untitled folder 7/.DS_Store __MACOSX/untitled folder 7/._.DS_Store untitled folder 7/1aa.png __MACOSX/untitled folder 7/._1aa.png untitled folder 7/2.png __MACOSX/untitled folder 7/._2.png untitled folder 7/4.png __MACOSX/untitled folder 7/._4.png untitled folder 7/5.png __MACOSX/untitled folder 7/._5.png untitled folder 7/S6.png __MACOSX/untitled folder 7/._S6.png untitled folder 7/S7.png __MACOSX/untitled folder 7/._S7.png untitled folder 7/Screen Shot 2014-03-25 at 3.00.32 PM.png __MACOSX/untitled folder 7/._Screen Shot 2014-03-25 at 3.00.32 PM.png Essay #1 For this first paper I am asking that you write an analysis of any one or two [or three] of the essays we’ve read to this point. A good understanding of the four expository modes of writing will help you in the formation of your paper. The paper should be designed as a comparison/contrast, process, division and analysis [also known as division and classification] or cause and effect paper. Consider either analyzing one essay [division/analysis, cause and effect, process] or two essays [comparison/contrast]. Consider also class discussions of the material. Below are illustrations of each mode. Get to know them, think about how you might write about any of these authors’ essays using one of these four patterns. “Process” writing usually involves the separation of your subject [the essay] into its component parts. It divides a continuous action into steps or stages. Two purposes of process analysis should be most familiar to the writer: a “directive process analysis” explains how to do something or make something. This might include a description of the “process” the author believes is necessary for something to take place. For example, was Frederick Douglass in his “Narrative” going through a process? If so, what was it? Or you might walk the reader through Plato’s “Allegory” step by step. An “informative process analysis,” on the other hand, explains how something is done or how it takes place. Such an essay might describe how the author designed his/her essay—the parts of the essay leading to its conclusion. An effective process essay can hold a reader’s interest by helping him or her to understand how something works. “Douglass’s method of dividing his essay into two parts…Plato’s method of showing development…” A “Division and Analysis” essay expresses a division of a subject into several parts to be analyzed or further classified. To divide is to separate the subject [an essay] into parts and analyze each part. You might argue that Plato’s essay is in six essential parts or that Bacon’s is in four parts [it is] and that each part has its own “characteristics” [it does]. Nietzsche’s Morality as Anti Nature” might be thought of in parts, according to what you see as the main divisions in terms of ideas [sensuality, hostility, the church, politics]. Francis Bacon uses several examples to illustrate each one of his idols [cave, marketplace, tribe, etc.] You might dis ...

1. untitled folder 7/.DS_Store
__MACOSX/untitled folder 7/._.DS_Store
untitled folder 7/1aa.png
__MACOSX/untitled folder 7/._1aa.png
untitled folder 7/2.png
__MACOSX/untitled folder 7/._2.png
untitled folder 7/4.png
__MACOSX/untitled folder 7/._4.png
untitled folder 7/5.png
__MACOSX/untitled folder 7/._5.png
untitled folder 7/S6.png
__MACOSX/untitled folder 7/._S6.png
untitled folder 7/S7.png
__MACOSX/untitled folder 7/._S7.png
untitled folder 7/Screen Shot 2014-03-25 at 3.00.32 PM.png
__MACOSX/untitled folder 7/._Screen Shot 2014-03-25 at
3.00.32 PM.png

2. Essay #1
For this first paper I am asking that you write an analysis of any
one or two [or three] of the essays we’ve read to this point. A
good understanding of the four expository modes of writing will
help you in the formation of your paper. The paper should be
designed as a comparison/contrast, process, division and
analysis [also known as division and classification] or cause and
effect paper. Consider either analyzing one essay
[division/analysis, cause and effect, process] or two essays
[comparison/contrast]. Consider also class discussions of the
material. Below are illustrations of each mode. Get to know
them, think about how you might write about any of these
authors’ essays using one of these four patterns.
“Process” writing usually involves the separation of your
subject [the essay] into its component parts. It divides a
continuous action into steps or stages. Two purposes of process
analysis should be most familiar to the writer: a “directive
process analysis” explains how to do something or make
something. This might include a description of the “process” the
author believes is necessary for something to take place. For
example, was Frederick Douglass in his “Narrative” going
through a process? If so, what was it? Or you might walk the
reader through Plato’s “Allegory” step by step. An “informative
process analysis,” on the other hand, explains how something is
done or how it takes place. Such an essay might describe how
the author designed his/her essay—the parts of the essay leading
to its conclusion. An effective process essay can hold a reader’s
interest by helping him or her to understand how something
works. “Douglass’s method of dividing his essay into two
parts…Plato’s method of showing development…”
A “Division and Analysis” essay expresses a division of a
subject into several parts to be analyzed or further classified.
To divide is to separate the subject [an essay] into parts and
analyze each part. You might argue that Plato’s essay is in six
essential parts or that Bacon’s is in four parts [it is] and that

