6. Unit 3 : Greece

1."There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." How is this so? If that is then the case, then why do we see in color, yet not in black and white? It is impossible for there to be only god and only evil, all humans are both good and evil. With some, the balance between the two may be more good than evil, and more evil than good. Nevertheless one can not be simply good nor simply evil. Example, an elderly woman while walking home gets mugged and knocked over by a man. YOU might say that this was an act of pure evil and thus the man WAS pure evil; but i say something different. Do the intentions of a man not count for anything? Say the robber needed money because his son was in terrible condition and his family needed the money for medical purposes... Yes what he did was most certainly wrong, but his motivation was to help someone in need, a loved one; or vice versa. If you do the wrong thong for the right reason are you evil? What about if you do the right thing for the wrong reason, does that make that person any better?

2. Plato believes that justice is determined by the four greta virtues; courage, wisdom, temperance and justice. He uses these characteristics to identify what justice in a state is. He gives examples how certain professions attract certain types of people. One example would be that brave, strong and courageous people are fit for defensive and political professions.

3. Plato believed that the perfect government would be run by the best, acsentially an aristocracy; "run by the best". I would agree to the aspect of being run by the best, but i would ask him, does higher rankings and more money mean you are the more superior in the race? Does Plato believe in self made man? I feel that government simply controlled by aristocrats, the most educated (we must keep in mind the types of intelligence, innate wisdom vs. educated stupidity) and richest would eventually become a monarchy. This is because eventually the richest family(ies) would be able to afford the best education and it would then be quite possible that they could then declare themselves the best of the race and (according to Plato's ideal) they then would have the right to rule the utopia.

4. My ideal republic/ lifestyle would be a democracy where the people were overseen by an elected few, and that there was no paper money, but instead each person with a trade would help each other. I believe this is a simpler approach. THis is how it would work, some people would be lawyers, others shoe makers, clothing sellers, farmers, ranchers, in short, each person would have something to bring to the the table and something to take back with them. "A pair of shoes for a week's meal" things like that. Without the complication of money. THis system (as long as people aren't corrupted with their own greed) would last for a long time, you take what you need and give what you don't. This would not only encourage the population to interact and get to know each other, but also encourage and stress the importance of education, discovering yourself, and being able to share your love of... (profession) with everyone else.

5. "The only thing standing in the way of knowledge is our insistence that the visual universe is reality." This follows up on the line that everything is not as it seems. If one only believed in things they could see then there would be no such thing as love, physics, imagination, history and more. To only believe in what you see means that first of all, your knowledge is very very limited and second, that you have no trust. To have faith and believe you'd nee physical evidence and some things just existence that can't be seen. Feelings can't be seen (though emotions can)but you can feel them and they are most certainly in existence. Important things like that would then not exist to that person.

5. Sparta vs. Athens

1. if i was a teenage girl i would rather live in a Spartan society because not only do women play a more important role in the Spartan daily life than they do in that of a but they also has the opportunity to learn more. Though in both societies women are to have no part in the government; the difference is in Sparta, because the men are busy training and fighting in the military, the "normal" professions that a man of that time was expected to perform was left to the women. Of course to be able to successfully fulfill those positions, the woman began her education at the age of seven and learned how to read, write as well as gymnastics, athletics and survival skills. In Athen's women were given no access to an education. Though in Sparta women's primary use was to produce healthy boys for the military, to do so, it was necessary for them to stay in shape, aka they were healthy and intelligent. The life of a Spartan women compared to that of an Athenian women seems much wealthier. 

2. If i were to be a slave i would rather live in Athen's because in both Athen's and Sparta slaves/serfs were the lowest of all the classes, in Athen's they were treated less harsh then most other city-states in Greece. Some could even take part in important roles such as policemen. Though this probably doesn't apply to every slave, i would have a greater chance of being given that opportunity.

