Ben Franklin and Deism

I can never remember what Deism is for some reason, so I keep having to look up the meanin of it.  " Deism is knowledge of God based on the application of our reason on the designs/laws found throughout Nature. The designs presuppose a Designer. Deism is therefore a natural religion and is not a "revealed" religion."  Deism is the belief in God through facts or evidence, rather than just saying I believe in God because I think he is always there.
"This library afforded me the means of improvement by constant study, for which I set apart an hour or two each day and thus repaired in some degree the loss of the learned education my father once intended for me" (Franklin 143).  Say you were in the Puritan community.  You would not need a library or any sense of that kind of education, because you would believe that God had given you all the education that you would need.  Here, Benjamin Franklin loved the library.  It gave him an oppurtunity to learn new information.   Another thing that was different to Pilgrim and similar to deism is that Franklin took Sunday as his day to honor the Lord, but yet he studied and tried to learn more.  He wanted to find more knowledge and facts about God (Franklin 144-145).  This goes back to the deistic approach, Benjamin Franklin is applying himself to learn more facts and knowledge about God.  "Though I seldom attended any worship..." (Franklin, 145).  This would be unheard of in the Puritan age, but things were different now.  You did not have to go to church to say you were a believer in God.  Franklin was actually researching things that applied to God.  Franklin later on said that he would bo by the facts and not feel sorry for them (Franklin 147).  He did not care what some people thought were right or wrong, he just cared about having the facts and that is what Franklin was going to go off of.
Real quick, I know this blog is about how it relates to Deism, but when Ben Franklin says that he will not speak bad about any man, no matter what they have done wrong, it is the exact opposite of what the Puritans did (Franklin 148).  If they ever heard anybody did something wrong that went against their beliefs they would come at that person, really until they were dead or out of the community.
Also, the thirteen virtues go along with deism.  Like I said, deism is the wanting to know facts about God and striving to get them.  The thirteen virtues go along with this because Benjamin Franklin was striving to get better at learning about God.  He wanted to know everything that he could, and so by creating these thirteen virtues, he tried his best to go by these, and he knew that it would help him with striving towards excellence.  Everytday he worked very hard at learning these.  It is not like he tok one day for all of them, he took weeks for a just one single virtue, which shows that he was applying himself.

"Deism Defined, Welcome to Deism, Deist Glossary and Frequently Asked Questions." Welcome To The    Deism Site! Web. 25 Oct. 2011. http://www.deism.com/deism_defined.htm.

Franklin, Benjamin, and Leonard Woods Labaree. The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin. New Haven: Yale UP, 1964. Print.

Journal 14

If I were Benjamin Franklin's apprentice for the day, it would be kind of cool, but it would also be a lot of hard work.  Benjamin Franklin is one of the smartest men to ever come across the face of the earth.  Being his assistant would be a lot of hard work.  You would have to be pretty smart, not make mistakes, and be able to understand what Benjamin Franklin was trying to do.
If I were Ben Franklin's assistant here is how I think my day would go... I would wake up at 7:00 o'clock every morning.  At that time I would make Ben's breakfast, on his Franklin Stove that he would have.  I would than bring it up to him and be like his butler.  Since he did create the Franklin Stove I think it would be cool if I cooked on it, and I am just assuming he has one.  Anyways after that we would get started on our day that is planned ahead of us.  We would start off by looking at his thirteen virtues.  Each day we would spend about six hours on one virtue and that virtue would change from week to week.  We would go into detail and get into a big converstation over the understanding of a virtue.  After our conversation and research was done we would take a break for a while and than work on the electricity topic.  Each day it was different but we would find more and more data.  After a long day of hardwork we would come home and again use his stove to make a meal and finish the day off with a nice hot meal.  It would be really weird being his "assistant".  You would have to wear funky clothes and it would be a lot different than what life is like today, but in a way I think that it would be kind of fun to live during Franklin's time and to help him out.

Journal 13

Today’s American Dream is a lot different than it was twenty years ago and especially fifty to hundred years ago.   I really do not know what the typical “American Dream” is because it can vary from person to person.  I am going to give my opinion on what I think the American dream is.

