How to write an essay, with sample essays and subjects for essays (1920) by William Trego Webb

How to write an essay with sample essays and subjects for essays
New and enl. ed.
by W. T. Webb.
Published 1920 by G. Routledge & Sons, limited, New York, E.P. Dutton & co. in London .
Written in English.

ID Numbers
Open Library
OL6635244M
LC Control Number
21010558
OCLC
2395772
Internet Archive
cu31924014450922
Classifications
Library of Congress
PE1471 .W4 1920
The Physical Object
Pagination
vii, 224 p.
Number of pages
224

Source: http://www.archive.org/download/cu31924014450922/cu31924014450922.pdf

BY

W. T. WEBB. M.A,

Some time Professor of English , Presidency
College, Calcutta ; Co- Author of ” A Guide to the Study

OF English.”

New and Enlarged Edition

London :

George Routledge& Sons, Limited

New York : E. P. Dutton & Co.

1920
All Rights Reserved

PREFACE

In all Examinations, whether in England or in India, the’ Essay
is more and more being employed as a test of the ability of
candidates to write clear, simple, and correct English. Thus we
find, ” Albcandidates will be expected to attempt the Essay, to
which special importance is attached.”‘ To help the candidate
to pass this test with some measure of success is the object of
this book. ‘ -’

The eighty ” Sample Essays ” do not aim at either originality
or high literary merit ; they are meant ta tepresent the kind of
Essay that a might be expected to write in an Examin-
ation. ‘ And since necessarily no two Avriters are altogether alike
in their mode of expressing themselves, the style ot these essays
has been to some extent diversified. They also vary in length,
because in some examinations short, in others longer. Essays are
required of the cafididates.

“The chapter on spelling and Punctuation has for convenience
been placed last ; but a knowledge of these subjects is of course
one of the first essentials to successful composition.

Of the 1320 ” Subjects for Essays,” many have been set in
various Public Examinations.

I. JUniversity of London Regulations for the Matriculation Examina-
tion io English.

CONTENTS

CHAPTER I                                            Page

Subjects and outlines…………………………………………… ………… i

CHAPTER II

Structure………………………………………………………… ……… 17

CHAPTER III

Diction…………………………………………………………… …….. 34

CHAPTER IV

Spelling and Punctuation ; Summary          .      .                                       57

SAMPLE ESSAYS

I. NARRATIVE ESSAYS

  1. The Discovery of America by Columbus       .      .                     67
  2. A Collision at Sea       ……       69
  3. The Black Hole of Calcutta .   ‘  .      .      .      .                              71
  4. The Elephant’s Revenge        ~~………………………… …….. 72
  5. The Story of Ulysses and the Cyclopses …     74
  6. Two Stories illustrating Reasoning Power in Animals               76
  7. A Railway Accident    ……       78

8.  _ The Story of William Tell…………………………………          79

9.    The Battle of Waterloo…………………………………… ……… 81

  1. A Fire…………………………………………………………          82
  2. -Queen Philippa and the Burghers of Calais    .      .                   84
  3. Two Anecdotes of Great Men      ….        86
  4. Sir Henry Lawrence    .      .      T     .      .      .                                88
  5. A Mountain Climb………………………………………….. …….. 89
  6. Ari-Adventure with a Tiger         .      .      .      .                              91
  7. Sheridan          ^…………………………………………….          92
  8. The Battle of Assaye……………………………………….. …….. 93
  9. v An Adventure with a Cobra……………………………… …….. 95
  1. Nelson……………………………………………………….          96
  2. The Emperor and the Poet         ….        98

vi                               *               contents

Page

II.   DESCRIPTIVE ESSAYS

21.    A Snow Mountain…………………………………… -99

  1. Peru         …………………………………………….                       100
  2. The Alligator     .      .             .      .      .     ~.                                    102