3. If i was a boy in the citizen class i would prefer to be live with the Athen's. In Sparta, all boys were sent at the age of seven to prepare for military and fight for Sparta until the age of thirty, in which they were allowed to marry but had to be "on call" until the age of sixty. Though the boys/men of Sparta were also educated, the men on Athen's i feel led a far richer life. As a citizen class i would attend school from the age of seven to fifteen, when i would learn how to read, write, poetry, math, gymnastics, and music. Then each would serve in the army for two years. This life style put's more emphasis on education, skills and success in life as an individual versa [in Sparta] the success of the city-state as a whole; while still staying healthy and spending some time serving in the military. (instead of one's whole life)

4. If i was a young solider i would want to live with the Spartan's simply because i would have a stronger chance of surviving. When a Spartan boy was born, if he did not look tough, or capable of serving his life in the military, standing through the harsh preparation, then he was killed at birth (which contributed to their smaller population). As a young solider i would have to be strong having been able to pass that assessment. The Sparta military was the most feared in all of Greece, fighting with them would not only insure strong comrades, but meant i myself was a good fighter. Also, because the training for a Spartan boy was much more intense, as a young solider i would be physically very healthy and on my way to being a skilled fighter. Instead of the Athen's who trained their men for a mere two years.

5. If i was a very wealthy person of the citizen class i would rather live in Athen's becuase i would want to use the benefits of wealth to exceed in my education as the wealthy had the opportunity to do in that time. For wealthy Spartans though the life was the same as that of a regular citizen class; training for the military. I would use my wealth for extra education which could then lead me to a high government position. Such as a Council of 500 whom were responsible for administering decisions made by the Assembly, or taking part in the Assembly, which all citizens were eligible for.

6. Though Sparta's lifestyle focuses mainly around preparing for war and breeding fierce soldier's while Athen's spent more time focusing on education and government instead; the life for a woman/girl in Sparta was much better then in Athen's. I think Sparta's lifestyle was very advanced for their time because the women w1ere treated almost as equal as men, which was not universal as it seems in present day US. The life and role of a women strongly dictates which lifestyle i would prefer. (though in both city-states women did not have a right to vote or take part in the government.) As i pointed out in the first question; women in Sparta needed to be able to do the jobs that "normally" men would preform (due to military focus they did not). This then required them to have a fair education, something that Athen's does not offer. Furthermore, because women were needed to give birth to strong and healthy sons, they too had to be healthy and strong, insuring that women were treated right.In terms of government i would say that Athen's had a more advanced form of government ie Democracy while Sparta had a twisted form of monarchy, two kings to check each other. (a more traditional approach). Still, the aspect of "equality" between he genders stands out, and i feel is one of the most important.) I think Sparta i s the better to place to live. 

4. New ideas in politics and government emerge from stress

New ideas in politics and government tend to emerge in times of social, economic and political stress. I don't think the type of stress itself is the key reason to explaining why this is, but rather stress itself. When things in general aren't working right or when the "work" out weighs the "pay"; then people try to fix them. Thus in reassessing those aspects/ objects, people are able to learn from their mistakes and create new theories, which then lead to new ideas in politics, government etc.

There are many examples of this in history. One good one is nine eleven, when terrorists snuck weapons on board planes and successfully crashed into the World trade center and the Pentagon, not only destroying the buildings but killing thousands of people in the process. Aside from the obvious tragedies and anger this provoked, it also proved that the US security was not good enough. That a terrorist could sneak past all the metal detectors and scanners with a weapon on him/her. After this tragedy, Airport security went up 200%. Metal detectors are more sensitive to metal and baggage is being checked. Carry on items are checked and scanned. Also many new items were being banned such as water bottles, plastic knifes and more. (yet these items are more due to recent threats but still fall under the same category as airport security) Also a social impact that this incident had on the public was that people were being discriminated on by there race (more than just stereotypes) Because the terrorist were believed to have been people from Al Qaeda. People began jumping to conclusions, many Islamic people were being treated poorly and thought of as terrorists as well. The affect of the stress caused from 9/11 was responsible for not only the improvement of air port security (governmental) and in some ways encouraged racism (politics). As I said before, invents like this, are responsible for changes in government and politics, and new inventions/ideas.