The American Dream is having a good life.  I think that most people think that the American Dream is having plenty of money, a big house, a nice car, and a beautiful family.  This may not be the typical dream of some people and there may be more things that are on the list, but I think this is what most people see it as.  People want to have money galore.  People get caught up in saying that if they have money they will be happy.  That is true to an extent, because money can get you a few things that will make you happy, but if that is all you care about, it will make your life miserable.  I think having a family is definitely the most important.  If you have a family that is beautiful, loving, and nice than I think that will make you the most happy.  The American Dream is different for a lot of people, but this in my opinion is the most popular.

For me, it is kind of hard to describe the American Dream.  I am a kid and I do not have all the privileges an adult has, but there are some things that every kid wants that is my age.  I think that most kids want a car, that can get them out of the house.  As long as they can leave whenever they want I think most kids are happy.  Having a loving family, I think is what I would include, and the last thing is having a little money to spend for yourself.  Not relying on your parents is a big deal, and if you can buy things with your money, that can make you happy.

Benjamin Franklin

In the Benjamin Franklin writing, he uses more of the rationalist way of writing.  He is more involved with data, facts, and what the rationalists wrote with.  Whereas, the Pilgrims and the Puritans wrote with more of a religious background.  So I just want to say that there will be more differences.
One comparison of writers is with Mary Rowlandson and her story.  They are both set up in a diary format, which was often seen in the Puritan writing style.  As they are both set up the same, what is in them is completely different.  Mary Rowlandson believes that God will help her, and will lead the way for her.  "I repaired under these thoughts to my Bible (my great comforter in that time) and that scripture came to my hand, Cast thy burden upon the Lord, and he shall sustain thee" (Rowlandson 85).  As her mindset is completely focused on the Providence of God, Franklin's story is different.  In his story, the people do not put God as what they need to get through everything.  They may still believe in him, but he is not the answer for everything like in Mary Rowlandson's story.  The other comparison is with William Bradford.  Both Fanklin, and Bradford were leaders.  They were looked up by everybody else, but how they led was way different.  Bradford, coming from the Puritans style of writing, led people through God. He saw signs of God everywhere he went: the sailor's death, the six "elect" people taking care of the contagious sick people (Bradford 15, 65). Bradford led with his heart (basically Jesus).  Whereas, Benjamin Franklin led with his mind and knowledge.  It seems like the same thing, but they can differ in a lot of different situations.  I am trying to think of a good example... Alright, I really can not think of a good one off the top of my head so I am going to exagerate it.  Say you have to get to point A.  There are two rodes to take.  One is the road less traveled and the other is where everybody travels, and it is safe it just takes a lot longer.  Road A( the dangerous one) is what God wants you to do, because it is less traveled, but Road B is safe.  Franklin most likely goes on Route B whereas, Bradford, goes on Route A (This is an awful example.  I am sorry and I do not think God would say go down the dangerous road, but I needed an example).
I kind of wonder what is the correct way of writing.  I think one way and then think that I am doing it wrong.  If I think that the Puritan style is right, than I am going to Gods' side, which is good because you want to be on Gods' side, but what about the rationalist writing.  If you can back up what you are saying than you are correct, but you are having God take the back seat. So what is the right way?

Franklin, Benjamin. "from The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin." Comp. Jeffrey D. Wilhelm, Ph.D. and Douglas Fisher, Ph.D. Glencoe Literature. American Literature ed. Columbus: McGraw-Hill Companies, 2009. 104-108. Print.

Rowlandson, Mary. "A Narrative of Captivity and Restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson." Comp. Jeffrey D. Wilhelm, Ph.D. and Douglas Fisher, Ph.D. Glencoe Literature. American Literature ed. Columbus: McGraw-Hill Companies, 2009. 82-85. Print.

Bradford, William. "from of Plymouth Plantation." Comp. Jeffrey D. Wilhelm, Ph.D. and Douglas Fisher, Ph.D. Glencoe Literature. American Literature ed. Columbus: McGraw-Hill Companies, 2009. 15, 62-67. Print.

