Students Again

Research  Paper  #1

The Building Blocks of Equality

Outline

I. Introduction:

A. Definition of equality (according to the author)

B. Thesis: Jefferson, Lincoln, and King fought for their beliefs of equality in their actions and words.

II. Thomas Jefferson

A. The original author of the Declaration of Independence

a. Shaping American rights and government

b. Free from British rule

B. The concept of freedom

C. Jefferson’s privileged life

a. Inheritance

b. How can he say “all men were created equal”

c. What constitutes “men”

D. Jefferson’s early political career

E. A platform for a free independent government

F. Critics of the Declaration III. Abraham Lincoln

A. The basis for Lincoln’s mission

a. How Lincoln defines “men”

b. The Gettysburg Address

B. Advocate for the end of slavery

a. The Emancipation Proclamation

C. Revisions to the Declaration

D. Lincoln’s humble beginnings

E. Slaves and politics

F. Lincoln’s interpretation of the Declaration

IV. Martin Luther King, Jr.

A. A civil rights advocate

a. Building on previous advocates theories

B. A peaceful and intentional fight

a. The techniques to create a following

b. Birmingham jail

C. Segregation, oppression, and discrimination

D. Changing the fight

a. The fight rages on V. A different view

A. What if the general term “all” was replaced with specifics VII. Conclusion

The Building Blocks of Equality

Equality and freedom is a political and social concept that allows all citizens to have an equal say, opportunity, treatment, freedom, and rights in a society. The free nation in which Americans perceive today was not conceived without a fight. The rights

of all people were not given, but won with persistence and dedication. July 4^th is celebrated each year to mark the beginning of a free nation and remember the sacrifice made for independence. Citizens are proud of what a few individuals did to catapult this nation into what it is today. Thomas Jefferson fought for separation from a suppressing British Monarchy that ruled the original thirteen colonies. Abraham Lincoln fought for the rights of all men by advocating the end of slavery. He believed that all men are truly created equal. Martin Luther King, Jr. fought for civil rights and the end of segregation for the oppressed. These men fought hard for their beliefs in equality through their actions and words. They made it possible for citizens to enjoy the rights and freedoms that are present today.

Thomas Jefferson was the original author of the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration created the basis for American rights and the philosophy of the American government. The major point of the Declaration was to inform the British of the thirteen colonies’ intention to separate from the rule of the British. Jefferson laid out points that he felt restricted the citizens of the new nation under British rule, restricting citizen at that time of “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness” (Declaration of Independence, 1776). Many points stated in the Declaration later became amendments to the Constitution of the United States known as the Bill of Rights.

Jefferson wanted to model the Declaration of Independence to eradicate the restriction of British rule. The concept of freedom to Jefferson meant separating from the strict control and rules that were still imposed on the colonies by the British government. Jefferson believed that all men are created equal. This belief suggests that everyone has the same opportunities and rights as any other man. During his presidency he promoted “religious freedom, helping establish the country’s separation between church and state, and he advocated free public education, an idea considered radical by his contemporaries” (Onuf).

Jefferson was born into wealth and was very well educated. He had many opportunities to attend the finest schools and enjoy the finest things in life. Jefferson inherited his fortunes from his father who was a wealthy plantation owner. His father owned more than 7,000 acres of land in western Virginia and owned many slaves (Onuf). Due to the death of his father, Jefferson inherited all of his father’s slaves. During his lifetime he owned over one hundred slaves. Many have asked how a prominent slave owner could possibly make such a declarative statement as “all men were created equal.” Although he did own slaves at the time when the Declaration was written, slaves were not considered citizens in society. He did not advocate the idea of basic human rights for non-citizens. During the time that the document was written, only men who could vote and own land were considered citizens. Since slaves were unable to own land they were not considered citizens. They had no rights. The only the rights given to them was by their slave masters. According to Charles Adams article “Lincoln’s Logic”, when Jefferson wrote the Declaration, the term “all men” intended it to represent all “white” men (36). White men were the only group who could vote and own land. He wanted the Declaration to address concerns of these citizens.

When advocating for free education, Jefferson clearly stated that free education should be available for all white males. He thought white males should be allowed free education to prepare them to become future leaders of this nation (Onuf). He did not see non-whites as future leaders of the nation. Jefferson was not concerned with slavery at this time. He focused his attention on the issue of freeing the colonies from British rule and conceiving a new and free nation.

