The speaker is good at following the classic organization, which includes seven elements. The elements are: topic, general purpose, specific purpose, central idea, introduction, body, and conclusion (Beebe & Beebe, 2014, p. 56). The topic is established in the introductory sentence, which also serves as an attention hook (Jonathan Montanez, 2020, 0:16). The speaker welcomes the audience to think about the comfort free public Wi-Fi brings, thus ascertaining the topic of the speech.
The general purpose of the speech is to inform the audience about public Wi-Fi necessity, which the speaker does when he talks about his own lack of access to Wi-Fi in childhood (Jonathan Montanez, 2020, 0:57). The specific purpose is a clear statement indicating what your audience should be able to do after hearing your speech (Beebe & Beebe, 2014, p. 56). It is not explicitly stated by the speaker, although he does detail what the audience can do to help make free public Wi-Fi a reality at the end.
Central idea is a quick summary of the entire speech. The speaker openly states the central idea at 1:04, when he explains what he is going to discuss (Jonathan Montanez, 2020). Afterwards he presents the introduction, although the attention-catching device was used at the beginning of the video. The first main point of the main body is made at 1:59, when he explains how many people do not have access to Wi-Fi and why it is an issue. The second main point is stated at 2:33, which is the causes of why there is no free public Wi-Fi (Jonathan Montanez, 2020). The third point is the discussion of solutions to achieving free public Wi-Fi in the US (3:38). The body is followed by the conclusion at 4:50, when he recounts the main points and restates why free public Wi-Fi would be beneficial for everyone.
Vocal Delivery
Vocal delivery of the speaker is controversial because there are both positive and negative aspects of his delivery. On the one hand, he speaks clearly and is easily understood, which is the first of the key vocal obligations to an audience: Speak to be understood (Beebe & Beebe, 2014, p. 249). The second obligation is to speak with vocal variety , which is notably absent from this speech (Beebe & Beebe, 2014, p. 249). Over the course of the entire video, the speakers voice is monotone, thus preventing the audience from sustaining interest, which can easily be fixed with different voice volume.
Physical Delivery
Physical delivery is also lacking because of the static pose of the speaker. Although eye contact is the most important aspect of delivery, it is not as prevalent in this speech primarily due to the format, which is an online call (Beebe & Beebe, 2014, p. 243). As such, the only real movement of the speakers eyes is made between the screen and his notes. However, there is also extremely small number of gestures used, as the speaker maintains the same pose with his hands holding notes over the course of the entire speech. A solution would be to free hands and use gestures to underscore the speech.
Oral Source Citations
There are four instances, in which the speaker uses oral citations. First, at 0:19 he references a study by PEW Research Center explaining how prevalent the Internet is in America (Jonathan Montanez, 2020). At 1:48 he references the Federal Communication Commission to underscore how many Americans lack access to the Internet. At 2:49 he brings up the infographic by Blink Networks, which explains the reason behind the lack of access. At 4:03 he references an article detaining ways of solving this problem. As such, there is an extensive use of oral source citations in a video less than six minutes, which is a positive aspect.
References
Beebe, S. J., & Beebe, S. (2014). Public speaking: An audience-centered approach. Allyn & Bacon.
Jonathan Montanez. (2020). Persuasive Speech Make Free Public Wifi for All Americans [Video]. YouTube. Web.
It has been reported by UK Road Safety Ltd that since 1st January 2008 there have been about 270,000 road causalities in the UK alone amounting to a total cost of about 13,782,410,640 pounds. (UK Road Safety Ltd, 1) Thus, it is obvious that anybody on the wheel should be more cautious while driving. This is more applicable for school bus drivers.
The best possible element of a school bus driver is the fact of driving a school bus. This includes the vicinity of the younger generation that is a beneficial condition for any person. The freshness of the child makes a person more energized. This makes a school bus driver more energetic at work. This energy is reflected in the skill of the driver and the added responsibility of the children makes him drive more safely. This ultimately makes driving safer and the road safer. The total accumulation of traffic thus is influenced by the presence of the school bus. The other drivers of the road also become aware of the presence of a school bus on road and that consciousness makes them aware of the reason to drive safely.
On the same note, it can be stated that School bus drivers are burdened with extra precautionary measures as they are deemed to carry passengers who are mostly minor and the safety of the minors are of top priority. This extra pressure may lead to extra stress at work.
Drivers burnout is due to stress. Thus, it is important to find out the reasons for stress like monotonous work schedules and work methods. Thus, it is important to try newer pastures in the present form of driving. Unfortunately, this is not possible and a driver has to live with it. Ultimately, it should be remembered that stress is an inevitable but complex companion of our working lives. Without challenges and pressures, work would lack sparkle, but we all can be overwhelmed by work-related stress, and experience its exhausting effects. Thus, it is a very difficult job for a school bus driver and the worst aspect of this job. (Brown, 79-80).
To make the situation worse, there are the presences of drivers on the road who possess little or no respect for traffic or road laws. These drivers take on the road with speed limits in mind. They disobey the general traffic rules and are often found driving under the influence of alcohol or other substances. Even if a driver is maintaining all other laws and statutory measures while driving, the number of mobile phone users while driving is quite high. There can be a lapse of concentration due to these facts and can easily result in accidents with fatal consequences. (Lamb, 227) These people should be restrained from using these means and a school bus driver must be aware of such intentional or unintentional threats on road for the safety of the students.
In conclusion, it would be relevant to make note that there is an added responsibility of driving the future generation safely to the destination and present a clean image of safe driving for the kids. A school bus driver can be a role model for the children on board and this would make the minors better and safer drivers in years to come and as a result, would make the future roads a better and safer place to drive.
Works cited
UK Road Safety Ltd; Road Safety Everyones Business; Global Traffic Statistics: Driving a Life Skill; UK Road Safety Ltd; 2008. Web.
Brown, Scheflin and Hammond; Memory, Trauma Treatment, And the Law; New York, NY: W. W. Norton; 1998.
Lamb, Davis; Cult to Culture: The Development of Civilization; Wellington: National Book Trust; 2004.
As the world ushered in the 20th Century, its evident that global economies are divided according to economic ideology. The most prevalent economic systems are Capitalism and Communism. These two ideologies have been the driving force that determines the level of cooperation between world economies. As a matter of fact, these two ideologies were the most influential factors during the cold war (Gabriel). On December 11th, 1964 Che Guevara delivered a speech before the General Assembly of the United Nations outlining various ways in which the Third World countries experienced onslaught from Capitalism in the form of Colonialism. This paper attempts to explore that speech and its relevance in todays global economy.
Capitalism versus Communism
Before proceeding with the speech details, its important to have a look at the traditional and modern meaning of Capitalism and Socialism. Traditionally, capitalism has been defined as the ownership and control of the means of production by a class of capitalists and an economic and political system that favors this (Clore 3). Today, capitalism has been redefined to mean private ownership of the means of production, and more generally the absence of central planning by the state (Clore 4). Private means that there is no government involvement.
