Oscar Wilde Argumentation

    In his quote, Oscar Wilde argues that disobedience is the only way to make true change in a society. Rebelling against the power that makes the rules, according to Wilde, is one of man's original virtues.

    Wilde's argument makes sense to me because history has proven that it is correct. In order for America to break free from Britain's oppression, they American people had to disobey and revolt against them. The people of France had to rebel against the oppressive tyrant Louis XIV and disobey him to obtain freedom. Although there have been peaceful, lawful protests to obtain freedom such as Martin Luther King Jr's famous gathering at the Washington Monument, the government only gave rights to the African-American people to appease them and not to fix the problem completely. People are still feeling the effects of racism within America, even after that historic non-violent protest against racism.

Dali Lama Argumentation

    The Dali Lama argues that people can never be content with what they have, if they don't practice contentment. He says that once someone practices contentment, they can say "Oh yes, I already have everything I need". This basically boils down to being content with one's self will keep them from being unhappy.
    What the Dali Lama says makes a lot of sense to me. Although, sometimes it is required to not be content with what you have. In American society, it is a dog-eats-dog world. People are always climbing over each other to be on a higher plane in the social pyramid. To be able to keep up with that competitiveness and live in American society happily, each individual must strive to improve themselves more and more to keep up with everyone else. Even though there are those that will argue that success doesn't mean happiness, success will definitely bring the ability to live comfortably. In order to live and improve your community, you must constantly be improving and never settle thinking that life is perfect.

Cotton Mather Assertion Analysis

    In Cotton Mather's speech, he asserts that witches are popping up all over America and that he is a "witch expert". He calls the people "monsters of the bubbling deep", suggesting that they come from hell. Their "maker" obviously wouldn't be God, but Satan himself, so these "codlings" wouldn't be holy and good. Mather says these things to scare people into believing what he says; it established him as a credible person.
    In order to convey his assertion, Mather uses syntax and analogy. Rhyme was used at the end of the sentences in order to keep what Mather says in the listener's heads, furthering their paranoia of witches. The people are referred to as "codlings" of a greater, darker power. This analogy removes the humanity of the non-believers from the believer's minds; the believers then see them as less-than themselves.

John Winthorp Assertion Analysis

    John Winthorp asserts that his paritioners are the figurative "people on the hill" and that they must uphold their "perfect" religious lifestyle in order to succeed in the New World. There is much emphasis on what would happen if anyone failed to do their part for their religion. This instills a feeling of anxiety amongst the paritioners to do their best and to not fail, or they will all suffer the consequences.
    In order to convey this assertion, John Winthorp uses syntax and simile. The entire "paragraph" is actually just one sentence; giving no time for the paritioners to think about what Winthorp is saying. The paritioners just accept it and move on. They also believe that they are superior to others or are the "city on the hill". Winthorp persaudes them to believe that they are better than others through the use of simile.

Plato Assertion Analysis

    In Plato's rhetorical question, he asserts that he is trying to make people begin to question life and how life affects people. Plato raises the question of how we perceive reality, whether we are living it through being asleep and dreaming or actually being awake and living reality as it is happening. His goal of making us think this way is to get people to begin to question life in order to learn more from it.
    In order to prove his assertion, Plato uses paradox and rhetorical questioning. The very question Plato asked is a paradox because he could be right and he could also be wrong at the same time. Both answers would work because nobody knows the true nature of life. The question he used is also a rhetorical question because it wasn't asked to obtain an answer, it was asked to make people think and question life.

Chief Joseph Assertion Analysis

    In Chief Joseph's surrender speech, Chief Joseph asserts that he was tired of his children dying and wanted to surrender from the battle. Many of his tribe ran away and died due to the fighting, and it made Chief Joseph sick. There was too much suffering for his heart to handle, so he surrendered his tribe and took a loss for the greater good of his people.
    In order to support this assertion, Chief Joseph used syntax, diction, and imagery. Since English was not Joseph's first language, the syntax was very simple and "to the point", making it easy to understand. Similar to the syntax, the diction in the speech wasn't extremely complicated, allowing for further clarity of what Chief Joseph was asserting. Finally, imagery was used to persuade the combatant that he was to surrender with examples such as starvation, freezing, and death.

John Fire Lame Deer Assertion Analysis

    In John Fire Lame Deer's commentary, he asserts that the Native Americans were perfectly fine before the white people came to "civilize" them. The author says that there was no crime because there was no reason to commit crime in the first place. Just the same that when someone was suffering, friends from the community would gift them what they needed to get that person back on their feet. John Fire Lame Deer seems to even be saying that their society was and is much more civilized than the white's idea of society.
    In order to support his assertion, John Fire Lame Deer used satire and parallelism. Satire was used throughout the enite text, emphasizing that the Native Americans "never would have known how to function without the white people", when in reality the Natives were doing so much better without them. Parallelism was used to emphasize the unity throughout the commentary by continuously using the word "we" when explaining how peaceful the Native American society before the whites.