24.   London     . \ -……………………………………………… ……….. i°3

35.    The Umbrella……………………………………………….             i°5

e6.   The British Museum……………………………………….           106

17.   A Boar-hunt…………………………………………………           108

  1. The Banyan Tree…………………………………………. ……….. no
  2. Ceylon      ……..        no
  1. The Mpsquito………………………………………………             “3
  2. Coal………………………………………….. ‘ .                              H5
  3. The Ape……………………………………………..       •           116 „
  4. Lakes…………………………………………………                      118
  5. The Camel………………………………………….. \                  120
  6. A StormW Sea…………………………………….. C                  121
  7. The Horse…………………………………………………. ……… 123
  8. The Human Hand      .      .      .      • /    “      .125
  9. The Peacock      …….      127
  10. The Climate of India   ……     128
  11. The Bamboo     …….       130

III.   REFLECTIVE ESSAYS

  1. Arbitration       .      :…………………………………….. …….. 132
  2. Law and Order are the Basis of-all True Freedom  .              133
  3. Gambling  .      .      .      .      .      .      .                                             135
  4. Cleanliness .      .      .      .      .      .      .      .                                    136
  5. Letter-writing………………………………………………          138
  6. Public Speaking .      .      .      .      .      .      .                                   139
  7. The Liberty of the Press…………………………………..          141
  8. Ambition     -    .      .      .      .      .      .      .                                     143
  9. Hero-worship     …….    144
  10. ” Example is better than Precept”      .    r.      .                          146
  11. The Right Use of Money                   .      .      .                              147

contents                                                Vil

Page

52.     Good Manners    .      .      . ^   .      .      .      .     149

53.  % Slavery                                                   .      .      .      .151

  1. Procrastination  …….    153
  2. The Influence of Good Books       .      .      .      .     154
  3. War .      .                            .      .’     . -    .      .      .156
  4. The True End of Education .      .      .   • .      .     158
  5. Resentment       …….     159

59.        Look before you Leaprt .                      ‘ .      .      .     160

60.    The Value in Life of a Sense of Humour       .      .     161

k-                     IV. EXPOSITORY ESSAYS

61.  fjltiotography ,   .                           .                               .      .164

  1. Air   ………………………………………………………….         165
  2. The Historical Novel   ……     167
  3. Strikes and Boycotting       …..       169
  4. The House of Commons      …..     171
  5. The Postal System     .      .      .      .      .      .                                 172
  6. Ancient and Modern Warfare      .      .      .      .                         175
  7. The Census       . 1…………………………………………..         177
  8. Direct and Indirect Taxation       .      .      .      .                          178
  9. Aircraft            .      .      .      .      .      .      .                                      180
  10. The Use Man has made of the Forces of Nature     .              182
  11. Cycling…………………………………………       .      .183
  12. The Character of Hamlet     .      .             .      .                           186
  13. Travelling……………………………………………………        188
  14. The Electric Telegraph…………………………………….        190
  15. Arctic Exploration      ……      192

” 77.  The Tramway    …….      194

  1. The Poetry of Tennyson      •   \ •   _ •      •      •     196
  2. The Game of Fo’otball        ..      .      .      .198

80. ^yolcanoes                .      .                                   .      .      .    200

Subjects for Essays, with Notes . . . 203
Index      .      .      .                                                             .      .    225

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Full Text Script of Act I Macbeth The play by William Shakespeare

Introduction
This section contains the script of Act I of Macbeth the play by William . The enduring works of William feature many famous and well loved characters. Make a note of any unusual words that you encounter whilst reading the script of Macbeth and check their definition in the Dictionary The script of Macbeth is extremely long. To reduce the time to load the script of the play, and for ease in accessing specific sections of the script, we have separated the text of Macbeth into Acts. Please click Macbeth Script to access further Acts.

Script / Text of Act I Macbeth

ACT I
SCENE I. A desert place.

Thunder and lightning. Enter three Witches
First Witch
When shall we three meet again
In thunder, lightning, or in rain?