According to Dean Clore, author of Socialism and Capitalism, Socialism means the ownership and control of the means of production by the workers themselves, whether as individuals, cooperatives, collectives, communal groups, or through the state, and an economic and political system that favors this system (7). The modern meaning of socialism is the ownership and control of the means of production by the state (Gabriel).
The Speech
Che Guevara, the Argentine Marxist revolutionary, gave a speech in the United Nations General Assembly, on December 11, 1964. The speech titled; Colonialism is Doomed has become exceptionally prominent due to the ideological ideas and its relevance to the global economy. In this speech, Che talks about the manner in which Colonialism, Imperialism and Capitalism have reduced the world into an imbalance between the haves and the have-nots (Moore 67). The speech was based on issues affecting Latin American, Asian and African countries, that by then had survived decades of ambush from colonial powers.
Ches speech was an attack to the United States, especially when he refer America as Imperialist that ensured that Third World country bows down to them (Moore 87). He gives examples of Puerto Rico, where United States made huge effort to infuse English as part of the Spanish culture resulting to a hybrid culture. In spite of this, Che is quick to note that Puerto Ricans have safeguarded their unique culture and heritage, without bowing down to the Yankees (Moore 91). He also cites the examples of how the Belgians, the very same receptors of racial abuse by the Germans, for not being the pure race of Aryans, were perpetrating racial crimes against the Congolese. He spoke about the need for Peoples Republic of China to be represented in the United Nation General Assembly, and not be represented by Taiwan, which was seen as a U.S. puppet.
In addressing the United Nations assembly, Che indicated that third world countries were ready to retaliate against the continued oppression by Capitalist world power. Specifically he talked in length about the Cuban missile crisis, making it clear that:
in the area of the Caribbean, maneuvers and preparations for aggression against Cuba are taking place; off the coast of Nicaragua above all, in Costa Rica, in the Panama Canal Zone, in the Vieques Islands of Puerto Rico, in Florida, and possibly in other parts of the territory of the United States, and also, perhaps, in Honduras, Cuban mercenaries are training, as well as mercenaries of other nationalities, with a purpose that cannot be peaceful ( Che Guevara Studies Center).
Che felt that United States imperialism in form of neo-colonialism was going against the will of Cuban, resulting to the Missile crisis.
Relevance of Che Guevaras Speech in the Global World Today
Fifty years after Che delivered the speech; it still remains very relevant, in todays global world. The domination of pro-Imperialist powers is very evident, especially through the way world super power treats third world countries. United States domination is very rampant, even though certain pockets of multi-polar power have emerged. Power is the driving force of todays capitalism. U.S. has a lot of economic power, supported mainly by mass movement of people from all over the world, who have either invested in the industrial sector, or are providing the much needed labor force.
Irresponsible Capitalism
As outlined by Che in his speech Capitalism have proved to be a jolt to small industries, especially in reference to todays globalized interdependent world. To have a better understanding of these effects, we will take a look at Capitalism and its effects to local industries. Specifically we will focus on the entry of Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) a U.S. based Company in the India market and Nike operations in Asia.
Disruption of Local Industry
The entry of KFC in India Market has been surrounded by many controversies. The KFC chain has witnessed protests from a various quarters. The controversy started on the very first day of operation of the first KFC outlet. Member of public marched into the restaurant protesting against the junk food introduced by KFC in India. The group of angry farmers and general public, led by their civic leaders, stormed restaurants and opined that the serving of such junk food was unethical in India. According to their spokesman, serving junk food was unethical as it add to Indias malnutrition problems (Case Studies in Business). The protesters also cited the likelihood of depletion of the Indias livestock which could cause harm to many Indians households.
The group also felt that KFC operations would affect the agricultural sector, which constituted a major portion of the Indian economy, and adversely affect the environment. There was general consensus that the entry of non-vegetarian food outlet would make people abandon their culture in favor of foreign food. This would shift the market, increasing the demand for non-vegetarian diet, and most likely cause many local businesses to close.
These protest were seen as a vociferous protest against the concept of westernization of the Indian agricultural sector and the changing food culture in Indian by U.S. firms. In essence, the general public was not only protesting against economic implications, but also cultural and social effects that will be caused by KFC presence in the Indian market.
KFC Treatment of Animals
Beside the protest from Indians farmers and general public, KFC has been a target by People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) as one of the many multinational food companies which mistreat animals. According to the PETA, KFC chicken is subject to extreme cruelty, before it reaches the plate and tempts the taste buds of consumers (PETA India). According to Ingrid Newkirk, Director PETA India, each bird whom KFC puts into a box or a bucket had a miserable life and a frightening death. People would be shocked to see our footage of a KFC suppliers employee who walks through a barn, carelessly lighting lamps and letting flames fall on the terrified birds. The air inside these filthy barns reeks of ammonia fumes, making it difficult for the birds to breathe. No one with a grain of compassion should set foot in KFC (Tribune News Service)
PETA classify KFC as a perpetrator of cruelty towards animals through unethical of breeding conditions, torturous killing of animals and cruel handling which is extremely prevalent in the KFC chain of restaurants and outlets. According to PETA, the chicken served by KFC is full of chemicals, and the birds are given hormones, antibiotics and arsenic chemicals to fatten them quickly (PETA India). The release of a video showcasing mis-treatment of chickens, led to mass protest in Bangalore, India. (PETA India)
Exploitation of Workers
Most of Nike apparels are made in Indonesia, China and Vietnam, where the labor is cheap and where labor laws are not in place or are poorly enforced. As a matter of fact, in China and Vietnam, the law prohibits workers from forming independent trade unions (Moore 99). There have been increased cases in recent months of the continued exploitation of Nike factory workers in these countries. These exploitation is in form of extremely low wages and hazardous working conditions. Nike has always distanced itself from the allegations, saying it does not own any of the factories, but only contracts work to various factory owners (Moore 103).
Although Nike is credited for creating job opportunities for people in Southeast Asia, the physical and verbal abuse by supervisors or excessive work overtime for extremely low wages are seen as direct violation of human rights. The company has also been blamed for gender rights violation due to the way female workers are treated. Women are paid less than the minimum wages, on the grounds that they require more training time than men.
Conclusion
The two cases show the effect of Neo-colonialism, where first world countries continue to exploit third world countries through unfair use of labor capital. Workers in factories and businesses owned and operated by multinationals are subjected to dangerous working conditions, receive low wages and face diminished human rights. All these conditions are directly related to Che Guevaras speech delivered to the United Nations Assembly on December 11th, 1964. The call for liberty and pursuit for the American Dream have actually resulted in the expansion of Capitalism all over the world in form of neo-colonialism. The claim for Independence by the already exploited countries is seen as irony. The remaining potential in third world countries is being exploited at an alarming rate. The bargaining power for third world countries is very low. In a bid to have an advantage of poor nations, developed countries have resulted to unfair trade policies.