During Jefferson’s early political career he did argue for the prohibition of slavery in the newly created territories (Onuf). However, this did not mean that his slaves had rights or that slave ownership was prohibited. In Jefferson’s writings, he concluded that, “all blacks, whether originally a distinct race, or made distinct by time and circumstances, are inferior to the whites in the endowments both of body and mind” (Onuf). After his presidency had ended, Jefferson endured great financial debt. He used his slaves as collateral for his debt that he incurred. Since his slaves were considered collateral, he could not free them (Onuf). He was more concerned about his fortune than the well being and future of his slaves. This further illustrates the fact that Jefferson’s view of equality pertained to white male land owners.

Although he had issues with slavery, he did use the Declaration of Independence to secure rights and freedoms for the citizens of that time. The Declaration provided the platform for a free and independent government. People today use the Declaration of Independence as something to reflect upon to see how Jefferson fought to gain independence form the unfair British rule. The conception of equality among the citizens originated from this historical and moving document. Words and ideas derived from the Declaration inspired the goals and dreams of others that followed Jefferson’s lead. The Declaration of Independence started the movement of freedom and the recognition that indeed it is an independent nation.

Some criticize the intent of the Declaration of Independence. In “The Pursuit of Whining: Affirmative Action circa 1776,” John Patrick Diggins states that the purpose of the Declaration of Impendence was to place blame on the British rule for the horrendous colonial conditions. Diggins believed that most people would see from the language of the Declaration that the administration of the young nation was just “whining.” The condition of the colonies was a situation they created for their people (27). However, most would agree that Jefferson uses the Declaration to reveal the problems that were important to the people at that time. He clearly defines problems imposed on citizens as a result of British rule. Jefferson vocally states that the current treatment from the British was unacceptable and it will not continue. The Declaration was used to lay out the platform for the future government of a growing nation.

Abraham Lincoln used the Declaration of Independence as a basis for his mission to instill the idea that all men are created equal. Lincoln did not use the word “men” in the sense that Thomas Jefferson inferred, but focused on the implication that every human deserves to have equal rights, opportunity, and freedom: “Four score and seven years ago, our fathers brought forth, on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal” (Lincoln 33). He used the words of the Declaration to form his political ideology and used his political career to emphasize that all men were undeniably created equal. Lincoln was a skilled communicator and used this talent to express to the nation his principles.

Lincoln became the foremost advocate for ending slavery. He truly believed that every man deserved the same opportunities and rights as the next man. At the beginning of the Civil War the focus was to keep the Union intact and preserve the idea of a strong nation. However, Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation transformed the character of the war by stating:

I do order and declare that all persons held as slaves within said designated States, and parts of States, are, and henceforward shall be free; and that the Executive government of the United States, including the military and naval authorities thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of said persons (Emancipation Proclamation, 1865).

Adversaries of the Emancipation Proclamation questioned if the document was legal, and Lincoln was aware of their argument over legality. Lincoln did not want this message to be overturned and forgotten when the war and his presidency came to an end. He quickly pushed for an amendment abolishing slavery in the United States Constitution to avoid the question of legality. This was realized as the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Lincoln was well aware that the nations that drafted the Declaration were slave owning states. He felt that the Declaration needed to be revised and to reflect what was true at that time:

…when in the distant future some man, some faction, some interest, should set up the doctrine that none but rich men, or none but white men, were entitled to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, their posterity might look up again to the Declaration of Independence and take courage to renew the battle which their fathers began (Lehrman).

He knew that blacks were equal in economic terms, and they were equal as citizens. Lincoln believed that blacks were already citizens when the fight for equality and freedom began.

Lincoln had humble beginnings; he was born in a small log cabin. He did not have the privilege of money or education available like Thomas Jefferson. Lincoln was self-taught and worked his way from the bottom to a prosperous political career. He lived his life in the pursuit of expressing his beliefs to others. Lincoln was not a slave owner and did not believe it was moral to own another person. His humble beginnings allowed him to see that everyone deserves a chance and the privileged should not be the only people to have these opportunities:

I am not ashamed to confess that twenty five years ago I was a hired laborer, mauling rails, at work on a flat-boat — just what might happen to any poor man's son! I want every man to have the chance — and I believe a black man is entitled to it — in which he can better his condition — when he may look forward and hope to be a hired laborer this year and the next, work for himself afterward, and finally to hire men to work for him! That is the true system (Lehrman).

