Resumos Histórias da América PDF

Preview

Summary

Self-Reliance Summary.Emerson opens his essay with three epigraphs that preview the theme of self-reliance in the essay. He then begins the essay by relecing on how oten an individual has some great insight, only to dismiss it because it came from their own imaginaion. According to Emerson, we shoul...

Description

Self-Reliance Summary . Emerson opens his essay with three epigraphs that preview the theme of self-reliance in the essay. He then begins the essay by reflecting on how often an individual has some great insight, only to dismiss it because it came from their own imagination. According to Emerson, we should prize these flashes of individual insight even more than those of famous writers and philosophers; it is the mature thinker who eventually realizes that originality of thought, rather than imitation of what everyone else believes, is the way to greatness. Emerson then argues that the most important realization any individual can have is that they should trust themselves above all others. Babies, children, and even animals are intuitively aware of this fact, according to Emerson, and so are worthy of imitation. Emerson sees self-reliance as a characteristic of boys, too, with their independent attitudes, lack of respect for authority, and willingness to pass judgment on everything they encounter. Emerson then shifts to a discussion of the relationship between the individual and society by noting that when we are alone, we can be like babies or children, but when we get out into the world, that little voice inside that carries our truth slips away. Emerson argues that people must embrace nonconformity to recover their self-reliance, even if doing so requires the individual to reject what most people believe is goodness. Emerson believes that there is a better kind of virtue than the opinions of respected people or demands for charity for the needy. This goodness comes from the individual’s own intuition, and not what is visible to society. Besides, states Emerson, living according to the world’s notion of goodness seems easy, and living according to one’s own notions of goodness is easy in solitude, but it takes a truly brave person to live out one’s own notions of goodness in the face of pressure from society. Although it might seem easier to just go along with the demands of society, it is harder because it scatters one’s force. Aware that being a nonconformist is easier argued than lived, Emerson warns that the individual should be prepared for disapproval from people high and low once he or she finally refuses to conform to society’s dictates. It will be easy to brush off the polite disapproval of cultivated people, but the loud and rough disapproval of common people, the mob, will require all of the individual’s inner resources to face down. The other thing Emerson sees as a roadblock to the would-be nonconformist is the world’s obsession with consistency. Really though, he argues, why should you be bound at all by your past actions or fear contradicting yourself? Emerson notes that society has made inconsistency into a devil, and the result is small-mindedness. He uses historical and religious examples to point out that every great person we have ever known refused to be bound by the past. If you want to be great, he says, embrace being misunderstood just like them. Emerson argues that the individual should have faith that inconsistency is an appearance only, since every action always reflects an underlying harmony that is rooted in one’s own individuality. So long as the individual is true to themselves, their actions will be authentic and good. Given his arguments in the first part of the essay, Emerson hopes by now that everyone realizes how ridiculous conformity is and the negative impact it is having on American culture. He describes American culture of the day as one of mediocrity that can only be overcome with the recognition that in each individual is a little bit of the universe, of God, and that wherever the individual lives authentically, God is to be found. Emerson believes people tap into that truth, into justice, and into wisdom by sitting still and letting the underlying reality that grounds us and all creation speak through us in the form of intuition. Everything else— time, space, even the past—appears as something apart from the underlying reality only because of our habits of thinking. Emerson counsels that people can escape that way of thinking by living in the present like plants do, and, like everything in nature, expressing one’s self against all comers. Emerson laments that his society has lost all sense of what it means to be self-reliant individuals. He describes his historical moment as a weak one that has birthed no great people, and city boys seeking professions quit as soon as they are confronted with an initial failure. Emerson admires the country boy who tries thing after thing, not at all concerned about any failure or conforming to society; these are the kinds of people Emerson believes will make America’s history. If the individual wants to achieve true virtue, Emerson argues, they must go to war against anything that oppresses their sense of individuality, even if people accuse them of gross immorality as a result. Taking care to meet their idea of their duties to loved ones or even to themselves will vindicate them and maybe even bring people around to their way of seeing. Ultimately, Emerson believes that living in this state of war against society is actually true virtue. Emerson closes his essay by applying the abstract concept of self-reliance to specifics. He believes that self-reliance can revolutionize every part of society if we let it: We should quit praying for something outside of ourselves to save us and instead act. We should quit subordinating our experiences to religions and philosophies and instead listen to our intuition. Emerson argues that Americans especially should stop traveling abroad to become cultured and instead create their own arts, literature, and culture using the materials we find right here at home. Emerson believes that progress is beside the point: we should quit pushing for it because it only saps our strength; society does not progress in a straight line. Emerson argues that people should stop locating their identities in property and instead understand that the most valuable part of a man is inside of him. Selfreliance can even be applied to politics: Emerson argues that we should quit governing ourselves by political parties and instead have each man govern himself by intuition. Emerson concludes by noting that self-reliance is the true path to peace.