As irresponsible capitalist invade the global world, the relevance of Che Guevaras speech come to light. As a matter of fact, a new name for neo-colonialism has been coined; off shoring. Third world countries can no longer afford to accept the status quo. It is now the right time to time to put strong leadership in place. This will be in form of government that converts the potential for the good of the citizens. Third world countries may result to forming trading blocs, through which their voices can be heard and deter armed hand of the invader ( Che Guevara Studies Center)
Works Cited
Che Guevara Studies Center. Colonialism is Doomed. 1997. Che Guevara Internet Archive. Web.
Case Studies in Business. KFC in India Ethical? 2009. Business Ethics Case Studies. Web.
Clore, Dan. Socialism and Capitalism. 2008. Economics. Web.
Gabriel, Satya J. What Was the Cold War All About?. 1998. Capitalism, Socialism, and the 1949 Chinese Revolution. Web.
Moore, Samuel. The Communist Manifesto. Miami: Penguin, 2002.
PETA India. Activists Protest KFC Cruelty. 2008. PETA India. Web.
This was a speech delivered by Tom Reagan in 1989 at the Royal Institute of Great Britain. Tom Reagan gave this speech as a contribution to the answer to the question of whether there is a need for the animal kingdom to have a bill of rights. The speech provided a strong philosophical argument in favor of animal rights.
Reagan started his speech by arguing that animals were conscious of their existence and that that had some significance to them. He argued that the presence of animals made a significant contribution to the global psychological balance and hence their psychological importance. Arguing from the enlightened ethics perspective, Reagan felt that any argument about animals ought to be logical and rational ( Vegan Ireland: A Case for Animal Rights 1).
Reagan went further to present four axioms of what the philosophies of animal rights (AR) were. Reagan argued that AR was a philosophy of pro and not anti-science because from Darwins words animals were our next of kin and hence the need to embrace them. Reagan also argued that AR was a philosophy that stood for justice. He claimed that it was wrong for a wrong to be committed for the interest of many and associated that with slavery and child labor. He also claimed that AR was a philosophy of peace and advocated for animals to be treated fairly. Reagan lastly argued that the true peacemakers would stand against animal exploitation ( Vegan Ireland: A Case for Animal Rights 1).
The last half part of the speech was fully dedicated to answering the objections from opponents of AR. The general argument that Reagan made in answering the objections was that though animals were not in a position to accomplish what human beings could they should not be mistreated ( Vegan Ireland: A Case for Animal Rights 1).
I believe that Reagan presented a powerful speech that succeeded in showing that animals have rights. He argued in a very systematic way using ordinary examples which could be understood by anybody. Reagan argued that animals are aware of their very existence and have some purpose in their life. This may sound ridiculous but how can one explain a lioness fighting fiercely to defend her cubs from predators? ( Information on the Lion, the Animal 1; Wright 1)
Reagan argued in a very logical way. He acknowledged the fact that animals could not be equal to human beings in many ways but argued that because animals were aware of themselves then in that sense they were equal to human beings. A similar opinion was elsewhere (Carnell 1; Francione 1). Reagan anticipated objections and gave logical and practical answers in his speech. He particularly pointed out the weakness of applying utilitarianism in society as well as in the case of animal rights.
Generally, Reagan made a convincing speech that was based on logical arguments. He truly showed that animals possess some sense of psychological awareness and that they too have some purpose in their life. This implies that animals are aware of the mistreatment that they receive from human beings. He succeeded to show that animals should be treated fairly and therefore they should have the bill of rights which will specifically focus on the way they are treated.
Maria Stewart was an African-American woman who became a journalist, teacher, lecturer, abolitionist, and womens rights activist. In her Why Sit Ye Here and Die? speech, she highlighted several arguments in support of black peoples rights. The first is that black people should have the right to education, as white people. She claims that if she had been educated at an early age, she would have been able to spread her ideas more widely and further (Stewart, 1). The second is that black people are exploited as slaves for low pay. She states that they are forced to spend much money in the winter to heat the house, and women are engaged in hard work and spend all their earnings on their children (Stewart, 4). This speech aims to convey the listeners that black people can earn, develop, and just live as white.
In her speech, she addresses white women, telling them that they have a wonderful opportunity to improve their moral and mental abilities. Furthermore, she says that if black women who work in the kitchens of their owners had such an opportunity, they would definitely take it (Stewart, 3). Moreover, she appeals to the black free community to help their children not suffer the same servile fate as unfree black people and to help them not become victims of a terrible state of degradation (Stewart, 3). Perhaps it would really help some to get out of the obligation to be a servant.
Stewarts speech was most probably criticized because it united all black people who were under the rule of white people and served them as slave labor, and did not have the opportunity to live and develop (Stewart, 4). Although some are more comfortable and calmer to be under the power and protection of their owner. It was concluded that everything depends on the people, because black ones who serve can choose for themselves another life independent of white people.
Speech must have several mandatory elements to be full-fledged, and such fundamental elements are the speaker, speech, and audience, and without one of them, the situation will not be complete. These components correspond to the concepts of ethos, logos, and pathos, and their analysis is essential for speech preparation (Tinianow, 2017). This post examines these elements using the example of Hillary Clintons 1995 speech at the UN World Conference on Women.
Building a compelling argument depends on each element; for example, ethos is the speakers characteristics, credibility, and concern for the topic. Looking at the example of the Clinton speech, her address focuses on the rights of women and the need to protect them. Her reliability as a speaker and ethos is supported by the experience of Clinton (1995): Over the past 25 years, I have worked persistently on issues relating to women, children, and families (para. 8).
Moreover, as a woman and first lady, Clinton combined work and care for the family ( Hillary Rodham Clinton, n.d.). Consequently, she has experience and knowledge on the topic, which gives reason to argue that she is an informed speaker.
Logos is the content and structure of speech, and having established her credibility in the topic, Clinton uses examples and information she learned as arguments. Her main claim was that women should fully enjoy their rights, and she cited examples of violations as proof that the problem required attention. For instance, she says about girls sold into slavery, domestic violence as the frequent cause of womens deaths, and other issues (Clinton, 1995). Finally, pathos is an audience and its emotional response to the address presented. In the speech studied, Clinton focused on the participants of the international conference. She applies the concepts of human rights and freedom and draws attention to how participants can change something to solve the problem. Thus, Clintons speech is an example of the careful use of all three elements ethos, logos, and pathos.
References
Clinton, H.R. (1995). Remarks to the U.N. 4th World Conference on Women Plenary Session. American Rhetoric. Web.
Paul: The protagonist or the main character in the passage.
