Step 1- Read all the comments from the previous assignment.
Step 2- Choose one comment which is thoughtful.
Step 3-
First, paraphrase the comment you are responding to: For example: “Mr. Bello thinks that…”
Then, write a question about the chosen comment. The question must be: clear, sincere, useful and be the sort of question which leads to more questions. The question you write must complicate the comment’s argument, make the reader of the comment you are questioning think deeper. Stir up some intellectual trouble
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
26 comments:
As Jennifer l. stated that Native Americans didn’t live with the Europeans because they had different beliefs of how Earth was created. If that was a valid explanation, why now a days in America people live together in one country, and they all have different beliefs?
Eric Baron states two main reasons why the Native Americans and Europeans didn’t share the land with each other. One reason that Eric states is that the Europeans were greedy. Do really think this is true? If so, can you prove your reasoning of why they were greedy with more evidence and theories?
Niara Morrison thinks that the Native Americans and the Europeans couldn't share the land because their beliefs got in the way. She says that the Native Americans believed that "sharing was caring" while the Europeans thought the land was only for them. Because the Europeans thought the land was only for them, she thinks there was no negotiating over it; the land was for them or no land at all. Are you sure there were no negotiations over the land?
The Europeans and the Native Americans each had different cultural contexts for negotiations. The Natives felt that no one could own the land, that the land was a gift from the Creator and they were its guardians, not owners. Language difficulties between Native Americans and Europeans also meant that the Natives didn't really understand what was being negotiated. They weren't really aware that they were selling the land, since they felt it wasn't theirs to sell in the first place. They were totally unaware that they were giving up anything. In fact, it wasn't until the Europeans began removing them from their land that the Native Americans understood what they had signed.
Mohamed Elsaid said that the Europeans took control over the land because the Native Americans had no government and no religion. But how do you know for sure? How do you know that the Native Americans never had religion? I am pretty sure that they did have ceremonies which are a way of celebrating their "religion". There are also no prove that the Naitve Americans had no government. Each tribe would have their own chief and that chief is usually in charge.
Joseph b. said that the native Americans believed that the land belonged to everyone. If so then why did the Europeans and the native Americans share the land?
Jason says that the Natives share the land because they thought it was an gift that god gave us. If the Natives knew that god truly didn't give them the land, would you still think that the Natives would have shared the land? Also do you think if the Natives didn't share the land, would the Europeans still take the Natives land? How would they if they were?
Mark Zubok stated that the Europeans did what was natural. If the Europeans did was natural, does that mean that they have to take all their land. Would you take the land? Would that be natural?
As Eric Baren stated, Native Americans didn’t have any problems sharing the new world until the Europeans settled and asked for more. If the Europeans asked for more land then they already had taken from the Indians, then what example of that land that they wanted more of is there?
Mark Zubok stated that what the Europeans did was natural. Many factors play into this issue. I agree to what he has to say, to some limits.If what the Europeans did was natural, does that mean that they have to take all the land from the Native Americans? Wouldn't it be inhumane to take land from the people who have already settled there, and then destroy them? Even though the Europeans are greedy, as indicated and suggested by many resources; don't you think that they would've or should've had some respect for other human beings such as the Natives. Would you take the land how the Europeans did? And would that be natural?
Jason stated that the Natives shared the land because they believed it was a gift that god presented to them. Do you think that if the natives wouldn’t believe this, would they still share the land? Also if you were god would you give land as a gift or as a natural resource?
Vlad Shknevskiy stated that,
“When they started conquering land, the Europeans really liked it”. Who do you mean by they and what do you mean you say that statement? How could the Europeans like land when it is conquered? In my opinion, I think that you need to elaborate on that sentence for more validity. Also, stating that the Native Americans and the Europeans lived in different types of homes doesn’t make them not want to share land.
According to Eric Baron the Europeans and the Native Americans didn’t share the land because the Europeans were greedy. I partially disagree with him. I find the word “greedy” too general and simplistic. What do you mean by “greedy”? The Europeans did take over the Native’s land because they wanted to expand their territory which was a symbol of power over other countries with less land. We must think, as well, they were manly explorers whose countries of origin were small and the fact that they conquered more land gave their countries a higher standing in the world.
On the other hand we cannot forget that these expeditions were financed by the Kings and Queens of the different countries and conquering land was a way of keeping their commitment.
Niara thought that the Native Americans and the Europeans could not share land because their religious beliefs were intersecting the problem. Niara said that the Native Americans inferred the Europeans that "sharing was caring." On the other hand, the Europeans claimed that the land was only theirs'. Since the Europeans said that the land was only for them, Niara though that that was final. Were no compromises good for the share of land? The language that the Native Americans spoke and the Europeans spoke were not understood by each other. Therefore, they were not able to communicate that well. To religious beliefs, they both had different perspectives in seeing share of land. To the Native Americans' point of view, they saw that the land was to be shared because it was a "gift from god." Because of language difficulties, they were not aware of the parts in which could be compromised and the parts that couldn't. In this case, they didn't realize...yet.
Mark Zubok thinks that what the Europeans did was natural. How can this be natural? The Europeans took over the Native Americans because they wanted to, it was a decision, not something natural.
Victor Yu states that the Native Americans and the Europeans couldn't share the land because they had different religions, technologies, and houses. What technologies did they have? Of course they didn't have a laptop, phone, t.v, and they didn't have typewriters because they all weren't inveted yet. So what mean of technology DID they have?
Jason says that the Natives share the land because they thought it was an gift that god gave us. If the Natives knew that god truly didn't give them the land, would you still think that the Natives would have shared the land? Also do you think if the Natives didn't share the land, would the Europeans still take the Natives land? How would they if they were?
As Jennifer stated the native americans and the euorpeans have two different religous statments. They then did not live well with eachother so how do people who are different religons live together in the U.S
Eric Baron wrote that the reason that the Europeans and the Natives couldn't share the land because the Europeans were to greedy. Eric can u prove that they were?Did u personally know one?Did u know a native that told you the things that the Europeans MIGHT of done?
Mark Zubok said that what the Europeans did was natural, but I disagree. How could this be something natural? The Native Americans already had inhabited the areas and to take that from them is wrong. It is as if the U.S. were to suddenly storm into an island in the Caribeans and claim it as its own.
Post a Comment