Sumário da aula: The search for cultural emancipation: the emergence of the American Renaissance. Brief introduction of the main intellectual figures and the broader historical context. Ralph Waldo Emerson, “Self-Reliance” (1841; excerpts) - The free-thinker, non-conformist and against systems. Against the calvinist vision of the perversity of the world (Calvin: the “corruption and perversity of our nature”), Emerson affirms that "the wide universe is full of good". The divine is in each person. "Trust thyself"; Self-reliance is the reverse of Conformity. Discussion of Ralph Waldo Emerson's essay “Self-Reliance” written in 1841. This essay promotes free-thought along with nonconformity in relation to systems. Ralph Waldo Emerson starts with a call to believe in the true self. He believes society has a negative impact on the growth of an individual while on the other hand solitude can encourage such growth. Emerson cites Socrates, Newton and Luther as examples of individuals who were “pure and wise” spirits who were misunderstood while they were alive. He also asks a rhetorical question to emphasize these people’s greatness: “Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood?” and concludes with “To be great is to be misunderstood.”. To accept each one’s individuality is essential to Emerson. The truth is within each person and must be found there rather than through adherence to formal religion as a way of increasing spirituality (free-thought). Throughout the essay he asks repeatedly to believe in your true self, to insist and never imitate, which is a criticism to society that asks repeatedly for you to do the same as the others and if you do differently, you’ll be misunderstood (non-conformist and against systems).