The Areopagites: Respected men of Athens
Dionysius: The member of the Areopagus town who believed the message.
Damaris: One of the members of the audience who believed the message.
Audience
The Preceding verse (Acts 17:18, KJV) of the same chapter gives clues about the people represented and addressed by the main character Paul. These were the philosophers and the respected men of the society of the epicureans and the stoics. Through the speech given by Paul to the elite of the society, the writer communicates to readers what is expected of them as true Christians.
Paul had studied their beliefs and discovered that they were very religious for the time that they lived in. He also refers to their religion as a state of being ignorant (Acts 17: 23) and seeks to change this belief in the unknown God introducing the God of Jews to replace the unknown God.
(Acts 17:27) states that they should seek the Lord by speaking to the generation of mankind. The speech is also directed to the modern-day Christians who are good at analyzing theological concepts but weak in true faith. The verses were written later on to portray the audience as people reading the speech and at the same time including themselves into the list of readers or beneficiaries (Acts 17:29).
In verse 31, the author refers to all men, further indicating that the speech applies to all who read the passage. Therefore, the speaker, while addressing the men of Athens, goes on to show that the message is universal for people who are willing to focus on worshipping the Lord of heaven (Acts 17:31).
The Narrator
Judging by the text, the narrator of the passage does not allow the readers to identify him through the choice of words.
The Speaker
This passage can be defined as a speech since the continuous oration by the protagonist who is Paul can be observed in this case. The speech begins from verse 22 to verse 31, at which point he concludes his speech by warning people about judgment and telling them about the resurrection. The speaker uses Hellenistic language to tell the audience about the Areopagus from the cultural perspective that will allow the audience to understand the key idea. At the end of the speech, a response is received from the audience as an acknowledgment of the message being received. The given event is by no means a dialogue because the speaker gives out the message uninterrupted up to the closing remarks; only afterward, a response is given.
Genre: Speech
The passage falls into the speech category due to the presence of the corresponding elements. The formula used at the beginning and written as You Men of Athens (Acts 17:22) creates an image of the speaker told a group of people about a certain issue affecting them all and does not expect a direct verbal response from them, but rather presupposes a change in their ways as a result of the speech.
The basis of the speech is on the Greek pantheon and the story of one of the gods, who was referred to as the unknown god. Paul uses this opportunity to metaphorically introduce the concept of true God in Christianity. The speaker also introduces foreshadowing to illustrate what is likely to happen should the men of Athens not heed the teachings of his speech (Acts 17:31).
The speaker also makes strong remarks on the foolish actions of idol worship (Acts 17: 29) and comparing the true God to earthly things such as gold and silver. In the literature context, this can be referred to as hyperbole which is used to express the speakers feeling towards the topic.
Setting
From a broad perspective, the protagonist was being followed everywhere he went by people who were against his doctrines. They had just stirred the people of Berea (Acts 17:13) and were sent away to Athens. In Athens, as he waited for his fellow apostles Silas and Timothy, he started to notice the religious behavior of the Athenians (Acts 17:16).
He began by disapproving with the doctrines of the locals in the synagogue, as well as arguing with devout people in the market places. Later on, he met with the epicureans and the stoics, who took him and brought him to Areopagus seeking to know his doctrine (Acts 17:19). The place was called Areopagus and the people living there were referred to as Areopagites. The Areopagus was used as the Athenians business location, courtroom, and the cities hall.
The physical location was a rocky place where a temple where fighters used to seek refuge was built and renamed after the Roman god of war called Mars. Mars hill was then used for special audiences with the elites of the society and this is where Paul addressed the people of Areopagus.
The setting appears to be in a busy city where everyone converged to conduct business and listen to current news and events. This was the administrative center of Areopagus as seen in verse (Acts 17:19).
Time
The time when the speech was created is still unclear. However, the speaker was accosted by the Areopagus leaders as he was going on his daily routine.
Key Word(s), Phrase(s), or Theme(s)
Keywords that are important for the meaning of the passage include such a word as worshipping, which is used strategically to emphasize the blind following and ignorant cult of various gods among the Athenians. As it can be seen in verse 23 and verse 25, the narrator uses worship as the central theme of the speech, therefore, making it clear that the only God to be sought is the Christian Lord of heaven. This keyword is further supported by the speaker calling upon the audience to seek the Lord.
The Speaker in the passage uses the word religious to introduce his point of view. He does not indicate straightforwardly that being religious is wrong, but rather makes it clear that the lord of heaven and not to other gods should be worshipped (Acts 17:22). It sets the direction of the speech towards correction and guidance after it has been stated clearly that these people are idolatrous. The fact that the audience is not ready to accept Christianity becomes clear at the end of the passage when some of his audience mocked him.
The speaker then comments on the Lord of heavens character and emphasizes His supremacy by explaining that he is the sole creator of all creation and does not dwell in the temples as it is traditionally assumed by the religious leaders. The theme of the universal reign and power of the God of heaven continues throughout the passage, leading to the idea that he promises resurrection to those who believed.
Historical Background
A reference is made to Mars Hill, where the speech was delivered. The Mars hill was similar to a towns courthouse and the town was Areopagus at that time. In other words, this reference prompts the reader to find out what Mars Hill was and to figure out that it was a sanctuary for fighters to hide feeling guilty after they failed during a war. The Mars Hill was where Paul was taken by the elites of the society, epicureans, and stoics, the spiritual leaders of the town.
The final reference to the Areopagites (Dionysius) is made at the end of the verse to refer to the group of people that lived in the town.
Socio-Cultural Elements
The social elements play a key role in the acceptance of the message given by Paul. The epicureans were against the concept of the divine God and mocked Paul as he made his speech, fearing that he could influence the decisions of others. The speech ended with some people, such as Dionysius the Areopagites, being converted to the Christian faith, which implies that some of the people, who did not have a high social status believed as well.
The epicureans discussed earlier in the passage were leaders noted by their rejection of Gods word. These were the atheists known due to their denial of theology and Gods provision.
The religious message was conveyed by the social elite; at one point, Paul uses a quote from one of the secular poets to reinforce his message.
Strong patronage is mildly evident in the passage; however, it is worth mentioning that some people were converted into the Christian faith without being influenced by the leaders opinion.
Synoptic Parallels or Inter Textual References
Acts 17:23 is similar to John 4:22 referring to the worship of unknown gods and calling on the people to worship the one true God.
Acts 17:24 rhymes with Isaiah 42: 5 that illustrates God as the creator of heaven and earth and the sole giver of life;
Acts 17: 25 is the parallel of psalms 50:12, which states that the lord of heaven is worshiped since He is the creator of all things.
Acts 17:26 parallels genesis 3:20 which portrays that we are all one since all people of the world descended from one woman called Eve.