Second Witch
When the hurlyburly’s done,
When the battle’s lost and won.

Third Witch
That will be ere the set of sun.

First Witch
Where the place?

Second Witch
Upon the heath.

Third Witch
There to meet with Macbeth.

First Witch
I come, Graymalkin!

Second Witch
Paddock calls.

Third Witch
Anon.

ALL
Fair is foul, and foul is fair:
Hover through the fog and filthy air.

Exeunt

SCENE II. A camp near Forres.

Alarum within. Enter DUNCAN, MALCOLM, DONALBAIN, LENNOX, with Attendants, meeting a bleeding Sergeant
DUNCAN
What bloody man is that? He can report,
As seemeth by his plight, of the revolt
The newest state.

MALCOLM
This is the sergeant
Who like a good and hardy soldier fought
‘Gainst my captivity. Hail, brave friend!
Say to the king the knowledge of the broil
As thou didst leave it.

Sergeant
Doubtful it stood;
As two spent swimmers, that do cling together
And choke their art. The merciless Macdonwald–
Worthy to be a rebel, for to that
The multiplying villanies of nature
Do swarm upon him–from the western isles
Of kerns and gallowglasses is supplied;
And fortune, on his damned quarrel smiling,
Show’d like a rebel’s whore: but all’s too weak:
For brave Macbeth–well he deserves that name–
Disdaining fortune, with his brandish’d steel,
Which smoked with bloody execution,
Like valour’s minion carved out his passage
Till he faced the slave;
Which ne’er shook hands, nor bade farewell to him,
Till he unseam’d him from the nave to the chaps,
And fix’d his head upon our battlements.

DUNCAN
O valiant cousin! worthy gentleman!

Sergeant
As whence the sun ‘gins his reflection
Shipwrecking storms and direful thunders break,
So from that spring whence comfort seem’d to come
Discomfort swells. Mark, king of Scotland, mark:
No sooner justice had with valour arm’d
Compell’d these skipping kerns to trust their heels,
But the Norweyan lord surveying vantage,
With furbish’d arms and new supplies of men
Began a fresh assault.

DUNCAN
Dismay’d not this
Our captains, Macbeth and Banquo?

Sergeant
Yes;
As sparrows eagles, or the hare the lion.
If I say sooth, I must report they were
As cannons overcharged with double cracks, so they
Doubly redoubled strokes upon the foe:
Except they meant to bathe in reeking wounds,
Or memorise another Golgotha,
I cannot tell.
But I am faint, my gashes cry for help.

DUNCAN
So well thy words become thee as thy wounds;
They smack of honour both. Go get him surgeons.

Exit Sergeant, attended

Who comes here?

Enter ROSS

MALCOLM
The worthy thane of Ross.

LENNOX
What a haste looks through his eyes! So should he look
That seems to speak strange.

ROSS
God save the king!

DUNCAN
Whence camest thou, worthy thane?

ROSS
From Fife, great king;
Where the Norweyan banners flout the sky
And fan our people cold. Norway himself,
With terrible numbers,
Assisted by that most disloyal traitor
The thane of Cawdor, began a dismal conflict;
Till that Bellona’s bridegroom, lapp’d in proof,
Confronted him with self-comparisons,
Point against point rebellious, arm ‘gainst arm.
Curbing his lavish spirit: and, to conclude,
The victory fell on us.

DUNCAN
Great happiness!

ROSS
That now
Sweno, the Norways’ king, craves composition:
Nor would we deign him burial of his men
Till he disbursed at Saint Colme’s inch
Ten thousand dollars to our general use.

DUNCAN
No more that thane of Cawdor shall deceive
Our bosom interest: go pronounce his present death,
And with his former title greet Macbeth.

ROSS
I’ll see it done.

DUNCAN
What he hath lost noble Macbeth hath won.

Exeunt

SCENE III. A heath near Forres.