Civil Disobedience – Henry David Thoreau . Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) was an American writer, philosopher, abolitionist, and historian. He was outspoken against slavery and American imperialism. He was truly disgusted with the American government. As a result, he refused to pay his poll taxes in 1848. He had to spend a night in jail for his actions. However, he was released from jail the next morning when a friend paid his taxes. In the same year, he gave lectures in schools in Concord, Massachusetts. The lectures were titled as The Rights and Duties of the Individual in relation to Government. These lectures formed the base of his 1849 published essay Resistance to Civil Government. The essay was published in an anthology called Æsthetic Papers. The word "Resistance" from the title was apt for Thoreau's metaphor of comparing the government to a machine. According to him, if the machine is producing injustice, citizens should work as a resistance to stop the machine. The essay primary deals with slavery crisis in America in the 1840s and 1850s. It also condemns the Mexican-American war. ► Thoreau opens his essay with a saying "That government is best which governs least," which he believes to be true. He speaks favourably about a government that does not intrude in citizens' lives. The government is chosen by people to achieve certain ends. According to Thoreau, it is in existence to execute citizens' will. It exists to ensure an individual's freedom. However, it is prone to be misused. Thoreau gives examples of slavery practice and the Mexican-American war to establish his point further. He asserts that the government itself becomes an obstacle between achieving its purpose, the purpose for which it was created. ► However, Thoreau makes it clear that he is against abolishing the government, but wished for a better one. He did not believe that there should be no government at all. He believed that if the government fails to improve, people should not support it. According to Thoreau, a person cannot accept the government's authority unquestioningly. ► Thoreau introduces common people's right to revolution against an unjust government. To establish this thought, he compares the government with a machine. As a machine, the government may not do a good job in producing justice. Instead, it might produce injustice only. He encourages people be a counter friction or a resistance to stop such a machine. He encourages rebellion. He believes that mere expression of objection is not enough; it requires action. Thoreau asserts that an individual must not support the government structure. An individual must act with principle and break the law if necessary. ► To establish this thought further, he gives his own example. He recalls the time when he was imprisoned for non-payment of taxes on his part. With his own example, he establishes that non-payment of taxes is a means to withdraw support from the government. It constitutes "peaceable revolution." Thoreau also advocates a simple and self-reliant lifestyle to achieve individual freedom. He urges people to be free from the corrupting powers of money and property. He goes on to describe details about his stay in the jail and the treatment meted out to a person by the state as if he is only a physical entity and not an intellectual individual. ► Thoreau maintains that he does not want to quarrel. He says that he wants to honor the laws of the land. However, he states that the current laws are not honorable. He believes that the government is in transition from absolute monarchy to democracy. However, he also notes that democracy may not be the final stage of the process. In the end, he again lays emphasis on respecting an individual. A state cannot be absolutely free and enlightened until the government recognizes the importance of an individual. Thoreau's essay revolves around three main themes: (i) civil government vs. higher law, (ii) government vs. an individual, and (iii) materialism vs. simple life. He uses logos, ethos, and pathos to explain and peruse the readers to support his ideas of the government. The essay explains to us the intentions and principles of the government. However, the principles turned into

actions, which are called laws, are often unjust. Unjust laws do not work for people, whether they are in majority or minority. To change unjust laws and the unjust government, people should stand up. It is every citizen's duty to resist unfairness shown by the government.

Sumário da Aula: Henry David Thoreau, “Civil Disobedience” (1849; excerpts). Thoreau’s critique of the dangers of democracy (the rule of the majority), and his idea of the conscience-driven individual-citizen. Thoreau’s text as inspiration for subsequent non-violent protest movements, such as Ghandi in India and Martin Luther King in the 1050s.60s. His concrete criticism of the government and the decision to fight a war with a weaker nation (Mexico) with the abusive goal of taking a significant part of its territory, and even more to extend the institution of slavery. Discussion of "Civil Disobedience", an essay by Henry David Thoreau written in 1849. In this essay Henry Thoreau examines the moral responsibilities of the democratic citizen and also the role of the government. He states that the government is nothing but an abstract idea that people choose to live by. Yet this abstract thing we call government is so easy to wield and manipulate that one individual can easily bid . The government does its will while we believe that it is made to serve the people, but it may mainly be used as a source to gain power. Thoreau encourages civil disobedience when the government does not govern or governs against the interests of the nation, because the citizen has the right to assert his sense of righteousness and his moral consciousness. As Thoreau was against the Mexican-American War, because it was fought against a weaker power to gain more territory to expand slavery, he refused to pay the taxes and went to jail.

