Journal #6

From Ben Franklin’s The Autobiography

1. Explain what was involved in Franklin’s plan for self-perfection? What conclusion did Franklin come to regarding the effectiveness of this plan?

Franklin conceived his plan for self-perfection after devising a project to achieve moral perfection. He conceived 13 virtues that he believed to be necessary or desirable. He planned to acquire one virtue at a time and use the virtues that he achieved1st to aid in acquiring others. The next virtue builds on the ones already in place. Franklin’s 1^st virtue was temperance and that made all the others easier to achieve. He marked his progress in a little book and after going a week without breaking the virtue, he could move on to the next.

It took Franklin years to get all of the virtues in place because of interference from business and travel. Franklin concluded that no one can get read of all their faults and that a perfect character would only lead you to be envied and hated. A benevolent man should have a couple faults. He found himself much happier after attempting to acquire all the virtues even though he didn't achieve perfection. He did get some of the virtues in place despite struggling through others.

2. Do you feel that a plan such as Franklin’s would improve you as a person? Why or why not? What would be your top five virtues?

I think a plan like Franklin’s would improve me as a person because I am not perfect. There are virtues that I am lacking in and need to improve upon. I think that an ordered regiment of acquiring virtues would help me be a happier person like Franklin claimed after attempting the same task. My top 5 virtues would be order, frugality, industry, tranquility, and humility. These are the virtues that I find most important.

Journal #5

Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense”

1. Identify the specific argument that Paine is making in each paragraph. For each of the arguments, identify whether Paine is making an emotional, ethical, or logical appeal and suggest an effective counterargument.

#1
The argument in the 1st paragraph is that the revolution will be hard but in the end, it will be worth it. Also, the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph will be in the end. Freedom is going to cost a heavy price and it takes a great sacrifice to give it value.
The appeal is mainly emotional because Americans are mistreated and Paine is talking about how glorious it will be when freedom is achieved. It is logical because they are under slavery of Britain and need to be freed. It is ethical because that they are doing to the colonies is wrong.
The counter point is that the Americans owe the English. They wouldn’t have the freedom that they have through England and they are under government control. This is treason against the state and it will be bad if we lose. There is no certainty for victory.

#2
The argument for the 2nd argument is that God will not let America loose; he will not let Britain destroy us with military force. The appeal is Ethical because the king is wrong and America is right. God is on America’s side and that is why we will win. America is morally right so they must triumph. The counter point is that God may not want a war and he might not help America. Also, God could be on England’s side. The king is backed by divine right so God could be on his side.

#3
The argument in the 3rd paragraph is that Paine is trying to get America to fight as soon as possible so it is not left to their children. He wants to fight now so the next generation can enjoy peace because eventually there will be a separation. The appeal is logical because he is saying that the separation will occur eventually. It is emotional because he is talking about helping out America’s children and giving them peace. It is ethical because Paine wants to improve future generations. The counter argument is that we shouldn’t fight because it may be worked out. There could also be diplomacy to work out the problem. Losing a parent or the war could negatively impact a child.

#4
The argument in the 4th paragraph is that America wouldn’t fight an offensive war against Brittan but the English have invaded and destroyed our property. They are like a thief breaking into your house. We need to defend ourselves from the British. It is an argument by analogy, comparing the king to a thief. The appeal is emotional because it is addressing how you would feel if someone would break into your house. It is ethical because if you are being attacked then you need to fight back. The counter argument is that Britain is so much more powerful than the colonies, that it is not ever worth trying to fight them. The colonies would lose and get ever stricter treatment from Britain.


2. Can you identify any of the logical fallacies that we discussed in Paine’s arguments? If so, which ones? Overall, what do you feel are the strengths and weaknesses of Paine’s arguments?

The logical fallacies include devices like faulty analogies where Paine says that Britain is putting the colonies into slavery when it is not true. He also claims that the King is breaking into our house and stealing from us when he isn’t. The writing is ad homonym because he is personally attaching the king and calling him names.It is begging the question because Paine is assuming that the colonies will win. Also, he assumes what God wants the colonies to win. He writes in aphorisms about the mood of the country. His writing is dogmatic because America tried to avoid war but Britain is still going to attach. It is a matter of faith that God will not let the colonies lose. His writing has a faulty dichotomy because he only gives the two extreme. We can either be with the king or with the colonies.

The weaknesses are that and the colonies might not win. The colonies actually have a good amount of freedom even though Paine makes it seem like they don’t. He failed to mention the sacrifices that will need to be made. Also, God may not be on the colonies’ side. Paine’s main weakness is logic. He doesn’t make logical sense in his writings because he claims things that aren’t certain. He doesn’t use facts or statistics to back up his argument.

The strengths are that it will be great if America wins. Paine is persuasive in reasons other than logic. He can touch people on an emotional level. The strengths of his argument are that the colonies are feeling wronged by Britain. He is appealing to the emotions of the Americans. Eventually the colonies will split with Britain so we should separate now and save future generations from tyranny.