3. each part has its own “characteristics” [it does]. Nietzsche’s
Morality as Anti Nature” might be thought of in parts,
according to what you see as the main divisions in terms of
ideas [sensuality, hostility, the church, politics]. Francis Bacon
uses several examples to illustrate each one of his idols [cave,
marketplace, tribe, etc.] You might discuss the examples he
uses. Choosing a subject and breaking it down into its
component parts, analyzing each part, one at a time, is known as
“division and analysis.” Many of the essays we’ve read can be
carefully broken down into parts and studied that way. Of
course, the parts all form a whole and this is probably
something you’d want to demonstrate.
A “Cause and Effect” paper [closest form to argument] explores
“causes” and asks the question Why? and must answer that
question to the satisfaction of the reader. An essay might
provide several reasons [causes] for why a certain thing is what
it is. For example, a writer might provide several reasons [3 is
usually sufficient] for why Douglass’s essay is more effective
than Plato’s or Bacon’s. The essay might likewise demonstrate
[point out] the “effects” [results] of something [e.g., the effects
of “education” on Mrs. Auld in Douglass’s essay. As another
example, the writer might point out the “effects” [results] of
Plato’s “Allegory” on modern educational practices or beliefs.
A cause and effect paper is driven by “thesis” and attempts to
either answer the question why or provide evidence of the
“effect” that something has on something else. “To figure out
reasons and results is to use the method of cause and effect.”
[Bedford Reader 412] Look for relationships by explaining why
something is the way it is [explore causes] or by showing what
the results are of its existence [explore effects], or both.
A “Comparison/Contrast” essay demonstrates a separation of
two things based on how they are either alike or different or
both. A comparison/contrast paper, like the other two, also
requires a very clear thesis. It is this thesis statement by which

4. your entire argument will turn. In order to compare or contrast
two things, you first need to say something about these
similarities or differences. Comparison/contrast can be made in
two fundamental ways: by using a “point by point” comparison,
by which the subjects are discussed in relation to each other one
point at a time; or by using a “side by side” comparison, by
which the subjects are discussed separately, one at a time, in
relation to the thesis. Plato and Bacon have similar views of
man’s nature and the problems of perception. A comparison of
these authors would be very effective. The style of Douglass’s
essay versus the style of Nietzsche or Plato or Bacon would also
work. Last, consider some of what we talked about in class. You
might compare the “Sermon on the Mount” with Nietzsche’s
ideas about morality—you might also compare Freud with
Jung—this comparison will come up in next week’s lecture. I
will send another prompt with further ideas regarding these
authors and their ideas.
Paper is 3-4 pages in length, must be typed, double-spaced.
Good luck! I will send along more ideas as I find them or as
they come up in class.
Plato's Republic1
THE ALLEGORY OF THE CAVE
And now, I said, let me show in a figure how far our nature
is enlightened or unenlightened: -
Behold! Human beings living in an underground den, which has

5. a mouth open towards the light
and reaching all along the den; here they have been from their
childhood, and have their legs and
necks chained so that they cannot move and can only see before
them, being prevented by the
chains from turning round their heads. Above and behind them
a fire is blazing at a distance, and
between the fire and the prisoners there is a raised way; and you
will see, if you look, a low wall
built along the way, like the screen which marionette players
have in front of them, over which
they show the puppets.
I see.
And do you see, I said, men passing along the wall carrying
all sorts of vessels and statues and
figures of animals made out of wood and stone and various
materials which appear over the wall?
Some of them are talking, others silent.
You have shown me a strange image, and they are strange
prisoners.
Like ourselves, I replied; and they see only their own shadows,
or the shadows of one another
which the fire throws on the opposite wall of the cave?

6. True, he said; How could they see anything but the shadows
if they were never allowed
to move their heads?
And of the objects which are being carried in like manner
they would only see the shadows?
Yes, he said.
And if they were able to converse with one another, would
they not suppose that they were
naming what was actually before them?
Very true.
Plato's Republic2
And suppose further that the prison has an echo which came
from the other side, would they
not be sure to fancy when one of the passers-by spoke that the
voice which they heard came from
the passing shadow?
No question, he replied.

