Germany, Austria, and Russia and between Germany, Austria, and Italy! The last straw was the assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand who was the successor to the Austrian throne. After horror and contempt for the plotting of particular individuals in the Serbian government, the Austrians decided on an ultimatum. And congratulations which were received by the Serbs by the Russian Pan-Slavists on the front of Serbian nationalism didn't help matters particularly. This ultimatum would have indeed ended independence for the Serbs. Can you guess what happened next? Despite interference from some of the main powers, the two parties along with their allies helped to send the world into a pit of despair that would be dug into the earth from the summer of 1914-1918. World War I had begun.

The French Materialists, Adam Smith, and the War of the Austrian Succession

"Explain the views of the French materialists."


The views of the French materialists revolved around the basic principle that everything was purely matter. Matter was basically their answer to life's questions. They tended to believe that due to the assumption that a person was simply matter/machine, then they should go about seeking sensual pleasure. One particular main view was that of an atheistic presumption. That there is no spiritual realm since everything is just matter. The views of the French materialists were, just as the name implies, focused on the material world.



"What does Adam Smith mean by the 'invisible hand'?"


Adam Smith is using the term of the "invisible hand" to describe the way that the actions of an individual to suit their needs actually ends up affecting society as well. This is the "invisible hand"; That there is an "invisible hand" guiding the market into it's various correct crevices and gaping holes. In effect, arranging the business world like a big 1,000 piece jigsaw puzzle.



"Discuss the causes and consequences of the War of the Austrian Succession."


The War of the Austrian Succession was caused by Maria Therese not being accepted as the ruler of the Hapsburg properties. This inconvenience was used by Prussia and France to challenge the Hapsburg ruling. The consequences that ensued include Austria losing Silesia to Prussia, and Louis XV of France losing much respect due to his decision to give back his fought for earnings to his defeated. This was done so that he would not look as if he was a conqueror. His people wanted what they fought for, and for the most part, they didn't get it.

Thanks for reading!





 

Enlightened Absolutism as well as the American Revolution

         "What was 'enlightened absolutism'?"


Enlightened absolutism is the idea of absolutist rulers incorporating enlightenment ideas and principles into practice. In enlightenment principles there is emphasis on the person to use rationality (or at least their idea of it). A few particular commonalities in enlightened absolutism are the desire for education, and freedom of speech and of the press. We can find examples of enlightened absolutist rulers in people such as Frederick the Great, Catherine II of Russia, and Charles III of Spain.

Enlightened absolutism was indeed an interesting development and has become a fascinating study material for students and historians alike.



"What was the constitutional dispute between the colonists and the British government that let to the American Revolution?..."


The constitutional dispute between the American colonists and the British government was one of two very different opinions. You see, the British didn't really have a particular written constitution. Their constitution was that of tradition. The British idea of tradition was whatever the British Parliament decided to pass or institute. The colonists' viewpoint, however, saw tradition as a tad more complex than that. The American colonists' opinion was that tradition was limited. That tradition held the government back in some ways. What I mean by this is that the British government, for a great deal of time, had more or less left the colonists alone to do as they pleased, as far as internal affairs was concerned. And now all of a sudden the British government was coming in and breaking the constitution's "laws" (tradition) by imposing revenue taxes and other seemingly unconstitutional practices on the colonists. We can see this being done through situations such as the Townshend Acts, which were acts carried out by the British government to raise wages for the governors and judges in the colonies, so that they would remain loyal to the British government. Similarly, there were the Coercive Acts which were used greatly for the purpose of getting after Massachusetts, after the Boston Tea Party. These acts were however viewed by the colonists as a violation of their rights. Ultimately, the Coercive Acts simply continued to fan the flames of angry colonists.

The contitutional dispute between the British government and the 13 colonies was definitely a fascinating beginning to the founding of America as an independent nation.

I hope that you have enjoyed my essay! Thanks for reading!       







    

Discussion on the Just War Theory, as well as the Later Scholastics

"Describe the main principals of just-war theory."


I think that this will be one of the easier topics for me to describe, as well as one of the easier ones for you to understand.

Just war theory is simply the theory of just war.  It is ideals and principles that make a war "just".  For instance, according to the just war theory it would be wrong to go to war with a country or state that had simply stolen a single apple.  It would likewise be wrong according to the just war theory to slaughter mercilessly all of the civilians living in the place that you are at war with once you had already won.

I hope you have a basic idea of what the just war theory is now.



"In what fundamental way did Duns Scotus and William of Ockham challenge the position of Thomas Aquinas?"


These two later scholastics were of the opinion that reason and faith simply did not go together.  They were two completely separate things in the eyes of these men.  This of course was a complete and utter challenge to the position taken by Thomas Aquinas.  Thomas Aquinas had spent a great deal of his life trying to prove that faith and reason went hand in hand.  Faith could be proven using reason according to Thomas Aquinas. This was the fundamental way that Duns Scotus and William of Ockham challenged the views of Thomas Aquinas.


Thanks for reading, and please give me feedback!  I would love to hear from you!

The Merovingians, Carolingians, and Charlemagne

"What picture of Charlemagne emerges from Einhard's biography?"


The picture that I see of Charlemagne in this biography is one of elegance and respect.  I see a man who worked to bring up his children in a secure environment, and I see a man who worked to beautify the place in which he lived.

For many, I believe that they will probably pay closest attention to the wars in which he fought, or perhaps they will particularly notice the power which he held.  I personally have little interest in the wars or politics.  I have interest in the description of the man, and aren't I supposed to be describing the picture of the man?

For me, the picture of Charlemagne that emerges from Einhard's biography is one which demands attention and wonder.  I see a man who was quite admirable.  That is the picture which I believe emerges from Einhard's biography.