3. Population Growth in the Classical Period

  i believe that population growth was the most significant development of the classical period because it contributed the progression of humanity, in aspects such as deforestation, increase in the complexity of societies, the spread of learning, and expanding networks. with more people living together, came access to more skills, knowledge and power; but it also meant more mouths to feed. Luckily with so many people harvesting and farming were fairly easy, yet over time, trees, plants, and animals that the society needed slowly became smaller and smaller in numbers. (i.e. deforestation and extinction.) The spread of learning included the progress of technology, also having so many people living together allowed there to be more innovations being created; things that benefited farming, transpiration and other things.

Cities were also becoming more complex creating or establishing their own hierarchy, currency, transportation, armies, and trade routes. Larger populations also benefited the functioning and effectiveness of trade. With more people it was easier to trade with civilizations not just neighboring them but also farther away places. Places like Afro Eurasia had many trades routes leading all throughout the area. Trade was not only responsible for spreading resources but also religion. The dominating religions being spread during this time included Hinduism, Judaism, buddhism, and Christianity.

So as you can tell population itself led to complexity in societies, expansion in networks and more, which then led to things like the spread of religion, new resources increase in technology and more. The growth of population pushed humanity one huge step closer to becoming what it is now.

2. Greatest achievement during the Classical Period

I believe that the biggest change that occurred during the Classical period was simply the expansion and creation of larger civilizations. During this time period was when the large regional civilizations of China, India and Mediterranean formed. Before the Classical Period, these regions had been filled with smaller independent states, nomadic groups and/or tribes. During the Classical Period, they had been replaced by two large empires. It was also during this time that civilizations began trading with each other, it was also when civilizations (whether large or small) shared new ideas, new innovations and culture among each other through trade, war, and simply living near one another. That led to new products such as silk from Asia as well as iron.(that was used for tools and weaponry.

Another aspect that I feel could be considered one of the biggest change (which connects to my previous statement regarding all the trade that had begun) would be that after the large civilizations formed, their leaders worked to integrate their new civilizations with others' culturally and commercially. From this, classical civilizations grew larger in their geographic, economic, cultural, and political reach. Thus, during the Classical period, civilizations grew in population, technology, culture and economically thanks to the interactions that occurred between on another.

1.) Reflection to Yali's Question

I think that White Europeans came to control a large share of the modern world, while those inhabiting the Americas, Africa and Asia became subjects of Colonization for many reasons. I think that geography was a huge advantage that Europe had over other more primitive places. Europe has an idealistic location and lifestyle. They were located in an area that provided them with resources that resulted in iron, food, water, and shelter. The iron ores gave them the materials to not just brainstorm inventions but follow through with them, such as weaponry and travel. Both advanced weapons and travel gave them a large advantage in conquest. They could easily transport soldiers and food and water to the desired location without having to walk. ( In which many soldiers died from exhaustion, lack or food and/or water) Europe is also surrounded by oceans which meant easy access to other countries. They had ports bordering their lands that constantly imported and exported goods. They had another advantage, trade. Other countries relied on them for food, clothing, and other factory made items. This sort of trade allowed them to have alliances with other countries so that they did not stand alone; minimizing the chances of being overthrown or conquered.
In addition, I think that such "luck" did not befall the more primitive people because of their location rather than intelligence. It is easily understood that they have a far greater knowledge of how to survive on their own, compared to the Europeans. This I think could possibly be because the primitive people never needed more. They were content with their lifestyle of being on "their land" living with what they had. The Europeans on the other hand, seemed to desire more. They wanted to expand, to monopolize (or so it seemed) other places, which is ironic since they already had much more advanced civilization than many other people in the world at that time. I think the main reason for the large imbalance in the historical outcome of Europe versus other more primitive people was their geographical location and influence they had on each other.