Lincoln is legendary for introducing the slavery issue into the political realm. He used the slavery issue in his many speeches to make an impact on the importance of equality and freedom. Every citizen looks at Lincoln as the father of the fight against slavery and leading the nation into a new direction. His Emancipation led the way for a new fight for freedom for every man. He provided hope for the future. As a great communicator he enlisted many to fight with him to allow all people to have equal opportunities and rights.

Some look at Lincoln’s words as just a political ploy to gain support for his political agenda. In “Lincoln’s Logic,” Charles Adams states that the inspiring words spoken by Lincoln in the Gettysburg Address did not convey the nation as it was during that time. He argues that, “[This United States] was not created by the Declaration of Independence but ‘the result of the ratification of a compact known as the Constitution’ a compact that said nothing about equality” (35). When Lincoln spoke those words he believed that the nation was created when the Declaration of Independence was written. The words expressed in the Declaration meant a lot to him. The ideas in the Declaration allowed a nation to think about what freedom and equality represented to them. It also made the people officially fight for those rights. Those words allowed for the start of a new nation and new a way of thinking. Words and feelings that were not put into law as of yet does not mean that a new nation was not yet created. Like the words of the Declaration, the words spoken in the Gettysburg Address and the Emancipation Proclamation hold great value for many.

Martin Luther King, Jr., a very outspoken civil rights advocate, was an individual that held the words to the Emancipation Proclamation in high regard: “…a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice” (King 813). King states his hopes through the words of Abraham Lincoln. These words helped him fuel his pursuit of freedom and equality for a new generation. He also wanted a new beginning and new nation like Lincoln. King’s view of a new nation would allow people of all walks of life to live together peacefully without feeling suppressed on their own land.

Ironically, Martin Luther King, Jr. uses the words of the Declaration of Independence in his famous “I Have a Dream” speech. Even though the author of the Declaration of Independence was a slave owner and did not fight for rights of every man, King found Thomas Jefferson’s words to be inspiring and powerful. King’s “I Have a Dream” speech changed the way the nation felt about the treatments and rights of black citizens. This view changed and expanded to a greater degree than what Lincoln began. King wanted to go forward with the fight for rights and equality. He did not want to go back and question his inclusion in Jefferson’s definition of “all men”: “And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead. We cannot turn back” (King 813).

King believed the right way to fight oppression and segregation was to fight peacefully and intentionally. He intelligently fought for what he believed and greatly influenced many. King was a preacher which put him in touch with the force of the black community and gave him a base within the black church. He often organized large sit-ins and demonstrations that were attended by thousands of people. He never resorted to violence to express his thoughts. He encountered many death threats and would never resort to violence in response to these threats. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a “man of action, who put his life on the line for freedom and justice every day, the man who braved threats and jail and beatings and who ultimately paid the highest price to make democracy a reality for all Americans” (C.King). He absolutely practiced what he preached according to his late wife, Coretta Scott King. Coretta’s opinion of her husband’s integrity may be considered biased by some, but others may consider her the most reliable source of information about Martin Luther King, Jr. A particular demonstration landed him in a Birmingham, Alabama jail. While in jail he wrote a response letter to express why he fights so hard for what he believes:

…Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored…The purpose of our direct-action program is to create a situation so crisis-packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation” (Letter from 797)

The Emancipation Proclamation set slaves free. However, this did not lead to equality among all men. Abraham Lincoln started the movement, but it was not sufficient for current times. Many minorities still did not have the same rights and opportunities as did their white counterparts. Blacks still faced segregation, oppression, and discrimination on their own land. This is what Martin Luther King, Jr. fought for; he fought to erase these acts through the values of courage, justice, and dignity. King changed the fight for equality. Now citizens denounce segregation. His untimely death was tragic for many of his followers. However, his fight still raged on with the help of his late wife Coretta Scott King, and others who took over his role to further progress the nation.

Today all citizens strive to obtain equality. Now people look at equality differently from the past. It is no longer the action to free the nation from British rule. It is no longer the action of freeing the slaves; it is now an action to seek equality for all citizens, freedom from oppression, and justice for all people. What would have happened if the Declaration of Independence stated freedom for all women, blacks, Native Americans, and whites instead of using the general word “all”? Things might have been different for these groups of people.