"Discuss the shift in power from the Merovingians to the Carolingians.  Why did it occur, and how?"



First of all, the Merovingians were not exactly what I'd call skilled administrators.  For instance, they fought among each other in bloody slaughters between brothers and cousins.  They also would take place in human sacrifice.  Needles to say, these weren't the kind of people that you would like as your neighbors.

As time went on, a man named Pepin the Short came to power thanks to the Pope.  Pepin asked the Pope if it was right that a ruler whom did nothing had power, but the one who did something had no power.  The Pope said that was not right, and this is where the shift between power changed.

I hope that you have enjoyed this essay, and please let me know what you think!  I would love to hear from you!          

Rhetorical Context in Cicero's Orations

"How important was the rhetorical Context of Cicero's orations: his listener's fear of Catiline's conspiracy and army?"

Cicero

     In my opinion, the rhetorical context of Cicero's orations was undeniably important in making his listeners afraid of Catiline's conspiracy and army!

     Rhetorical context is what made his speeches so fantastic!  I don't think that he would have gotten very far in his orations had he not used such good rhetoric.  Using outstanding rhetorical context was an amazing gift that he held in his possession, and he used it to stir up the emotions of many.  He had an advantage that no other man in history possessed.

     Thanks so much for reading, and please let me know what you think!

Aeschylus

  "What was Aeschylus's view of the Trojan war?"

      The way that Aeschylus describes the remains of Troy, and the Greek's victory was very interesting indeed!

     First of all, we see that the war is said to have been started because a woman named Helen was captured.  The war would last ten long years.

     Once the men returned to their families, we are told that the women are angry because they know that their husbands have most-likely had affairs with the captured women of Troy.

     I think that this shows that Aeschylus's view of the Trojan war was not a "blind view" so to speak.  He noticed the negative qualities that resulted from them and made sure to note of them.  I think that although I'm sure that he saw some good things as a result of the Trojan war, he also noticed the bad.

     Thank you so much for reading, and please let me know what you think!

Medea (Thoughts)

"What does the fate of Medea and those who mistreat her and oppress her say about it's own time?"

     The play Medea is about a woman who has been left by her husband for a princess.  Obviously, she is upset about this. (Wouldn't you be too?)  She was in despair and she decided to commit a series of brutal murders in order to avenge the misfortune that her husband had brought upon her.
   
     In her doing this, we can see very clearly the affects that the Peloponessian War had caused.  (the play and the war were about the same time)
   
     This work of Greek drama has a mix of grief, anger, and love all wrapped up into one.  This being the case, I can see the same thing in war.
   
     War is typically brought on by grief (and or) anger just as the murders that Medea committed were brought on by these.
   
     In war we also see love.  Men leaving their friends and families can be tragic.  It tears the people affected apart.  It can be the making or unmaking of a person, and in Medea's case, it was her unmaking.
   
     It was tragic, just as the time of the Peloponessian War was tragic.  These are the things that I see reflected in the play Medea.

"Can we learn anything from Medea about the Greek's attitude towards foreigners and women?"

     Yes, I believe that we can.  In Medea we see both a mix of those that don't care what your gender is or about where you come from, and then again, we see those who do.  (Sounds a bit like society today don't you think?)
   
     We see some, (her husband, Jason for example) that can be sexist.  He seems to see Medea as no more than a play thing.  Something that he can leave and not reap the consequences of doing so.  And then we see others such as the king.  He seems less opposed to the opposite gender than did Jason.  We see this when his daughter is killed by Medea.  He is heart-broken by the loss of his dear daughter.  In this seen, we can tell that he really did care for his daughter.  It certainly didn't seem like he thought of her as no more than a play thing.
   
     Now I will do my best to answer the question concerning the view of foreigners.

     Medea was a foreigner and it appears that although she was respected by some, she was also mistreated by others.  (Again, I am using Jason as an example).  He left her for a woman of his own city.  Not that of another which Medea was.  And then again, we see the man who agreed to offer Medea safety in his land if she could get there.  It doesn't seem like he was very opposed to foreigners.

     Yes, I think that there where certain wide-held views of women and foreigners, but also that there were some who didn't have those views.  I believe that just like with anything in the world, it was a mixed lot.
     Thank you so much for reading, and please let me know what you think!                      

The Peloponnesian War and Pericles' Funeral Oration

"What points is Pericles trying to make about Athens in his Funeral Oration?"


     Pericles was trying to get across how wonderful Athens was, praise the people, and honor the dead at the same time. 
     
     He talked about all the advantages that Athenian citizens had, he tried to motivate the living during a time of war, and as stated earlier, honor the dead.  
     
     He wanted to help the people to keep going by telling them about what they had to live up to (The dead soldiers).  He also tried to give them a reason(s)to keep fighting by telling them about all that they had to lose.  He told them about all of the amazing advantages that Athens had to offer like its freedom in government and ordinary life.  

     These were the points that Pericles was trying to make in his Funeral Oration.


"Why was the Peloponnesian War fought?  What was its long-term significance?"


     The Peloponnesian War was fought for these reasons.

1.  Athens appeared to be using the Delian League's ship-building funds to help beautify itself instead of to build ships for the protection of those in the Delian League.
2.  Sparta was afraid that Athens was becoming too powerful.

     Here is the war's long-term significance.

1.  Athens would lose its dominance of the other members of the Delian League.
2.  Sparta would take control of things.
3.  In the end, this war between the Greeks would ultimately weaken them and spell out some serious consequences.

     Well, That's all for this week. I hope that you have enjoyed this essay on "The Peloponnesian War and Pericles' Funeral Oration". See you next Friday, and please let me know what you think!