7. To them, I said, the truth would be literally nothing but the
shadows of the images.
That is certain.
And now look again, and see what will naturally follow if
the prisoners are released and
disabused of their error. At first, when any one of them is
liberated and compelled suddenly to
stand up and turn his neck around and walk and look towards
the fire light, he will suffer sharp
pains; the glare will distress him, and he will be unable to see
the realities of which in his former
state he had seen in the shadows; and then conceive someone
saying to him that what he saw
before was an illusion, but that now, when he is approaching
nearer to being and his eye is turned
towards more real existence, he has a clearer vision - - -What
will be his reply? As you may
further imagine that his instructor is pointing to the objects as
they pass and requiring him to
name them, will he not be perplexed? Will he not fancy that the
shadows which he formerly saw
are truer than the objects which are now shown to him?
Far truer.

8. And if he is compelled to look straight at the light, will he
not have a pain in his eyes which
will make him turn away to take refuge in the objects of vision
which he can see and which he
will conceive to be in reality clearer than the things which are
now being shown to him?
True, he said.
And suppose once more, that he is reluctantly dragged up a
steep and rugged ascent and held
fast until he is forced into the presence of the sun itself. Is he
not likely to be pained and irritated?
When he approaches the light his eyes will be dazzled and he
will not be able to see anything at
all of what are now called realities.
Not all in a moment, he said.
Plato's Republic3
He will require to grow accustomed to the sight of the upper
world. First he will see the
shadows best, next the reflections of men and other objects in

9. the water, and then the objects
themselves; then he will gaze upon the light of the moon and
then the stars and the spangled
heaven and he will see the stars by night better than the sun or
the light of the sun by day?
Certainly.
Last of all he will be able to see the sun, and not mere
reflections of it in the water, but he will
see it in its own proper place, and not in another; and he will
contemplate it as it is.
Certainly.
He will then proceed to argue that this is what determines
the season and the years and that it
is the guardian of all that is in the visible world, and in a
certain way the cause of all things which
he and his fellows have been accustomed to behold?
Clearly, he said, he would first see the sun and then reason
about it.
And when he remembered his old habitation and the wisdom
of the den and his fellow
prisoners, do you not suppose that he would felicitate himself
on the change and pity them?
Certainly, he would.

10. And if they were in the habit of conferring honors among
themselves on those who were
quickest to observe the passing shadows and to remark which of
them went before, and which
followed after, and which were together, and who were
therefore best able to draw conclusions as
to the future, do you think that he would care for such honors
and glories or envy the possessors
of them? Would he not say with Homer, "Better to be the poor
servant of a poor master," and to
endure anything, rather than think as they do and live after their
manner?
Yes, he said, I think that he would rather suffer anything
than entertain these false
notions and live in this miserable manner.
Imagine once more, I said, such a one coming suddenly out
of the sun to be replaced in his old
situation; would he not be certain to have his eyes full of
darkness?
To be sure, he said.

11. Plato's Republic4
And if there were a contest, and he had to compete in
measuring the shadows with the
prisoners who had never moved out of the den, while his sight
was still weak and before his eyes
had become steady(and the time which would be needed to
acquire this new habit of sight might
be very considerable), would he not be ridiculous? Men would
say of him that up he went and
down he came without his eyes, and that it was better to not
even think of ascending; if anyone
tried to loose another and lead him up to the light, let them only
catch the offender and put him to
death.
No question, he said.
This entire allegory, I said, you may append, dear Glaucon,
to the previous argument. The
prison house is the world of sight, the light of the fire is the
sun, and you will not misapprehend
me if you interpret the journey upwards to be the ascent of the
soul into the intellectual world . . .
my opinion is that in the world of knowledge the idea of good

12. appears last of all and is seen only
with an effort, and when seen, is also inferred to be the
universal author of all things beautiful and
right, parent of light and of the lord of light in this visible
world. The immediate source of reason
and truth is in the intellectual, and this is the power upon which
he who would act rationally
either in public or private life must have his eye fixed.
I agree, he said, as far as I am able to understand you.
. . . .the bewilderments of the eyes are of two kinds, and
arise from two causes, either from
coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is
true of the mind's eye, quite as much
as of the bodily eye. He who remembers this when he sees any
one who is perplexed and weak
will not be too ready to laugh. He will first ask whether that
soul of man has come out of the
brighter light, and is unable to see because he is unaccustomed
to the dark, or having turned away
from darkness, is dazzled by the excess light of day. . . . The
best minds must attain that
knowledge which we have already shown to be the greatest of
all - they must continue to ascend

13. until they have arrived at the good. But when they have
ascended and seen enough, they must not
be allowed to remain in the upper world. They must be able to
descend again among the
Plato's Republic5
prisoners in the den and partake of their labors and homors,
whether they are worth having or not
. . . . Each of you, when his turn comes, must go down to the
general underground abode[the
world of common, uneducated people] and get the habit of
seeing in the dark. . . .When you have
acquired the habit, you will see ten thousand times better than
the inhabitants of the den, and you
will know what the several images are and what they represent,
because you have seen the
beautiful and just and good in their truth.