Thunder. Enter the three Witches
First Witch
Where hast thou been, sister?

Second Witch
Killing swine.

Third Witch
Sister, where thou?

First Witch
A sailor’s wife had chestnuts in her lap,
And munch’d, and munch’d, and munch’d:–
‘Give me,’ quoth I:
‘Aroint thee, witch!’ the rump-fed ronyon cries.
Her husband’s to Aleppo gone, master o’ the Tiger:
But in a sieve I’ll thither sail,
And, like a rat without a tail,
I’ll do, I’ll do, and I’ll do.

Second Witch
I’ll give thee a wind.

First Witch
Thou’rt kind.

Third Witch
And I another.

First Witch
I myself have all the other,
And the very ports they blow,
All the quarters that they know
I’ the shipman’s card.
I will drain him dry as hay:
Sleep shall neither night nor day
Hang upon his pent-house lid;
He shall live a man forbid:
Weary se’nnights nine times nine
Shall he dwindle, peak and pine:
Though his bark cannot be lost,
Yet it shall be tempest-tost.
Look what I have.

Second Witch
Show me, show me.

First Witch
Here I have a pilot’s thumb,
Wreck’d as homeward he did come.

Drum within

Third Witch
A drum, a drum!
Macbeth doth come.

ALL
The weird sisters, hand in hand,
Posters of the sea and land,
Thus do go about, about:
Thrice to thine and thrice to mine
And thrice again, to make up nine.
Peace! the charm’s wound up.

Enter MACBETH and BANQUO

MACBETH
So foul and fair a day I have not seen.

BANQUO
How far is’t call’d to Forres? What are these
So wither’d and so wild in their attire,
That look not like the inhabitants o’ the earth,
And yet are on’t? Live you? or are you aught
That man may question? You seem to understand me,
By each at once her chappy finger laying
Upon her skinny lips: you should be women,
And yet your beards forbid me to interpret
That you are so.

MACBETH
Speak, if you can: what are you?

First Witch
All hail, Macbeth! hail to thee, thane of Glamis!

Second Witch
All hail, Macbeth, hail to thee, thane of Cawdor!

Third Witch
All hail, Macbeth, thou shalt be king hereafter!

BANQUO
Good sir, why do you start; and seem to fear
that do sound so fair? I’ the name of truth,
Are ye fantastical, or that indeed
Which outwardly ye show? My noble partner
You greet with present grace and great prediction
Of noble having and of royal hope,
That he seems rapt withal: to me you speak not.
If you can look into the seeds of time,
And say which grain will grow and which will not,
Speak then to me, who neither beg nor fear
Your favours nor your hate.

First Witch
Hail!

Second Witch
Hail!

Third Witch
Hail!

First Witch
Lesser than Macbeth, and greater.

Second Witch
Not so happy, yet much happier.

Third Witch
Thou shalt get kings, though thou be none:
So all hail, Macbeth and Banquo!

First Witch
Banquo and Macbeth, all hail!

MACBETH
Stay, you imperfect speakers, tell me more:
By Sinel’s death I know I am thane of Glamis;
But how of Cawdor? the thane of Cawdor lives,
A prosperous gentleman; and to be king
Stands not within the prospect of belief,
No more than to be Cawdor. Say from whence
You owe this strange intelligence? or why
Upon this blasted heath you stop our way
With such prophetic greeting? Speak, I charge you.

Witches vanish

BANQUO
The earth hath bubbles, as the water has,
And these are of them. Whither are they vanish’d?

MACBETH
Into the air; and what seem’d corporal melted
As breath into the wind. Would they had stay’d!

BANQUO
Were such here as we do speak about?
Or have we eaten on the insane root
That takes the reason prisoner?

MACBETH
Your shall be kings.

BANQUO
You shall be king.

MACBETH
And thane of Cawdor too: went it not so?

BANQUO
To the selfsame tune and words. Who’s here?