Acts 17:27 correspond to Isaiah 55:6, which urges the audience to seek and worship the Lord, who constantly watches them as a loving Father.
Acts 17:30 are parallel to Acts 14:16, which implied that in the past, Nations could walk in their ways but this had to come to an end.
Acts 17:31 correspond to psalms 9:8. Both verses predict the pending judgment of the world.
Acts 17:32 are similar to Acts 17:18. These verses illustrate the rejection of the gospel by some of the elites of the society, which was being addressed by the passage1.
Bibliography
Couric, Robert. King James Version. Michigan: Zodervan Bible Publishers, 2002.
Footnotes
Robert Couric. King James Version (Michigan: Zondervan Bible Publishers, 2002).
Governmental power is an authority bestowed to an individual or a group of people to implement policies and control the use of public resources. Governmental power is often misused thus leading to political injustices. In Dr. Martin Luthers speech, I Have a Dream, generations are motivated to come to terms with racism and other injustices (McKay 162). The power that ruled America suppressed the minority despite the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863 that all slaves had the freedom to enjoy Americas citizenship. At the time of Luthers speech, a century had elapsed after the proclamation, yet Negros continued suffering injustices (Sweetman 293). This occurrence shows how those with governmental authority can propagate injustices. This discussion explores Luthers speech and illustrates how power can be exercised by those in authority, with the major argument being racism.
Power as a Tool of Governmental Authority
Luthers speech is enriched with metaphors that shaped the message of deliverance from racism into reality. It portrays governmental power as one of the ways through which the majority (the Whites) ruled unjustly over the minority (the Negros). A few powerful people suppressed the freedom of others. Because of this phenomenon, Dr. Luther, mobilized the government officials to implement the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act for the Negros (Mantler 70). This scenario is a good indication of how society alienated its citizens through the color of their skin.
The governmental power during the slavery period in America was threatened by the perceived racism, social, economic, and political forces against the Negro society (Ling 48), which calls for dialogue among the ruling parties to bridge the rift created by the differences among their subjects or citizens. Societal powers characterized Americas situation during Luthers time (Foss 34). The society was segregated by the racial preferences of the ruling authority. It was filled will prejudice that impaired the economic development of the country since there was limited freedom to work. In fact, racial discrimination was at its peak during Luthers time to the extent that Negros were not permitted to sit in the front seats on buses. The Montgomery, Alabama bus boycott was put forward by Luther to draw the attention of society to eliminate the misuse of power.
The Responsibilities Accompanying Power
Power comes with the responsibility of ensuring equity, justice, and freedom to all subjects. The accountability of leaders in their decision-making processes affects the outcome of their leadership. Sharing of the available resource should be done with objectivity, transparency, and without favor and preferences that tend to divide the society into ethnic and racial groups. During Luthers speech, he says, But one hundred years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of
discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity (King Jr.). It is evident that there was a lack of accountability in the society as indicated by a few citizens who prospered while the majority lived in poverty and alienation (King Jr.). In conclusion, the divisive societal power can be terminated if the society could be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice (King Jr.). This transformation is only possible if the government uses its power to ensure freedom and equality.
Works Cited
Foss, Sonja K. Rhetorical Criticism: Exploration and Practice. 5th ed., Waveland Press, 2017.
King Jr., Martin Luther. I Have a Dream. Lincoln Memorial, 28 August 1963, Washington DC. Keynote Address.
Ling, Peter J. Martin Luther King, Jr. Routledge, 2015.
Mantler, Gordon K. Power to the Poor: Black-Brown Coalition and the Fight for Economic Justice, 1960-1974. UNC Press Books, 2013.
McKay, David. American Politics and Society. 9th ed., John Wiley & Sons, 2017.
Sweetman, Joseph, et al. I Have a Dream: A Typology of Social Change Goals. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, vol. 1, no. 1, 2013, pp. 293-320.
Many people commented on McCains condescension speech. While they considered it a great speech, very few had an understanding of the factors that make a speech successful or rather the factors that make a speech be referred to as a great speech. Most people do not understand what makes some speakers like Martin Luther and Barrack Obama stand out as great speakers of all time. This paper will therefore analyze the factors of rhetoric and persuasion in McCains concession speech and point out how the factors of speech making were put into interplay to enable its success.
One of the scholars that have had research in the field of speech is Sarah King. In her book Human Communication as a field of study, King points out that communication is a dynamic field that is practical and theoretic and which has a great influence on all aspects of human life. On his part, Burke (p. xiii) points out that what appears to be a common text or speech carries a lot of hidden meanings behind it that most listeners or readers fail to recognize.
A speech could contain several forms of imagery that are used as weapons for change and persuasion. To get the hidden meaning, one must have a clear understanding of how rhetoric motives are created without the recognition of the listeners or readers. The main aim of rhetoric motives is for persuasion on one part and identification on the other part. Basing on our text of analysis, we will identify rhetoric based on the latter; identification.
After a long period of the campaign between the Republican presidential candidate John McCain and his counterpart Barrack Obama of the democrats, the race eventually came to an end on Tuesday night of November 4th when Barrack Obama was elected president of the United States of America. It was during this night of the election that John McCain honorably accepted the outcome of the elections and therefore gave his concession speech in Phoenix, Arizona to the whole nation.
Description of the speech
In his speech, McCain recognizes the effort by Barrack Obama to restore the hope of the Americans during such a hard time both economically and socially. He points out that this was a difficult campaign but finally he has to acknowledge his defeat by honoring the choice of the Americans.
He also congratulates his former rival Barrack Obama for having persevered and endured the long and difficult journey without wavering until he finally came out as the person to which Americans entrusted their beloved country. He also acknowledges the historical nature of the victory. To him, this victory was not just for the democrats, but it marked a history for the African Americans as a whole because from the outcomes, the injustices that had been committed to them had been put aside. Americans had learnt to give due honor to whoever deserved the honor without considering his color or origin.
In his speech, McCain does not forget to mention the differences that had occurred during the campaign but this, according to him are things of the past and should be put aside so that both the republicans and the Democrats could embark on building the country that they love most, the United States of America. He stresses on the importance of working together as lovers of the beautiful country so as to maintain its status as a great nation. Finally, McCain acknowledges the people who had stood by his side during the long campaign period including his family and the family of Palin who had all persevered the long journey.
He also recognizes his campaign team and his close friends who had supported him through strategizing and financing all the events. Having not made it to the great seat, he acknowledges failure not to the republicans who had voted for him but to himself for having been unable to win the contest. He eventually sums up the speech by wising well his former opponent of whom he refers to as his president to be and calls for all the Americans not to major on the difficulties that they undergo but to ensure that they look forward to holding and sustaining America as a great nation.