Seneca Falls Declaration and Resolutions . This text represents the Declaration that was adopted in the Seneca Falls Convention in the year of 1848. This declaration occurs because in 19th-century America, like it is shown in the text, women had no legal rights. They could not vote, they didn’t had the right to own property or business, they had to be dependent on a man, like their father, and then after marriage they would be dependent on their husbands, being expected to always have children and remaining at home. Because of that, in the middle of the 19th century, some women like Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucretia Mott, Abigail Adams, Margaret Fuller, Sojourner Truth, Maria Stewart and Susan B. Anthony, that we talked about, began demanding for changes and equal rights with men, and more importantly, they demand the right to vote. In a way to discuss the injustices women suffered in American society and to plan ways to redress their grievances a group of women in upstate New York began organising a meeting in the 1840’s that took place at Seneca Falls, New York, in July of the year of 1848, being known nowadays as the Seneca Falls Convention. This Convention was attended by several hundred men and women interested in the issue, and notably by early women’s rights activists Lucretia Mott and Elizabeth Cady Stanton. The Declaration of Rights and Sentiments was signed by 68 women and 32 men, forming a total of 100 delegates present in the conference, during a two-day meeting. This Declaration was mainly written by Stanton and pretends to show the social and political situation of women and try to change and eliminate these issues. The Declaration is considered one of the founding documents of the women’s rights movement in the United States but after its publication it has received not only approval but also a lot of criticism. Some parts of the document show that women were not happy with their situation of being mistreated by man and that they would do something about it. Some passages also explain reasons why this situation is of grave concern not only to women but to all: “The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman, having a direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.” The specific examples given by the authors on how women are treated makes their arguments very convincing which is important to show women displeasure with their situation.

Lecture Delivered at the Franklin Hall – Maria Stewart . She was the first American woman to speak to a mixed audience of men and women, whites and black. She was also the first African- American woman to lecture about women’s rights, make a public anti-slavery speech and the first African-American woman to make public lectures. In February 1833, Stewart addressed Boston’s African Masonic Lodge. This speech was a turning point in her career. In her speech she claimed that black men lacked “ambition and requisite courage.” This caused uproar amongst the audience members. After this negative reaction to her speech Maria W. Stewart decided to retire from giving lectures. She gave her farewell address September 1833 at a schoolroom in the African Meeting House. “She asserted that her advice has been rejected because she was a woman.” In her first address, in 1832, Stewart spoke before a women-only audience at the African American Female Intelligence Society, an institution founded by the free black community of Boston. Speaking to that female black audience, she used the Bible to defend her right to speak, and spoke on both religion and justice, advocating activism for equality. On September 21, 1832, Stewart delivered a second lecture, this time to an audience that also included men. She spoke at Franklin Hall, the site of the

New England Anti-Slavery Society meetings. In her speech, she questioned whether free blacks were much more free than slaves, given the lack of opportunity and equality. She also questioned the move to send free blacks back to Africa. Garrison published more of her writings in The Liberator. He published the text of her speeches there, putting them into the "Ladies Department. In 1835, Garrison published a pamphlet with her four speeches plus some essays and poems, titling it Productions of Mrs. Maria W. Stewart. These inspired other women to begin public speaking. In New York, Stewart remained an activist, attending the 1837 Women's Anti-slavery Convention, she supported herself teaching in public schools in Manhattan and Brooklyn, becoming an assistant to the principle of the Williamsburg School. She was also active in a black women's literary group and supported Frederick Douglass' newspaper, The North Star, but did not write for it.

Ain’t I a Women? – Sojourner Truth . The speech begins with Sojourner Truth politely asking permission to say a few words, suggesting she has a few things she wants to talk about related to the subject. Since the event was the Women’s Rights Convention, the subject at hand was directly addressed when she flatly states “I am a woman’s right.” She asserts that she is as strong as any man as well as being capable of doing the work of a man such as plowing and reaping crops in the field. She then subtly addresses the specific issue of gender equality by answering to any lingering doubt that she can cut and carry as much as a man. Regarding the issue of intellectual inequality, she makes a sudden and effective shift in rhetoric by asking if a man has a quart and a woman only has a pint, what’s so awful about allowing her to keep that full pint? It is a brilliant stroke that serves to undermine the slippery slope argument: if women can only hold a pint, why be afraid they’ll try to take the quart from a man? Then comes another rhetorical shift after another reminder that just because you allow someone else to have rights of their own, it doesn’t mean you have to give up any of your own. She admits she cannot read, but she can certainly hear and many of the things she’s heard are stories from the Bible. In particular, the story that Even is the cause of all the sin of mankind. Rather than trying to a...