Enter ROSS and ANGUS

ROSS
The king hath happily received, Macbeth,
The news of thy success; and when he reads
Thy personal venture in the rebels’ fight,
His wonders and his praises do contend
Which should be thine or his: silenced with that,
In viewing o’er the rest o’ the selfsame day,
He finds thee in the stout Norweyan ranks,
Nothing afeard of what thyself didst make,
Strange images of death. As thick as hail
Came with ; and every one did bear
Thy praises in his kingdom’s great defence,
And pour’d them down before him.

ANGUS
We are sent
To give thee from our royal master thanks;
Only to herald thee into his sight,
Not pay thee.

ROSS
And, for an earnest of a greater honour,
He bade me, from him, call thee thane of Cawdor:
In which addition, hail, most worthy thane!
For it is thine.

BANQUO
What, can the devil speak true?

MACBETH
The thane of Cawdor lives: why do you dress me
In borrow’d robes?

ANGUS
Who was the thane lives yet;
But under heavy judgment bears that life
Which he deserves to lose. Whether he was combined
With those of Norway, or did line the rebel
With hidden help and vantage, or that with both
He labour’d in his country’s wreck, I know not;
But treasons capital, confess’d and proved,
Have overthrown him.

MACBETH
[Aside] Glamis, and thane of Cawdor!
The greatest is behind.

To ROSS and ANGUS

Thanks for your pains.

To BANQUO

Do you not hope your shall be kings,
When those that gave the thane of Cawdor to me
Promised no less to them?

BANQUO
That trusted home
Might yet enkindle you unto the crown,
Besides the thane of Cawdor. But ’tis strange:
And oftentimes, to win us to our harm,
The instruments of darkness tell us truths,
Win us with honest trifles, to betray’s
In deepest consequence.
Cousins, a word, I pray you.

MACBETH
[Aside] Two truths are told,
As happy prologues to the swelling act
Of the imperial theme.–I thank you, gentlemen.

Aside

Cannot be ill, cannot be good: if ill,
Why hath it given me earnest of success,
Commencing in a truth? I am thane of Cawdor:
If good, why do I yield to that suggestion
Whose horrid image doth unfix my hair
And make my seated heart knock at my ribs,
Against the use of nature? Present fears
Are less than horrible imaginings:
My thought, whose murder yet is but fantastical,
Shakes so my single state of man that function
Is smother’d in surmise, and nothing is
But what is not.

BANQUO
Look, how our partner’s rapt.

MACBETH
[Aside] If chance will have me king, why, chance may crown me,
Without my stir.

BANQUO
New horrors come upon him,
Like our strange garments, cleave not to their mould
But with the aid of use.

MACBETH
[Aside] Come what come may,
Time and the hour runs through the roughest day.

BANQUO
Worthy Macbeth, we stay upon your leisure.

MACBETH
Give me your favour: my dull brain was wrought
With forgotten. Kind gentlemen, your pains
Are register’d where every day I turn
The leaf to read them. Let us toward the king.
Think upon what hath chanced, and, at more time,
The interim having weigh’d it, let us speak
Our free hearts each to other.

BANQUO
Very gladly.

MACBETH
Till then, enough. Come, friends.

Exeunt

SCENE IV. Forres. The palace.

Flourish. Enter DUNCAN, MALCOLM, DONALBAIN, LENNOX, and Attendants
DUNCAN
Is execution done on Cawdor? Are not
Those in commission yet return’d?

MALCOLM
My liege,
They are not yet come back. But I have spoke
With one that saw him die: who did report
That very frankly he confess’d his treasons,
Implored your highness’ pardon and set forth
A deep repentance: nothing in his life
Became him like the leaving it; he died
As one that had been studied in his death
To throw away the dearest he owed,
As ’twere a careless trifle.

DUNCAN
There’s no art
To find the ’s construction in the face:
He was a gentleman on whom I built
An absolute trust.

