Name: Erin Munchel

Journal #6

From Ben Franklin’s The Autobiography (p. 80 – 83)

Write a well-developed paragraph in response to the following questions.

1. Explain what was involved in Franklin’s plan for self-perfection? What conclusion did Franklin come to regarding the effectiveness of this plan?

Franklin wanted to perfect and simplify life. He did this by creating 13 virtues he thought were needed to improve his lifestyle. To him, every detail mattered, and everything should be morally perfected while organized. He practiced each virtue one a time until he mastered it, then went on to the next, always marking his faults or successes. Each day was focused on one specific virtue that he would practice. He was confident that his character was vastly improved by these virtues. However, he found it was very hard to always maintain order. Although he fails and was not perfect, he thought he was happier then he would have been without the virtues.

2. Do you feel that a plan such as Franklin’s would improve you as a person? Why or why not? What would be your top five virtues?

I feel that if I were to practice virtues that I made to improve myself, it would make me a better person. If I tried my hardest to achieve each virtue, I would probably be happier. If everyone picked out and understood their own personal flaws, virtues could be made to help perfect each one of us. These virtues focus on treating others in a good way, and putting passion into everything we do.

My top five virtues would be:

1. Patience: tolerate delay implying self control and forbearance.

2. Consideration: Putting others before yourself in order to display contemplation

3. Self reliance- relying on yourself, and no one else, in order to have significant responsibilities complete, and acquire a since of responsibility.

4. Compassion- regarding emotional capacities of empathy and sympathy as a part of love.

5. Honesty- being completely real and sincere with others, having openness with others in order to achieve better relationships.

Journal #5

Journal #5 – from Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense” (p.95-6)

1. Identify the specific argument that Paine is making in each paragraph. For each of the arguments, identify whether Paine is making an emotional, ethical, or logical appeal and suggest an effective counterargument.

#1 the harder the conflict, the greater the triumph; all power should be to god, it is not to Britain if something should be taxed of not. It will be tough but we must go to war; the victory will be great. This focuses on good feelings that will come out of triumph. Emotional

#2 god will not give up on us people,; A king (of Britain) can’t save and guide us like God can; the common man has the same deception as the king. Having faith in God will make them automatically win. This is Belief without proof, which is dogmatic. Paine is showing ‘begging the question’ in this paragraph. A counter argument is that there is no guarantee that god is on their side. Ethical

#3 American will not be happy and content until free from foreign rule. America should be freed now, because if we wait, our children will have to fight. More separation earlier will benefit the children. The children will benefit from this sacrifice. If we do it now, we will fight, and our children will be happy and free. A counter argument is that staying with England can help trade. Also, the children could be able to fight, because they should be the voice of their own generation. There is no proof that the conflict would not drag on until when the children grow up. This argument is based on the assumption that they will win the war, which is begging the question. Emotional, ethical, and Logical appeal.

#4 we cannot make the decision to pardon or punish if we do not know all of the facts. He compares the king to a thief, which is a faulty analogy. ethical

2. Can you identify any of the logical fallacy that we discussed in Paine’s arguments? If so, which ones? Overall, what do you feel are the strengths and weaknesses of Paine’s arguments?

Paine does use a lot of analogies and is still straightforward and blunt. Paine’s arguments all relate something to God. If someone read’s this who is atheist, they may not relate and fully get the point of the argument Paine is making.