Thomas Jefferson started the fight through his great words. He focused his fight on equality for all white men through gaining independence from the British and gaining rights for all citizens. He conveyed his message through his academic intelligence and great writing abilities. Abraham Lincoln focused on racial equality by making the abolishment of slavery a fore front in his fight for equality. He conveyed his message through his great speeches. Martin Luther King, Jr. focused his fight for equality on humanitarian equality in the form of equal rights and opportunities for all people. He conveyed his message through peaceful sit-ins and nonviolent measures. All these men fought for the basic rights of equality and freedom, but in different ways that was acceptable in their time. All three incredible individuals were advocates for equality. Thomas Jefferson led the idea that every individual is entitled to “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness” (Declaration of Independence, 1776). That phrase lead to Abraham Lincoln to expand on that concept and Martin Luther King, Jr. to expand on it also. Both men used Jefferson’s words to build on their ideas of what equality meant. In each of their writings about equality, one can see great commonalties: “inalienable rights”, “all men”, “new beginning”, and “new nation”. There is still a common goal of the leaders of equality: all men are created equal. With equality their must also be freedom; freedom from British rule, freedom from slavery, freedom from oppression, and freedom from segregation: “Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!" (King 813)

Works Cited

Adams, Charles. “Lincoln’s Logic.” When in the Course of human Events: Arguing the Case for Southern Session. MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2000. Rpt. in. Elements

of Argument: A Text and Reader. Annette T. Rottenberg. 8^th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2006. 34.

Diggins, John Patrick. “The Pursuit of Whining: Affirmative Action circa 1776.” New York Times. 25 Sept. 1995. Rpt. in. Elements of Argument: A Text and Reader.

Annette T. Rottenberg. 8^th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2006. 27. King, Coretta Scott. “The Meaning of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday.”

thekingcenter.org. n.d. The King Center. 26 June 2006. < http://www.thekingcenter.org/holiday/index.asp>.

King, Martin Luther, Jr. “I Have a Dream.” Washington, D.C. 28 Aug. 1963. Rpt. in.

Elements of Argument: A Text and Reader. Annette T. Rottenberg. 8^th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2006. 813.

---. "Letter from Birmingham Jail." 16 Apr. 1963. Testament of Hope: The Essential Writings and Speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr. New York : HarperCollins, 1986. Rpt. in. Elements of Argument: A Text and Reader. Annette T. Rottenberg.

8^th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2006. 797.

Lehrman, Lewis. “Mr. Lincoln and the Declaration.” mrlincolnandthefounders.org. n.d. Mr. Lincoln and Founders. 26 June 2006 < http://www.mrlincolnandthefounders.org/print.asp?ID=1>.

Lincoln, Abraham. “Gettysburg Address.” Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. 19 Nov. 1863. Rpt.

in. Elements of Argument: A Text and Reader. Annette T. Rottenberg. 8^th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2006. 33.

Onuf, Peter. ed. “President: Thomas Jefferson.” Americanpresident.org. n.d. American President.org. 19 June 2006 < http://www.americanpresident.org/history/thomasjefferson/>.

Research  Paper  #2

Community College or University: Meeting a Community’s Needs

Outline

I. Introduction:

A. History of the community college system

B. Thesis: Benefit the community by keeping Matbo Community College II. The positive aspects of community colleges

A. Cost benefits

B. Convenient locations

C. Flexible schedules

D. The open door policy

E. Vocational degrees

III. The negative attributes of community colleges

G. No academic requirements

H. Attrition

I. Limited degree opportunities

IV. Benefits of universities

B.   Bachelor’s degree

B. High standards, motivated student body, and prestige

C. Variety of academic programs

D. A well rounded education

V. Negative elements of universities

A. Location

B. Housing requirements

C. Daytime classes

D. No vocational studies

E. Acceptance requirements

F. High cost

VI. Opinions and insufficient research

A. Matbo University, the right choice

B. Community colleges should not become universities

C. Insufficient research, experts not willing to take a side VII. Conclusion

Community College or University: Meeting a Community’s Needs Traditional two-year community colleges started off very small, offering classes to less than a few hundred students. They focused on developing responsible citizens and offering a liberal arts education. During the years of the Great Depression, the goals of the community college system changed. It became a place where semiprofessionals were developed. These students could advance past high school academics but not quite obtain a four-year degree. Today, community colleges have evolved into an institution that offers something more than it did in the past (Wikipedia). Matbo Community College has included a University Center where it has academic agreements with many of the colleges and universities in the state of Alaska. This allows the citizens in the community to get a Bachelors of Arts, Bachelors of Science, or Masters degree without leaving the Matbo campus. Should Matbo Community College offer the same opportunities as the other 20-plus colleges and universities in the state? Would it be wise to abandon a community college system that offers students the opportunity to begin their post-secondary career? Answering these questions can be achieved by looking at the positive and negative aspects of the community college and the university system. It would be a great benefit to the community if the Matbo Community College system remains the same.