Evaluation and analysis
One very important thing to note during a practice of speech evaluation and interpretation is the objective of the speaker. One should identify the motive of the speaker. It should be clear whether the speakers primary objective was to educate, entertain, motivate or persuade. By identifying this, the primary message will be clear to the person doing the analysis. Furthermore, identifying the objective of the speech helps to know whether the person giving the speech was the right person or some one else should have been used (six minutes, 2008).
In his speech, McCain was very clear with his objectives. One can easily identify that he was aimed at letting all Americans; both the Republicans and the Democrats to put aside their differences during the campaign and look forward to working together to build a strong America. This he starts by personally accepting the defeat and congratulating the winner then acknowledging the choice of the majority of Americans.
From the beginning to the end of the speech, he holds close top his objective without diverting far away. He does this by urging his supporters to join congratulating Obama and giving their next president good will. He also focuses on working together to build a strong America by urging Americans not to quit but to focus on the future because Americans never surrender. He emphasized this by reminding American that they make history but not hide from it. All these remarks were aimed at making sure that his primary objective of forgetting the campaign differences and working together for the betterment of the future of America for their grand children.
Identification of the audience and context of the speech is another factor that should be considered when making a speech analysis. This is very important because the way to address teenagers would greatly vary fro the way one would address elderly people. One must identify where and when the speech is being held. In addition to this, the key demographic characteristics of the audience must be considered. The size of the audience and whether the speech is meant for only the live audience or there are other external audiences getting the same speech on other media of communication like the radio, television or The Internet must be put into consideration (six minutes, 2008).
In his speech, the McCain is very clear with his audience. The audience is made up of Americans both in the Red States and the Blue States. With the main objective being to call on all the Americans to work together irrespective of their political orientations to build America, McCain stressed the importance of patriotism. This is because the audience was made up of two different groups of people who had two different feelings.
While the Republicans were mourning their defeat, the Democrats were celebrating victory. Unfortunately, these are people of the same country and who have to work together to ensure that the country goes past the economic hardships that were prevailing during the period so that they come up with strategies to build their country together. To attain this, he has to identify something that is common between the two.
This he identifies in patriotism. Consequently, most of his speech is marked by the use of the word our Nation and the country that we both love. These two phrases were used in many occasions and repeatedly to maintain his primary objective which was unity between the Republicans and the Democrats and also to trigger the feeling of patriotism which was the greatest unifying factor between the two contestants.
Culturally, Americans are known to be one of the most patriotic citizens towards their country. The name America is taken as a power word that would stimulate them to do anything to protect the sovereignty and pride of the country (Changing minds, 2009). This character is believed to be a strong weapon that could make them do the impossible just to save their country. McCain therefore uses this weapon to make the Americans forget about the differences in their political orientations and major on one thing that is common between them and a stronger force than politics and that is patriotism.
In addition, McCain understands that the audience would be marked by African Americans who would be out to celebrate the historic victory of one of their own in the highest office in the United States. Consequently, in his speech, he identifies this group of the audience by calling the event a historic event. He points out that Americans had moved from far where injustices prevailed over the citizenship of some legitimate Americans.
He refers to this as a phenomenon that would wound. In this part of the speech, he is trying to connect the audience with history. A history that was marked with injustice and inequality in terms of slavery where African Americans were not taken as equals to their white counterparts. To further strengthen the point of history, he reminds of the event where great controversy was drawn from critics just because President Roosevelt had welcomed Booker for diner.
The election of Barrack Obama as president thus shows that America had moved from such old and outdated practices where Americans worked together as Americans and not as white or African American or as Republicans and Democrats. This was also a way of cementing the theme of togetherness and patriotism and unity which is what McCain had taken as his primary objective.
Operative appeals
For any speech to make an impact to its audience, the operative appeals must be creatively used so as to appeal to the taste of the intended audience. Several scholars have tried to define the word rhetoric motives or rhetoric appeals.
According to the American Rhetoric, several definitions from several scholars have been highlighted. Among the definitions are Aristotles which defines them as, the faculty of discovering in any particular case, all of the available means of persuasion (Aristotle, p. 24). Other definitions include the art of using discourse to enchant the soul as offered by Plato, Cicero who purports that rhetoric is a speech that has been designed with the aim of persuading, Kenneth Burkes definition that rhetoric is the use of words in attitude formation or the use of words for the course of belief manipulation. There are several other definitions offered by the American Rhetoric (2009).
According to Aristotle, there are three major forms of rhetoric appeals. The first appeal he identifies is Ethos, which he identifies as the credibility of a persons character. (Reck & Scholar, p.93). The second form of rhetoric appeal is pathos which is the controlling of emotions by the speaker or writer and finally logos which refers to the truthfulness of the speech content under reasonable argument. Using of these three forms of appeals can result into great results which would translate into attitude formation towards the speaker, the listener or the society (Benson, p. xii).
Basing on the definitions and examples offered above of the operative appeals, it is now possible to try and highlight them in the speech offered by John McCain during the election night. As identified earlier, the main objective of the speech was ensuring that Americans worked together despite their political orientation to ensure that they continued to uphold the integrity of their country.
Ethos refers to the openly visible ethics of the speaker. This can be simplified as the image of the speaker to his audience. According to Aristotle, if the audience believes that the person speaking to them has moral character that is good and that what he speaks is of good will, then they are very much likely to believe what he says to them. In addition to this, the audience is bound to believe the speaker if he appears to have the required expertise and knowledge towards the topic being spoken (Aristotle).
This is very evident in the concession speech by McCain. Basing on the reaction of people, it is clear that they felt that McCain acted as a real patriot. The audience must have expected the loser to react in either negative or positive way. One way was by acknowledging the defeat and looking forward to reconstructing the broken America wile the other option was to refute the results and complain of rigging or blame the voters for giving the highest seat to the wrong person.
McCain chose the positive side of the bargain and thus worked reasonably towards creating a favorable image towards the audience. By congratulating his opponent and promising effort towards ensuring that the new president was able to reconstruct the countrys economy and also by humbling low enough to call him my president was a clear indication of positive image formation. In the speech McCain praised senator Obama for achieving a great victory for himself and America. This shows that the man had accepted defeat and also acknowledged the winner. He further says, I wish Godspeed to the man who was my former opponent and will be my opponent. These statements were an indication that McCain was ready to work and submit under his former opponent. There is no better way of portraying a positive image as this.
In addition, he remembers to win the favor of the African Americans by demonizing the injustices and inequalities that were portrayed by history. He recognizes the wound caused by the phenomenon and even takes up [on his back the evil situation that occurred when President Roosevelt welcomed Booker T. Washington to dine with him. Finally, he calls upon all African Americans and all other minority ethnicities to be proud of being American citizens and that their being citizens of the greatest nation on earth be cherished without fear and regret.
The second form of appeal to the audience as pointed out by Aristotle is logos. This is the use of logical scientific judgments of the topic of discussion. This is a very effective weapon of audience appeal because the public highly values rationality and logic when in the process of decision making.