Thomas Paine

Thomas Paine had every right to be upset at the English for imposing their taxes on them.  The American colonies were going on with their lives and the English were not bothering them.  The English pretty much just ignored them, which right or wrong is what they did.  So when England began to lose more and more money, they began to in a way panic and went out and tried to find ways to make money.  The easiest way to make money, although you can not do it without argument, is to make people give you their money.  It does not require as much work as many other ways do, in trying to get money.  So what do the English do?  They taxed the American colonies, in order to get their money back.  I am sure nobody in the colonies would be very happy with that.  Here the English do not really treat you with much respect, and they ignore you.  They do not interact whatsoever with you, but then all of the sudden they come and tax you.  It is definitely a rude thing to do, looking from the colonies perspective.  It is kind of like a person who never talks to you and is always somewhat rude to you.  They think they are so much above you that it will hurt their reputation to interact with you.  So they never talk to you, but than one day, they decide to come up and tell you to help them with their homework.  They are not asking you, they are making you help.  Although you may be mad, most people are going to go along (angrily) with what they said, and this is kind of like what happened with the English and the colonies.  Thomas Paine agreed that they had to do something and they "lay their shoulders to the wheel... when so great an object is at stake" (Paine 136).  It goes along with the rationalist period because, you need to stand up for what you believe in and what is right.  Paine was not going to let the English walk all over them so he did something about it.
I think that Paine was not writing to a specific group.  I think he was writing to anybody that could get ahold of what he had written. He wanted to show people that what the English were doing was not right, and by writing this, he could not only get to the people on his side, but also to the people who were unsure or on the other side of what Paine believed.  He was trying to write this to change the other sides view, and to show them that they must fight for what they believe is true.  I believe that Paine did an excellent job in writing this, because he used a rationalist way of writing.  He told them what was wrong with evidence and than said what they should do to solve the situation going on between the two sides.

Paine, Thomas. "The Crisis, No. 1." Comp. Jeffrey D. Wilhelm, Ph.D. and Douglas Fisher, Ph.D. Glencoe Literature. American Literature ed. Columbus: McGraw-Hill Companies, 2009. 132-136. Print.

Journal 12

This is kind of an open ended question, because I do not really know what the rules are implying to.  I am just going to say rules that I think should be in my house, applying to me.  The "right" rules are that each member of our family must respect, support, and love one another.  We must be there for one another when we have our ups and downs.  I am kind of struggling just because our family does not necessarily have rules, we just know between right and wrong.  "Wrongs" would be that there is to be no anger that lingers between one another.  A family will have times where they are not happy with each other, but we have to do our best to work past those times.  There is to be no causing, smoking, or drinking at any times (unless you are older than twenty one to drink). 
Those were the rules for my family, but now I am going to make a few rules applying to everybody in the world.  I would make a rule that there is to be no war.  There are better ways to settle disputes, than to go to war.  Each person should be treated equally no matter what age, color, religion, or wealth status.  I would make a rule that every person has to have a job.  I do not care how hard this would be to imply, but if you are (twenty one or older) you must have a job.  Work somewhere and do something to make money.  I hate seeing homeless people on the side of the streets just because they do not have money. Go somewhere and apply.  Keep applying until someone finally accepts you, because there are plenty of jobs out there, you just have to get up off your feet and find it.  I thought this was kind of hard to do because, I am fine with a lot of the rules that are in place now, in my life.

Journal 11

The one aphorism that I remember and I hear most frequently is do not count your eggs before they hatch.  I really like this, because it is so true.  I hear people all the time say things that will happen and then they never do.  I like to think of this in sports terms.  This year the cardinals were ten and a half games out of the playoffs with less than a month left.  Braves fans were guaranteeing a playoff berth and most cardinal fans were saying goodbye to the season.  There was a month left, but they were so far out of the playoffs you would have been crazy to think anything was going to happen.  The cardinals came back and made the playoffs.  This is an example of not counting your blessings until they have completely finished.  Most people don't really go by this rule because everybody thinks of either the best or the worst.  They think that if it is almost over than it is over, and it is just human nature to do that, but you should think things through and wait until it actually happens, before you say anything.
I hear my mom say it all the time to me and I never listen to her because who cares, I am going to think what I think will happen.  I think that something you can do if this saying implies to you and something that you are working on is to work even harder at it.  Work hard so that it does come true and than you can actually say something because it is finished.  It is like if you have an A in a class, you can not do anything about it and risk losing it, or guarantee an A by working harder and learning more about something.  It is something that every person in the world should go by, but not enough people do.  Work hard and do not think things will happen before they actually do.