One of the major features of a community college is that it provides a low cost education opportunity for everyone. Low income families can send their child, quite possibly themselves, to school and allow them to further their education at a very low cost. Many families worry about where they will get the money to pay for higher education. The low cost of a community college, an average annual cost of a $1,379, provides them the chance to get the quality education that is available (Green). Other benefits of community colleges are: convenient location of the campuses, flexible schedules, open door policy, and specialized vocational degrees. Campuses are usually centrally located within the community. This allows most students to easily commute between school, work, or other obligations. Many community college administrations are aware that this is the majority of their students which is why flexible class schedules are available. Flexible schedules are a benefit for working adults who wish to attend community college but have other commitments which makes attending daytime classes impossible. Education for everyone means that community colleges have an open door policy. The only requirement is that the students have the desire to further their education. A feature that is unique to community college is the vocational studies. Community colleges offer specialized two-year degrees for students that are interested in becoming a veterinarian technician, a firefighter, or a nurse.

With many benefits of the community college system, there are some negative attributes. The open door policy, as stated before, does not require any academic standards of their students. There is no requirement for ACTs, SATs, or GPA. Some of the students that attend are “disproportionately working class, nonwhite, or academically weak, and these are the very students most likely to drop out of a community college” (Townsend and Twombly 142). Many students attend, not to transfer to a university, but to test the waters to see if they want to take the academic route. This uncertainty adds to a higher attrition rate. Community colleges only provide the ability to obtain an Associates degree, transfer credits, or vocational education. Most companies now require their new employees to have a bachelor’s degree. This puts the community college students at a disadvantage if they desire to seek a professional career beyond their education.

The greatest asset that a university has to offer is granting Bachelors degrees. These degrees are necessary to any student that would like to pursue a professional career. In order for universities to maintain a level of prestige, these intuitions rely heavily on academics. Universities place stringent requirements on their applicants. The universities require acceptable scores on standardized test for prospective students to attain admittance. This leads to a motivated academic body. Most students are dedicated to attending and finishing their post-secondary education. Students that attend universities have a wide variety of academic programs available to them. Most universities have a business college, liberal arts college, engineering college, science college, and many others. Universities also offer other opportunities to help students achieve a well-rounded education by providing clubs, on-campus activities, elite collegiate athletics, fraternities, sororities, and other social events.

The location of these universities is not convenient to all potential students. While some schools do have students that commute, they have to drive a significant distance to get to school. Most schools require students, for the first two years, to live on campus in a dorm. The majority of the classes are offered during the day. Flexible scheduling is not available for working adults. Students who desire to pursue a vocational path do not get that opportunity at a university. The higher academic requirements that universities and colleges have tend to leave out some students. Not everyone that applies to universities is accepted because of their poor academic performance and low test scores. Another major constraint universities put on future students is the cost of attending. The average cost of attending a public four- year institution in 2001 was about $9,199 per year and $22,969 a year for private school (Green). Many families struggle to find money for higher education. Sometimes financial aid is not enough to bridge this gap. Education at a university is not a low cost option.

Representative Sander Levin, along with Representative Fred Miller and County Commissioner Paul Gieleghem have banded together to promote the need for a university in Matbo County. Fred Miller says, “4-year option is no longer a luxury but a necessity...

Matbo County is the third most populous county in the United States without a 4-year college” (Lee). There are other experts that oppose the idea of changing community colleges into universities:

Moreover, some veterans of the community college movement have become the most outspoken critics of the community college baccalaureate, suggesting that the growing number of two-year institutions maneuvering to offer higher-level courses and programs reflects nothing more than blind ambition and the selfish pursuit of greater prestige. Both of these, they argue, are likely to lead the institutions to abandon their original mission and values (Manzo 6).

The amount of research that has been completed, specifically pertaining to the topic of Matbo Community College converting into Matbo University, is insufficient. Due to this insufficient amount of research, experts close to the idea are reluctant to officially state their opinions.