Enter MACBETH, BANQUO, ROSS, and ANGUS

O worthiest cousin!
The sin of my ingratitude even now
Was heavy on me: thou art so far before
That swiftest wing of recompense is slow
To overtake thee. Would thou hadst less deserved,
That the proportion both of thanks and payment
Might have been mine! only I have left to say,
More is thy due than more than all can pay.

MACBETH
The service and the loyalty I owe,
In doing it, pays itself. Your highness’ part
Is to receive our duties; and our duties
Are to your throne and state and servants,
Which do but what they should, by doing every
Safe toward your love and honour.

DUNCAN
Welcome hither:
I have begun to plant thee, and will labour
To make thee full of growing. Noble Banquo,
That hast no less deserved, nor must be known
No less to have done so, let me enfold thee
And hold thee to my heart.

BANQUO
There if I grow,
The harvest is your own.

DUNCAN
My plenteous joys,
Wanton in fulness, seek to hide themselves
In drops of sorrow. Sons, kinsmen, thanes,
And you whose places are the nearest, know
We will establish our estate upon
Our eldest, Malcolm, whom we name hereafter
The Prince of Cumberland; which honour must
Not unaccompanied invest him only,
But signs of nobleness, like stars, shall shine
On all deservers. From hence to Inverness,
And bind us further to you.

MACBETH
The rest is labour, which is not used for you:
I’ll be myself the harbinger and make joyful
The hearing of my wife with your approach;
So humbly take my leave.

DUNCAN
My worthy Cawdor!

MACBETH
[Aside] The Prince of Cumberland! that is a step
On which I must fall down, or else o’erleap,
For in my way it lies. Stars, hide your fires;
Let not light see my black and deep desires:
The eye wink at the hand; yet let that be,
Which the eye fears, when it is done, to see.

Exit

DUNCAN
True, worthy Banquo; he is full so valiant,
And in his commendations I am fed;
It is a banquet to me. Let’s after him,
Whose care is gone before to bid us welcome:
It is a peerless kinsman.

Flourish. Exeunt

SCENE V. Inverness. Macbeth’s castle.

Enter LADY MACBETH, reading a letter
LADY MACBETH
‘They met me in the day of success: and I have
learned by the perfectest report, they have more in
them than mortal knowledge. When I burned in desire
to question them further, they made themselves air,
into which they vanished. Whiles I stood rapt in
the wonder of it, came missives from the king, who
all-hailed me ‘Thane of Cawdor;’ by which title,
before, these weird sisters saluted me, and referred
me to the coming on of time, with ‘Hail, king that
shalt be!’ This have I thought good to deliver
thee, my dearest partner of greatness, that thou
mightst not lose the dues of rejoicing, by being
ignorant of what greatness is promised thee. Lay it
to thy heart, and farewell.’
Glamis thou art, and Cawdor; and shalt be
What thou art promised: yet do I fear thy nature;
It is too full o’ the milk of human kindness
To catch the nearest way: thou wouldst be great;
Art not without ambition, but without
The illness should attend it: what thou wouldst highly,
That wouldst thou holily; wouldst not play false,
And yet wouldst wrongly win: thou’ldst have, great Glamis,
That which cries ‘Thus thou must do, if thou have it;
And that which rather thou dost fear to do
Than wishest should be undone.’ Hie thee hither,
That I may pour my spirits in thine ear;
And chastise with the valour of my tongue
All that impedes thee from the golden round,
Which fate and metaphysical aid doth seem
To have thee crown’d withal.

Enter a Messenger

What is your tidings?

Messenger
The king comes here to-night.

LADY MACBETH
Thou’rt mad to say it:
Is not thy master with him? who, were’t so,
Would have inform’d for preparation.

Messenger
So please you, it is true: our thane is coming:
One of my fellows had the speed of him,
Who, almost dead for breath, had scarcely more
Than would make up his message.

