How Douglass Dispelled the Illusions of Slavery - 1019 Words

Frederick Douglass wrote his autobiography to provide a look into the world of a slave. His audience varied, from abolitionists, to whites that were on the fence about the issue, but his purpose remained: to allow non-slaves to learn about the horrors of slavery. In this autobiography, Douglass dispelled readers’ â€Å"illusions about slavery† by merely telling his true story, an everyman tale for slaves. Douglass worked on plantations in the Maryland area, and those plantations were considered to be easier than those of Georgia or Alabama, as unruly or ornery slaves were â€Å"sold to a Georgia [slave] trader† as punishment (54). Douglass may very well have been one of the better-treated slaves of his era, and in revealing the horrors of his†¦show more content†¦Ridden of the ignorance that once provided him relative bliss, Douglass realized the horror of his circumstances and delved to another level of despair. While McDuffie believed the slaves were a llowed to â€Å"eat as much wholesome† food as they wanted, in reality, slaves received food as if they were unwanted animals, fed â€Å"coarse corn meal† from a â€Å"trough† (McDuffie, P5; Douglass, 59). Corn meal served from a trough does not constitute wholesome food. In his speech when he proclaimed slavery to be a â€Å"positive good,† John C. Calhoun also argued that the â€Å"black race of Central Africa† had never attained a lifestyle â€Å"so civilized and so improved† (Slavery a Positive Good, Calhoun, P1). Douglass countered this argument with narrations of the dehumanization that slaves went through. Douglass described his Aunt Hester’s whipping, when her master whipped her until â€Å"red blood came dripping on the floor,† punishing her as if she were a misbehaving animal. Douglass revealed that while whites argued that the slaves had become more civilized, at the same time they dehumanized them with animal-like p unishment. Another illusion that Douglass countered in his narrative was the idea that slavery was justified because of certain passages from the Bible. McDuffie defended slavery because â€Å"domestic slavery† existed with theShow MoreRelatedPersonality Psychology - Sojourner Truth2195 Words   |  9 Pagesher life to fighting slavery, and advocating equal rights for women. She first began speaking in 1827, giving personal testimony of the evils and cruelty of slavery; and later as a staunch supporter of suffrage, also advocated for equal rights for women. At the 1851 Women’s Rights Convention in Akron, Ohio, she delivered her speech â€Å"Ain’t I a Woman† which is now revered among classic text of feminism. She lived her life in the water-shed years of American abolition of slavery and became a leader and

Immanuel Kant An Atypical Philosopher From The...

Immanuel Kant was an atypical philosopher from the Enlightenment Era. His ethical views differed from other philosophers during the time. While most views were based on consequences, his ethical views were deontological, meaning that he judged actions based on the intention rather that the result of the action. He believed that morality should not be based on emotion, but on reason. You perform an action not because it will provide you a means to an end, but because it was reasonably right, and based on good will. Rational human beings are ends in themselves. He did not believe in the idea of a conscious, he believed that we are not born with one and that God did not give us one. However, he did believe that God gave us the ability to reason. These views are displayed in his Categorical Imperatives. Before I go over the Categorical Imperatives, I will define his distinction between a Categorical Imperative and a Hypothetical one. According to Kant, all imperatives command either hy pothetically or categorically. If an action is good only as a means to something else, it is hypothetical. If an act is good in and of itself, without regard to a further end, it is categorical (Textbook, 515). Using this reasoning, you could state that most other philosopher’s views during this time period are hypothetical imperatives. Kant’s Categorical Imperatives are what he thinks members of a society should be doing. He bases his views of actions on the question of would my action makeShow MoreRelatedJurisprudential Theories on IPR13115 Words   |  53 Pages According to Article 27 of the  Universal Declaration of Human Rights, everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.[32]  Although the relationship between intellectual property and  human rights  is a complex one,[33]  there are moral arguments for intellectual property. The arguments that justify intellectual property fall into three major categories. Personality theorists believe

Film Review Almos A Man Essay Example For Students

Film Review Almos A Man Essay In the film, â€Å"Almos’ A Man,† Dave is a young boy who works as a farm hand who feels like he is treated like a boy but he feels like he should be treated like a man. He even quips to his mother that she often tells him â€Å"he is almos’ a man now,† during the discussion when he asks to buy a gun. He makes excuse after excuse about why they need a gun but in reality it seems to me to be a typical boys’ infatuation with guns, as he really proves it to be as the movies goes on. He actually convinces his mother that he will buy the gun and bring it straight home and give to her so she can give it to his father. Naturally he does not bring it right home. He keeps it loaded and under his pillow. When his mom wakes him and asks for it, he says it’s hidden outside and he will get it first thing in the morning. Again, he does not retrieve the gun for his mother. This time he takes the gun to work in the fields with him. As he is working the fields with the mule, Jenny, to whom he seemed quite attached, he decides to fire the gun for the first time. In his inexperience, he fires erratically and accidentally hit the mule and she is killed. He seems genuinely upset and remorseful at first but after his parents and his boss, Mr. Hawkins found out about the gun and what he had done and they reprimanded him, he became angry and sullen. When his father instructed him to return the gun to the store where he bought it, he instead decided to keep it and hopped on a train out of town. Dave Saunders suffered a series of unfortunate events, all of which were of his own doing due to his own immaturity. He continually lied about the gun, he failed to get help for the mule immediately and then he lied about shooting it. Running away proves he hasnt grown up. Even his rambling about proving to them he’s a man is more inane silliness and only proves further that he has not matured at all. Dave felt that he needed a gun to prove he was a man and gain respect but it proved to be his undoing and sadly, it ruined his young life. Just as we saw in â€Å"Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been,† both teens are trying to gain maturity and independence before they were ready. In comparison, Connie was creating a whole different persona when she went out with her friends. She would bring clothes and makeup with her and change at into a bubbly outgoing girl trying to attract all the boys’ attention. She would sneak across the street from the mall to the drive-in where the older kids hung out and meet older boys there. Connie used makeup and clothing to make herself feel more like a grown-up. Dave, on the other hand felt like he needed to own a gun to feel like a man. It gave him power. He was as good as the white people when he had a gun. But their desire to grow up too fast was the downfall for both teens and resulted in a less than happy ending for each of them. Dave ran away from home on a train with nothing to his name except the clothes on his back and a gun. Connie drove off to her death in the car of who was presumably either the devil or a killer/rapist depending on your interpretation. My takeaway is the moral of both stories is dont be in such a rush to grow up!