If Matbo community college does change to Matbo University, where would all the students that are not academically strong, low income, or not sure of their academic future attend school? This decision may alienate the demographic Matbo Community College currently serves. The community college system should not be compromised. Matbo already has a University Center that offers some bachelors and masters degrees. This should be adequate because it already offers bachelor and graduate degree opportunities for its students. There are many other colleges and universities within a short driving distance of Matbo County. Matbo needs to stay focused on serving their students by keeping flexible schedules, opportunity for vocational degree seekers, and an open door policy. Changing to a university might require winning support from their governing boards, be able to earn accreditation, and have the campus resources to start a four-year program (Gersema). In addition, there is much more to becoming a university than just offering degrees beyond an Associates degree. Universities have a culture that facilitates a well-rounded education through the offering of extracurricular activities. Will Matbo University do what is necessary to actually become a university beyond bearing the title? This could prove to be a costly, lengthy, and difficult process to endure. With all of the evidence presented, it is certain that the benefit of keeping a successful community college within the county outweighs the uncertainty of changing to a university.

Works Cited

"Community College." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 8 June 2006. Wikimedia Foundations, Inc. 9 June 2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_College >.

Gersema, Emily. “Community College Compromise Reached: Regents: Universities Get Priority on Degrees.” East Valley Tribune 3 Feb. 2006.

Green, Sean-Michael. ”Two Years Can Be Better Than Four.” nextSTEPmag.com n.d. 9 June 2006. <http://www.nextstepmagazine.com/nsmpages/articledetails.aspx?articleid=811>.

Lee, Amanda. “Group's Desire is Matbo University.” Matbo Daily Online Edition. 2 Dec. 2005. 9 June 2006 <http://www.Matbodaily.com/stories/120205/loc_university001.shtml>.

Manzo, Kathleen Kennedy. “Community Colleges: Breaking on Through to the Other Side.” Community College Week 23 July 2001: 6-8.

Townsend, Barbara K., and Susan B. Twombly. Community Colleges: Policy in the Future Context. Connecticut: Ablex Publishing, 2000.

Research  Paper  #3

Oedipus the Prince of Corinth

The Oedipus complex can be viewed as a stage in personality development when every male child between the ages of three to five develops a complex where they fall in love with their mother and hate their father. During this age range, the child views their father as competition for their mother’s affection and attention. (Freud) However, in The Destiny of Oedipus, the Oedipus complex is defined by Sigmund Freud as, “It is the fate of all of us, perhaps, to direct our first sexual impulse towards our mother and our first hatred and our first murderous wish against our father.” (1492) The issues that must be explored to determine whether the Oedipus complex applies to Oedipus are: the age that Oedipus was sent away from his biological parents, the circumstances surrounding Laius’ death, and the reasoning behind Oedipus marrying Jocasta. These issues will support the belief that Oedipus did not have the Oedipus complex.

One of the major points of the Oedipus complex is that “It occurs during the phallic stage of the psycho-sexual development of the personality; approximately year’s three to five.” (Columbia University Press) This restriction pokes a major hole in the theory that Oedipus has the Oedipus complex since he was sent away when only 3 days old:

JOCASTA. … my son—

he wasn’t three days old and the boy’s father fastened his ankles, had a henchman fling him away on a          barren, trackless mountain. (790-793)

Oedipus could not have been holding a jealous and murderous hatred toward Laius because he was not in his care during the developing ages of the complex. Oedipus was not able to forget and therefore resolve the complex toward Laius because he was simply a man that Oedipus never knew. Oedipus did kill his birth father Laius, but this can be attributed to mere coincidence, not the Oedipus complex. If Oedipus would have known to kill Laius through instinct, he would have to do so regardless of a situational conflict. Given the knowledge of the age at which the Oedipus complex develops it is made clear that Oedipus was not in the care of his birth parents, Jocasta and Laius, during the ages that would have allowed Oedipus to develop such a complex.

A chance encounter with Oedipus leaving Delphi and Laius entering Delphi led to the death of Laius. Laius and the five men traveling with him forcefully ran Oedipus off of the road. Acting out of anger because he was run off the road and the fear of being out numbered by aggressors, Oedipus killed Laius:

OEDIPUS. were about to thrust me off the road—brute force— and the one shouldering me aside, the driver,

I strike him in anger! –and the old man, watching me coming up along his wheels—he brings down

his prod, two prongs straight at my head! (889-893)

Oedipus did not know the true identity of the aggressors. He had just killed a man that had wronged him:

CREON. Our leader, My lord, was once a man named Laius,

Before you came and put us straight on course.