Declaration of Independence

With this website that shows us what is acceptable and unnacceptable in a story, it shows us how we should write our stories.  It gives us ideas as to why we should not give somebody a negative name calling.  It does not help and there are a lot of helpfultips in this website.  Definitely the easiest topic that should not go into writings is name calling.  It is not the you are stupid, but it gives somebody a negative name that does not help the story. ", "He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation, and tyranny already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation" (Jefferson 124).  He is calling the king a tyrant, which is definitely not helping him with what he is trying to get acrossed. He is not showing the proper respect to the king, and is in a way saying that he himself, would make a much better king.  I understand why he is saying what he said though, because he was frustrated and anytime you get angry at somebody or something, you have a tendency to express your feelings about it.  We all have done it, and it is human nature of us to do it, but when you are trying to prove a point, it is not the wisest thing to say.  Another technique that should not have been used was the bandwagon technique.   "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..." (Jefferson 122).  If all men are created equal than why do they keep acting as if the king is nothing.  Sure he is the king, and you would think that if he was not to be treated equally, he would be treated better than everybody else, but he is being called names.  Not only was it not true in this case, but it really has never been true.  Here is why. No matter when you look back on the world, you will find many people who were treated like garbage.  There are many, but the first group were the Jews during the Holocaust.  They were treated awfully, and sure it may just pertain to the U.S. but it is a rule that should be conducted throughout the world.  The next group is the African Americans when they were slaves for white people.  They were whipped and had no rights, but you still mean to say that they were treated equally, I do not think so.  Even today, people are not treated equally.  We look at people and either think they are poor middle class or rich.  If they are poor, most people do not like them.  Do not ask me why, but this seems to be the case a lot of the times.

Jefferson, Thomas. "Declaration of Independence." Comp. Jeffrey D. Wilhelm, Ph.D. and Douglas Fisher, Ph.D. Glencoe Literature. American Literature ed. Columbus: McGraw-Hill Companies, 2009. 122-124. Print.

"Recognizing Propaganda Techniques and Errors of Faulty Logic." Cuesta College. 06 Mar. 2011. Web. 3 Oct. 2011

Patrick Henry

Here is my blog about Patrick Henry.  Sorry that it is a little late.
Patrick Henry gives a very passionate speech as to what he thinks should happen with his people.  He gets into a lot of detail as to why he thinks what he thinks is right.  I believe that he is true in what he is saying because he does give a lot of data and facts to back up his ideas.  It is like what we have been talking about in class, if you can back up what you believe to be true than your statements or beliefs are true.  He goes on a long speech as to why they should go to war.  He says what they have done that has not worked and then says that they must fight. "Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free-- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!" (Henry 119).  He states they have done everything possible and it is still not workin so the only thing left for them to do is to go to war.  Some people may not agree with what he is saying, but he tells them cleary why they should, and that God has left them. "
Deism is not a specific religion but rather a particular perspective on the nature of God. Deists believe that a creator god does exist, but that after the motions of the universe were set in place he retreated, having no further interaction with the created universe or the beings within it. As such, there are a variety of common religious beliefs that deists do not accept. Because the deist god is entirely removed from involvement, he has neither need nor want of worship. Indeed, deists commonly hold that God does not even care if humanity believes in him." (Beyer).  I do not agree with what they believe.  Why would a God create such an amazing world and then not care what happens. To me it does not make any sense.

Beyer, Catherine. "Deism - What Is Deism? - Beliefs of Deists." Alternative Religions. Web. 03 Oct. 2011. http://altreligion.about.com/od/alternativereligionsaz/p/Deism.htm.

Henry, Patrick. "Speech to the Second Virginia Convention". Comp. Jeffrey D. Wilhelm, Ph.D. and Douglas Fisher, Ph.D. Glencoe Literature. American Literature ed. Columbus: McGraw-Hill Companies, 2009. 116-119. Print.