However this approach should be approached with caution because not all audiences can be approached scientifically due to their limited understanding of science but there are other forms of appeal within this form of audience appeal. In appealing to an audience, Aristotle purports that we can use a form of appeal called the rhetoric syllogism also referred to as an enthymeme. This form of persuasion involves giving suggestions to a possible cause of action just because something has to be done although the effectiveness of the cause is simply based on assumptions and probabilities.
The outcome of the cause is not truth but due to lack of any other option, the suggested cause of action offers the only solution (Aristotle). This was very evident in McCains concession speech offered in Arizona. After a long campaign trail where both the Republicans and the Democrats each had the hopes of emerging the winner, the truth was out. The Democrats had won. This left the Republicans in a state of limbo. They had no idea of which action to take. They would go for any offered option provided they were doing anything.
Faced with such a situation, the most logically, though not scientifically proved, cause of action was to urge the Republicans to join the Democrats in nation building. Whether this is possible or a mere theoretical action that would not be put into practice was not a thing to be proved by then. Due to the lack of other options and the inability to prove whether the action could stand or not, the audience was bound to believe in the cause of action offered by McCain.
Thirdly, Aristotle identifies Pathos as a form of audience persuasion and appeal. This is based on the manipulation of the emotions of the audience. While many people believe that their decision making is usually rational, Aristotle purports that the role of emotions in decision making cannot be sidelined. Many decisions are made under the influence of anger, fear, anxiety, love, hatred, etc. as Aristotle points out, to make an audience angry; one must understand what actually can trigger the feelings of anger in the audience. Once you understand what can trigger a given emotion, one should then give a solution to the form of emotion (Aristotle).
In his speech, McCain understands the feelings that his followers, the Republicans are harboring. He knows that they very much disappointed in fact we could say they are mad. In his speech he acknowledges this although he does not refer to it as being mad but he says that he knows that they are disappointed. He understands that the Republicans feel that they have failed and have been humiliated in the hands of their rivals, the Democrats.
As a result, he decides to take the blame off their shoulders by saying that what had happened was what the Americans had decided and that he wished the outcome was the other way round. In the effort to create an emotion, he says, it is natural, tonight, to feel some disappointment. By saying this, McCain triggers the feeling of failure or underachievement and humiliation that the Republicans are feeling. He reminds them of what they are feeling and thus piles the feelings just to remove them from their shoulders onto his shoulders by saying, &we fought as hard as we could. And though we feel short, the failure is mine, not yours. He provides a purging solution to the feeling of pain through recognizing their efforts. He names one after another acknowledges their support as family, friends and colleagues.
He also makes them feel better by saying that they deed their best. In fact, he doesnt know what could have been done besides what they deed. As a remedy and medicine to their hopelessness and despair, McCain offers a solution. He brings it out as a closing remark.
He brings back the hope that was looking seemingly elusive to the Republicans. He says, ¬ to despair in our present difficulties, but to believe, always, in the promise and greatness of America, because nothing is inevitable here. Americans never quit. We never surrender. We never hide from history. We make history. These were words of hope. Although they physically refer to Americans, they are meant for Republicans who feel down and hopeless. These are words designed to give them hope and make them know that they dont have to surrender. They dont have to quit either. They have to fight for the greatness of America by waiting for the next general elections where they would come up as victors.
McCain also uses repetition to drive the feeling of oneness within the Republicans and the Democrats. He tries to make them feel as brothers and sisters who have the obligation of developing their great nation. To achieve this, he dwells on the repeated glorification of America as a great nation. He also repeats words like love and gratitude as a way of showing his commitment to his party members. With these words, the republicans are bound to feel that their effort was not useless. They will no that their choice of president still valued them and also appreciated their voting him although he was not successful. To the Democrat audience, the message underscores the need to love and appreciate their former rivals and work hence work together as members of the great nation.
Conclusion
It is clear that the put on the measurement scale, the concession speech y McCain was a great success. Many live blogs showed people who were moved by the speech. Even democrats thought that the speech was good. One democrat was quoted saying that he shed tears when he heard the speech. In addition, he felt that should McCain have campaigned in the same manner, the defeat would not have been that large. The factors that played a role in the success of this speech were the clarity in the objective of the speech. He is clear of the need for working together of both the republicans and the Democrats in the achieving of the American dream.
He brings this out with a clear understanding of the audience and tries to offer either a consolation or congratulation to the deserving parties. Finally, he puts the rhetoric appeals outlined by Aristotle into play by touching on the emotions and the rationale of the audience. All these play a great role in ensuring that the speech is moving.
Aristotle. Rhetoric. Trans. W. Rhys Roberts. New York: Random House, Inc., 1984.
Burke, Kennedy. A Rhetoric of Motives. New York: Meridian Books, 1962.
Burke, Kenneth. The Rhetoric of Hitlers Battle. Landmark Essays on Rhetorical Criticism. Ed. Thomas W. Benson. Davis, California: Hermagoras Press, 1993. 33-50.
The Three Metamorphoses is one of the numerous philosophical works of Nietzsche in whose prologues produced thought provoking and soul searching ideas that explain the essence of life. In this paper, the analysis will endeavor to critically single out the fundamental concepts eminently presented in the speech.
In furtherance of this analysis, metaphors and allusions employed by the author shall be identified in quest for human meaning. In the final analysis, a commentary of the speech shall be availed.
The Concepts, Metaphors and Allusions in the three Metamorphoses
Metaphors and Allusions
In this piece of both philosophical and literary representation, Nietzsche employs numerous metaphors to imply meaning of life and how change is an inevitable aspect of human spiritual life. Zurathustra describes the three metaphors representing the transformational form of man.
These metaphors finally set an answer to the apprehension designed by Gods death. These metamorphic elements that preoccupy the otherwise hopeful being explain the real essence created by the ability to overcome the static nature in order to become new in the course of time (Nietzsche 116).
The author begins his philosophical imagery by saying that, I name you three metamorphoses of the spirit: how the spirit shall become a camel, and the camel a lion, and the child at last a child (Nietzsche 54). He chooses to be in love with live representations by use of animals to illustrate life out of the seemingly abstract world in which man lives. According to the speech, change should be a constant and logical.
In qualifying a description of various stages of human consciousness, Nietzsche utilizes the camel, the camel and finally the lion in pursuit for the fundamental forms of transformation necessary for an overman .
The camel represents the beginning of the strategic walk towards the much anticipated end of human spirit. In this primary stage, the camel is thought of as being the burden bearing spirit that is always submissive and under the command of all other superior forces beyond its scope of denial. It posses within its self, the duty to carry forth the mantle of spiritual hope through suffering and sacrifice.
The camel hence becomes the symbol of general human commitment towards rescuing sanity of the soul (Nietzsche, Ansell-Pearson and Duncan 263). It means that to become, one must be willing to suffer the consequences of life in order to gain from the promise of the future.