LADY MACBETH
Give him tending;
He brings great news.

Exit Messenger

The raven himself is hoarse
That croaks the fatal entrance of Duncan
Under my battlements. Come, you spirits
That tend on mortal thoughts, unsex me here,
And fill me from the crown to the toe top-full
Of direst cruelty! make thick my blood;
Stop up the access and passage to remorse,
That no compunctious visitings of nature
Shake my fell purpose, nor keep peace between
The effect and it! Come to my woman’s breasts,
And take my milk for gall, you murdering ministers,
Wherever in your sightless substances
You wait on nature’s mischief! Come, thick night,
And pall thee in the dunnest smoke of hell,
That my keen knife see not the wound it makes,
Nor heaven peep through the blanket of the dark,
To cry ‘Hold, hold!’

Enter MACBETH

Great Glamis! worthy Cawdor!
Greater than both, by the all-hail hereafter!
Thy letters have transported me beyond
This ignorant present, and I feel now
The future in the instant.

MACBETH
My dearest love,
Duncan comes here to-night.

LADY MACBETH
And when goes hence?

MACBETH
To-morrow, as he purposes.

LADY MACBETH
O, never
Shall sun that morrow see!
Your face, my thane, is as a book where men
May read strange matters. To beguile the time,
Look like the time; bear welcome in your eye,
Your hand, your tongue: look like the innocent flower,
But be the serpent under’t. He that’s coming
Must be provided for: and you shall put
This night’s great business into my dispatch;
Which shall to all our nights and days to come
Give solely sovereign sway and masterdom.

MACBETH
We will speak further.

LADY MACBETH
Only look up clear;
To alter favour ever is to fear:
Leave all the rest to me.

Exeunt

SCENE VI. Before Macbeth’s castle.

Hautboys and torches. Enter DUNCAN, MALCOLM, DONALBAIN, BANQUO, LENNOX, MACDUFF, ROSS, ANGUS, and Attendants
DUNCAN
This castle hath a pleasant seat; the air
Nimbly and sweetly recommends itself
Unto our gentle senses.

BANQUO
This guest of summer,
The temple-haunting martlet, does approve,
By his loved mansionry, that the heaven’s breath
Smells wooingly here: no jutty, frieze,
Buttress, nor coign of vantage, but this bird
Hath made his pendent bed and procreant cradle:
Where they most breed and haunt, I have observed,
The air is delicate.

Enter LADY MACBETH

DUNCAN
See, see, our honour’d hostess!
The love that follows us sometime is our trouble,
Which still we thank as love. Herein I teach you
How you shall bid God ‘ild us for your pains,
And thank us for your trouble.

LADY MACBETH
All our service
In every point twice done and then done double
Were poor and single business to contend
Against those honours deep and broad wherewith
Your majesty loads our house: for those of old,
And the late dignities heap’d up to them,
We rest your hermits.

DUNCAN
Where’s the thane of Cawdor?
We coursed him at the heels, and had a purpose
To be his purveyor: but he rides well;
And his great love, sharp as his spur, hath holp him
To his home before us. Fair and noble hostess,
We are your guest to-night.

LADY MACBETH
Your servants ever
Have theirs, themselves and what is theirs, in compt,
To make their audit at your highness’ pleasure,
Still to return your own.

DUNCAN
Give me your hand;
Conduct me to mine host: we love him highly,
And shall continue our graces towards him.
By your leave, hostess.

Exeunt

SCENE VII. Macbeth’s castle.

