Philosophical Idealism

What are the best arguments for or against philosophical idealism?

Pros) Sometimes it is a good way to see things this way, for example, this helps you think about permanent things, and think in concepts rather than being lost in the world. It allows you to think clearer because you can think of a group of things under a certain concept rather than their diversities.

Cons) While this is true, if you go all the way, you cannot see diversities, and are close minded to many things because there is an angle that has no concept. It also blurs what is real and what is simply a man made permanence. You may look at a tree and see its life cycle rather than being able to enjoy the shade in which it gives you.

Minoans and Mycenaeans

Minoans) the Minoens were a sea people in archaic Greece. These people did not have walls on their islands which were around Crete. This was due to their being great at the sea and thinking they could hold their own in the sea without war on their islands. They also were great at art such as architecture and paining. Almost all of these characteristics are opposite for the Myceneans.

Myceneans) the Myceneans were a land people who lived in the archaic Greece era. These people were a land living people around the area  south of the Balkan mountains. They did have great walls and did not have a lot of art. This was because they were at war a lot of the time and were a more serious group rather than taking part of the luxuries they could have like the Minoens.

The Illiad, Book one

Summarize Book one of the Illiad in the context of the Greek terms arete, time, and kleos.

Arete) We see arete hidden throughout the story, but mainly in Agamemnon's argument with Achillies. Agamemnon acceptes Achillies's arete in battle, but basically says he is good at nothing else. Achillies says Agamemnon is excelent at a leadership role, but is no good at all. We also see arete when Achillies talks with his mother. His mother makes a comment to the fact that Achillies has a short life, but an excelent one.

Time) In book one we see a lot of time. It starts with Agamemnon refusing to give the servant of Apollo his daughter back. After that, we hear people talk about Agamemnon throughout the first book as having a lot of stuff, or time. Then, at the council, Agamemnon makes a big deal about needing a replacement for his prize who was the servant of Apollo's daughter. Later Achillies's prize is taken by Agamemnon who needed a replacement, and Achillies asks his mom to ask Zeus to favor the trojans so Agamemnon will need Achilles in battle and give his prize back.

Kleos)  Kleos is a bit harder to see in book one due to the fact that there are no glorious battles, but in Agamemnon's argument with Achillies, there are references to their overall glory. Agamemnon makes reference to Achillies's glory in battle, and Achillies makes a comment to Agamemnon's glory in leadership.

Phoenicia

The Phoenicians lived in Lebanon after descending from Canaan. Phoenicia separated into city-states in 1000BC and fell under Assyria, Persia, and Babylon. Phoenicia contributed to other civilizations greatly through out the years too. They shared metal, timber, purple dye, and other things such as this.

Rameses the not so great

Should Rameses II have been so concerned about his reputation in history? Is historical reputation important for leaders today? Why, or why not?

Rameses II should have been concerned with his reputation, for it gave him power over others. Although I personally disagree with this form of power, it brought Rameses power for a long time and fame for much longer. If it weren't for his fame, he probably would not have stayed in rule for so long, and as for fame, up until the late 19th century A.D., he was thought as a great King, but recent information tells us that much of his fame was false.

Old Egypt

1) Are the similarities between early Egypt and Sumer so great that the two civilizations ought to be regarded as influencing each other? Why,  or Why not?

I'd say no, for it doesn't seem that Egypt and Sumer ever effected each other. I believe this was mainly because firstly Early Egypt was surrounded by desert and was isolated for the oust part along with Egypt and Sumer being separated by the Medateranian Sea. They were both very different from each other, so they would probably not have understood the other's culture. For instance, Egypt's culture completely revolved around the Nile.

3) How does the architecture of Egypt and Sumer reflect the worldviews of the two early civilizations?

For Egypt, the pyramids reflect their worldview greatly. Firstly, the enormousness of the pyramid shows that the king was  a person of great importance. Then the tomb itself. The way the king is buried along with the hieroglyphics shows three things. Firstly, life after death, secondly, the gods, and thirdly, order life, death, and ressurection.

Code of Hammurabi

Today I will be blogging on some of the paragraphs in the core of Hammurabi.

2) The first thing i see when I look at this is that "justice" is often based off of luck, but I think that they believed it had more to do with the divine than luck. 

5) In this paragraph, it shows that the judicial group were highly important, and judging was a big deal in the country. The judges weren't above the law, but instead were held highly accountable to the correct judgment of other citizens.

9) This helps with two things in the country. Thievery and false accusations. If a person were to buy a stolen item, this law protects them from being in trouble for an accidental purchase, and the thief gets highly punished for his actions.

26) This law helps and hurts the country. It discourages people from not going to war because they could lose their main way of life, and be "put on the streets", but in another way it kind of helps someone to be a mercenary. The hired person could easily become the owner of a fairly nice house.

32) This law seems strange at first until you read the last phrase. Basically, if a captured person can buy his freedom, but only with his house, he shall not give his house, but the community will pay for his freedom. This law is intriguing because it makes no sense that the community would have to pay for a captured person, but The reason why he shall not give his house is beacause that was like their identity. I was like giving your debit card or driver's license. I am not quite sure how I feel about this one.