The camel as a metaphoric facet serves to demonstrate the tendency of human beings to indulge themselves in those things that seem difficult in the course of duty. The camel provokes a thinking of doing what we are obliged to do in order to challenge the self , giving way for better refinement.
Zarathustra opines by asking, What is the heaviest thing, so asks the weight-bearing spirit, that I may take it upon me and rejoice in my strength . The spirit of burden bearing represented by the camel is seen to feel great and happy in its unquestionable strength.
This spirit reminds the human kind of the ardent need for positive attitude imbued with the suffrage of humanity in order to pride in the real duty bestowed to man by nature. As a philosophical outrage, Zarathustra asks if the heavy is not the burden to feed upon the grass of knowledge (Nietzsche 116). To the seeker, suffering for the sake of searching and longing for truth is a burden laden to him or her.
The desert into which the camel flees to forms a basis for metamorphosis. It is the beginning of the journey to imagine the future that is uncertain. In this illustration, the desert represents the world of uncertainty into which the spirit plunges in search for the self fulfillment and satisfaction.
The movement form the known to the unknown is a true virtue of hope, courage together with imaginative power to conquer and discover the unexplored world.
Zarathustra creates an allusion in the sense that we are left to infer meaning from the unveilings of the journey of the camel. Illusionary elements utilized have far much meaning that endows the mind to create linkages through imaginations. It is in the desert that the camel undergoes change and transformation into a lion.
The desert provides the true environment that must be sought by an individual seeking for truth and knowledge. The idea of fleeing the real world that is habitable in the thinking of man, to the desert preoccupied by fear, dangers and uncertainty refers to the need for independence of the spirit (Nietzsche 116).
The lion is the middle stage that defines the transformation of oneself. To overcome means being a lion to the extent of fighting for what belongs to you. The lion captures the true mantle presented to it by the by the camel. In the desert, the dragon is the representation of the unyielding forces that rule over the universe with a claim for ultimate control over the faculty of reason.
The dragon is the spirit called Thou Shalt which is the critical foe to the call for freedom of the mind and mental subjugation. The free will to say No to the dragon is the result of wining over by uttering No to the fearful dragon.
The author allures the reader to infer the greater meaning through symbolic imaginations that transcends to create new knowledge, realities and wisdom. The lion is a sign of victory arising from the struggle to prey in the wilderness (Nietzsche 116).
The child is a unique metaphoric facet of human spiritual transformation according to Zarathustra. In thus Spoke Zarathustra (TSZ), the element of life has been left to be guided by the fate of change. This process is mandatory if a spirit has to realize the ultimate self that is self-identifying . To accomplish this cycle, a child becomes from a lion after realizing and possessing all the truths, reason, knowledge and power.
But the question is asked, What can the child do that the lion cannot? (Nietzsche, Pearson, and Duncan 264). The metaphor used here shows how the process ends in humility characterized by absolute freedom. At this moment, the ideals of life are eminently present in the child as a source of sanity, innocence, virtue and eternal standards.
The essence of life is gained by an individual after a hefty struggle with constraints of the world. In the final end, the child becomes the ultimate being in the society full of inner morality, and not morality imposed by forces of destruction and suppression.
Wading into dirty water when it is the water of truth, and not shrinking from the cold frogs and hot toads (Nietzsche 263) is a statement with far reaching meaning derived metaphorically as induced by Zarathustra. The author implies that it is rather necessary to engage yourself in the fighting the odds without fear of anything in order to gain from the practice.
Concepts
The concept of logical change
Change that is preached by Zarathustra is an inevitable struggle that must be waged to free the mind and spiri5 from the subdued self. The beginning of this process is acceptance of situation through bearing the burden (Nietzsche, Ansell-Pearson and Duncan 263). However, questioning the existence of the forces of command lends one towards seeking rebellion to capture freedom.
It is worth to note that this transformational process is cyclic as opposed to linear, since linearity has an end. If life follows a linear from, it departs from transformational to static. In the same line, change is logical as it stems from its initial stage throughout the process to found the final form universally acceptable as the most virtuous.
The concept of overcoming and becoming
It is worth noting that Zarathustra as an embodiment of change denotes the agent uninterested in the power to rule over others. This is gained from the fact that I lack the lions voice for all command (Nietzsche 116). The possibility of newness is pegged on leading full of separation and disconnect with the ordinary world (Nietzsche, Ansell-Pearson and Duncan 263).
The Notion of revolt and quest for power and freedom
The camel, as Nietzsche puts it, is only a vessel that accepts suffering to deliver oneself into a world of freedom. On the other hand, the lion is a representation of a tool that captures this freedom through struggle against the might of the commanding objects. To gain freedom, one must seek the ultimate lord who is the dragon enemy of the lion in the desert. The lion
Commentary on the speech, On the Three Metamorphoses
Zarathustra gave a strong and assertive address that unites the theme of change, struggle for freedom that demand of an individual. The speech given was a substantive address that touched on numerous steps that would define a route for transformational being necessary to acquaint mankind of the need to become new.
Zarathustra called for people to firs of all accept the huge burden bestowed to them by both nature and earthly forces that renders them week and submissive. In submissiveness, Zarathustra believed that the wisdom of the ultimate forces would soon be overcome.
Lowering oneself in order to hurt ones pride? Letting ones foolishness glow in order to mock ones wisdom? This was a powerful theme that plights in the subjugation of the mind, and the same time a beckon of hope.
To conquer these eminent challenges, his address induced a feeling of enthusiasm through symbolic representations of the camel that drives its load to the desert. The speech was replete with thought provoking and mind surging expressions that brought people into reverence. There are numerous instances that endure the call for logical movements free from disturbance or halt.
To become new, he pleaded to individuals to offer themselves the challenges and accept to face the issues at hand boldly without fear of nothing but the lord. The dragon that is the spirit called Thou Shalt should not be left to prevail for a longer time lets the suffering continues to subdue the human kind.
Taking a quick move into the unexplored territories in search for independence would be a requisite step towards rescuing the spirit of mankind.
In his final submission, Zarathustra offers the option of coming back to the ultimate being of a child free of suffering, full of creative minds always yielding new ideas. This stage is the most desirable since shall free them from guilt, making them forget of the past possessed with contempt, fear, and stagnation.
Works Cited
Nietzsche, Friedrich W., Keith Ansell-Pearson and Duncan Large. The Nietzsche reader, Volume 10. Ed. Ansell-Pearson, Keith and Duncan Large. New York: Wiley-Blackwell, 2006. Print.
Nietzsche, Friedrich. Thus Spoke Zarathustra A Book for All and None. Ed. Caro, Andrian and Pippin, Robert. Cambridge University press: Cambridge, 2006. Print.