OEDIPUS. I know--

Or so I’ve heard. I never saw the man myself. (117-119)

Oedipus was in the care of Polybus and Merope during the age that the Oedipus complex develops, not in the care of Laius. In order for Oedipus to have killed Laius with murderous hatred associated with the Oedipus complex, he would have had to have been with his father during the development of the complex and to know that father:

OEDIPUS. My father was Polybus, king of Corinth. My mother, a Dorian, Merope. (852-853)

If Oedipus had the Oedipus complex he would have murdered Polybus instead of Laius. A basic rule of royalty is that a king must have a queen. Since Queen Jocasta existed before the new king was crowned, Oedipus was obligated to marry Jocasta after being crowned King of Thebes. Oedipus married Jocasta out of duty. He merely filled the position of the previous king. The foundation of the marriage was not love, jealously, or repressed sexual impulse:

OEDIPUS. But I am the king now,

I hold the throne that he held then, Possess his bed

and a wife” (294-296)

The Oedipus complex requires the child to develop a sexual impulse toward their mother and if unresolved that impulse lingers for that mother. Oedipus did not know his birth mother, just as his birth father, during the age range in which he would have experienced his first sexual impulse. This would make it impossible to direct that sexual impulse toward Jocasta due to a complex. The only mother Oedipus knew and regarded to be his mother was Merope. Therefore, if Oedipus had developed the Oedipus complex and it remained unresolved, his repressed sexual impulse would have been towards Merope.

Oedipus’ birth parents gave him away at three days old, not after the age of five when the Oedipus complex would have already been developed. He killed a stranger out of anger and fear, not out of a murderous hatred towards a father associated with the complex. He knew Polybus and Merope as his mother and father, not Laius and Jocasta. He was in their care before, during, and after three to five years of age. This would have led to the killing of Polybus and marrying of Merope if he had an Oedipus complex that had gone unresolved. He won the throne of Thebes and Jocasta came with the job, not because he wanted to be with her nor had a repressed sexual impulse. These issues support the belief that Oedipus did not have the Oedipus complex.

Works Cited

Freud, Sigmund. “The Destiny of Oedipus” Literature: An Introduction to Fiction,

Poetry, and Drama. Ed. X.J. Kennedy and Dana Gioia. 9^th ed. New York: Longman, 2005. 1491-2.

Sophocles. Oedipus  the  King.   Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, and   Drama.

Ed. X.J. Kennedy and Dana Gioia. 9^th ed. New York: Longman, 2005. 1365-1433. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition Copyright © 2003, Columbia University Press. Licensed from Columbia University Press. All rights reserved.

www.cc.columbia.edu/cu/cup/

Critical  Response  Paper  #1

Animals In Need of a Doctor

Outline

I. Introduction:

A. Summary of “Animal Research Saves Lives”

B. Summary of “Why We Don’t Need Animal Experimentation”

C. Thesis: Authority, quality, and omissions

II. Supporting their warrant (I said it therefore it must be true)

A. Heloisa Sabin:

1. Husband created first oral Polio vaccine

2. Experiencing the Polio epidemic

3. Honorary director of Americans for Medical Progress

B. Peggy Carlson:

1. Medical Doctor

2. Research Director for Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine

3. Dr. Bross agrees

III. Sabin and Carlson: Do they agree with animal testing or not? J. Sabin for animal testing

K. Carlson against testing animals

L. Does Sabin or Carlson best serve the medical community IV. Omissions for both sides

D. Heloisa Sabin:

1. Did any other experiments work? B. Peggy Carlson:

1. Was there ever a cure without animal testing?

2. How does under funding due to animal research create a problem? V. Conclusion

Animals in need of a doctor

In Elements of Arguments, two articles that appeared in the Wall Street Journal, “Animal Research Saves Human Lives” by Heloisa Sabin on October 18, 1995 and “Why We Don’t Need Animal Experimentation” by Peggy Carlson on November 7, 1995, discuss the subject of animal testing (Rottenberg and Winchell 214-17). Sabin’s article argues that animal testing is the most reliable way to develop vaccines for diseases. Some oppose the idea that animal testing is necessary to create vaccines. In Carlson’s article, she argues that animal testing is not the path to take to find cures for diseases. These two opposing articles will endure a critical review of the authors’ authority to make a claim, the quality of their position, and omissions during the course of their argument.

An author’s knowledge on a subject can be established through his or her experience. This can support the assumptions of his or her claims. Heloisa Sabin had close personal ties to animal testing. Sabin’s husband, Albert Sabin, developed the original oral vaccination for the Polio disease (Sabin 214). Since she was there with her husband while he developed the cure for polio, this made her knowledgeable about the importance of animal testing. She saw the horrors that the disease had caused before a cure was developed. The experiences she had in witnessing this disease take over many lives made her passionate about the necessity of the use of animals to test these vaccines. This passion led her to become the “honorary director of Americans for Medical Progress in Alexandria, Virginia” (Rottenberg and Winchell 214). This organization promotes the necessity of animal testing: “Americans for Medical Progress (AMP) protects society’s investment in research by nurturing public understanding of and support for the humane necessary and valuable use of animals in medicine” (Americans for Medical Progress) Peggy Carlson also has an understanding about animal testing. She is a medical doctor with knowledge of the different ways vaccines can be developed. This knowledge led her to become the “Research Director of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine in Washington D.C.” (Rottenberg and Winchell 216). This committee does not condone animal testing. They say, “It is incumbent on scientists and institutions using animals for research, testing, or educational purposes to actively investigate and implement alternatives” (Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine). Some of her colleagues in the medical field agree with her view. Dr. Bross who was the former Director of Biostatistics at the Roswell Institute agrees that animal testing is not beneficial, he states “… animal results often delay and hamper advances…they have never produced a single substantial advance…” (Carlson 216). The experiences and affiliations of Sabin and Carlson enhance their knowledge of animal testing. This provides credit for their ability to make a claim.

Sabin and Carlson are passionate about their position of whether or not to use animal testing during research. This passion leads to the inflexibility of their positions on how to find the cure for diseases. Sabin has forcefully stated in her article that animal testing is necessary because of its success with her husband developing the Polio vaccine. However, she does not give credit to the idea that animal testing may not be necessary in all instances. She uses statements that her husband made and intertwined them with her ideas to help support her claims, “Without animal research, polio would be claiming thousands of lives each year…Animals are still needed to test every new batch of vaccine that is provided for today’s children” (Sabin 215). While expressing this thought, she used a quote Albert made to a reporter, “There could have been no oral polio vaccine without the use of innumerable animals, a very large number of animals”(qtd. in A. Sabin). Since animal testing was successful in curing Polio, she feels passionate that it will be the key to curing other diseases. Her assumption that Polio would continue to devastate if it were not for animal testing shows her inflexibility on the subject. Carlson also has a strong stance about animal testing. She states that animal testing is unnecessary and takes money away from other necessary medical endeavors: “…animal experiments leads to its over funding, which, in turn, leads to the under funding of other more beneficial areas”(Carlson 217). She does not introduce the idea that maybe some animal testing is necessary in certain instances. Both authors do a disservice in the position of their articles by omitting that the other author might have a valid point but to a lesser extreme. They never consider that a combination of each position might better serve the real problem. The real problem is how to create and test better vaccines for disease in the quickest timeframe.

Although the articles present some evidence, there are some omissions of information that would help support the claims. If Sabin included more information about other tests, facts, and experiments that were successful with animal testing (other than Polio) many would see the benefits. She should have stated other instances that absolutely needed the use of animal testing to reinforce her claim. As for Carlson’s claims, she needed to provide more evidence of cures that have been successfully developed without the use of animal testing. Since she claims that under funding of more beneficial areas was due to animal testing (Carlson 217), Carlson needs to state the actual occurrences. Both authors needed more support than was given to convince a reader to agree with their viewpoint.

In review of these articles, it is clear that in order for the author to validate their claims they should have some experience and knowledge of the subject. It is also important that they clearly state their claims and have critical viewpoints of their side of the argument. In order to fully support their claims, they must explore all evidence that would solidify their argument. This can be done with more examples and facts. Omission of important details only weakens their argument. Heloisa Sabin and Peggy Carlson argue their points well, but they lack data that was needed for their readers to completely identify with their position.

Works Cited

AMP: Americans for Medical Progress. n.d. Americans for Medical Progress. 4 June 2006. < http://www.amprogress.org/site/c.jrLUK0PDLoF/b.933817/k.D675/OVE RVIEW.htm>.

Carlson, Peggy. “We Don’t Need Animal Experimentation.” Elements of Argument. Ed. Karen S. Henry. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2006. 216 - 17.

PCRM: Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. 4 June 2004. Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. 4 June 2006. < http://www.pcrm.org/resch/anexp/position.html>.

Rottenberg, Annette T., and Donna Haisty Winchell. Elements of Argument. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2006.

Sabin, Heloisa. “Animal Research Saves Human Lives.” Elements of Argument. Ed. Karen S. Henry. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2006. 214 – 15.