Hautboys and torches. Enter a Sewer, and divers Servants with dishes and service, and pass over the stage. Then enter MACBETH
MACBETH
If it were done when ’tis done, then ’twere well
It were done quickly: if the assassination
Could trammel up the consequence, and catch
With his surcease success; that but this blow
Might be the be-all and the end-all here,
But here, upon this bank and shoal of time,
We’ld jump the life to come. But in these cases
We still have judgment here; that we but teach
Bloody instructions, which, being taught, return
To plague the inventor: this even-handed justice
Commends the ingredients of our poison’d chalice
To our own lips. He’s here in double trust;
First, as I am his kinsman and his subject,
Strong both against the deed; then, as his host,
Who should against his murderer shut the door,
Not bear the knife myself. Besides, this Duncan
Hath borne his faculties so meek, hath been
So clear in his great office, that his virtues
Will plead like angels, trumpet-tongued, against
The deep damnation of his taking-off;
And pity, like a naked new-born babe,
Striding the blast, or heaven’s cherubim, horsed
Upon the sightless couriers of the air,
Shall blow the horrid deed in every eye,
That tears shall drown the wind. I have no spur
To prick the sides of my intent, but only
Vaulting ambition, which o’erleaps itself
And falls on the other.

Enter LADY MACBETH

How now! what news?

LADY MACBETH
He has almost supp’d: why have you left the chamber?

MACBETH
Hath he ask’d for me?

LADY MACBETH
Know you not he has?

MACBETH
We will proceed no further in this business:
He hath honour’d me of late; and I have bought
Golden opinions from all sorts of people,
Which would be worn now in their newest gloss,
Not cast aside so soon.

LADY MACBETH
Was the hope drunk
Wherein you dress’d yourself? hath it slept since?
And wakes it now, to look so green and pale
At what it did so freely? From this time
Such I account thy love. Art thou afeard
To be the same in thine own act and valour
As thou art in desire? Wouldst thou have that
Which thou esteem’st the ornament of life,
And live a coward in thine own esteem,
Letting ‘I dare not’ wait upon ‘I would,’
Like the poor cat i’ the adage?

MACBETH
Prithee, peace:
I dare do all that may become a man;
Who dares do more is none.

LADY MACBETH
What beast was’t, then,
That made you break this enterprise to me?
When you durst do it, then you were a man;
And, to be more than what you were, you would
Be so much more the man. Nor time nor place
Did then adhere, and yet you would make both:
They have made themselves, and that their fitness now
Does unmake you. I have given suck, and know
How tender ’tis to love the babe that milks me:
I would, while it was smiling in my face,
Have pluck’d my nipple from his boneless gums,
And dash’d the brains out, had I so sworn as you
Have done to this.

MACBETH
If we should fail?

LADY MACBETH
We fail!
But screw your courage to the sticking-place,
And we’ll not fail. When Duncan is asleep–
Whereto the rather shall his day’s hard journey
Soundly invite him–his two chamberlains
Will I with wine and wassail so convince
That memory, the warder of the brain,
Shall be a fume, and the receipt of reason
A limbeck only: when in swinish sleep
Their drenched natures lie as in a death,
What cannot you and I perform upon
The unguarded Duncan? what not put upon
His spongy officers, who shall bear the guilt
Of our great quell?

MACBETH
Bring forth men- only;
For thy undaunted mettle should compose
Nothing but males. Will it not be received,
When we have mark’d with blood those sleepy two
Of his own chamber and used their very daggers,
That they have done’t?

LADY MACBETH
Who dares receive it other,
As we shall make our griefs and clamour roar
Upon his death?

MACBETH
I am settled, and bend up
Each corporal agent to this terrible feat.
Away, and mock the time with fairest show:
False face must hide what the false heart doth know.

ExeuntPersonae

Script of Act I Macbeth
a famous play by
William

http://www.william-.info/act1-script-text-macbeth.htm

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Recognition and Reversal in Antony and Cleopatra, by Sylvan Barnet

Recognition and Reversal in Antony and Cleopatra
Sylvan Barnet
Quarterly, Vol. 8, No. 3 (Summer, 1957), pp. 331-334
(article consists of 4 pages)

Recognition and Reversal in Antony and Cleopatra

SYLVAN BARNET

ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA has not had an impressive stage , nor has critical opinion, viewed as a whole, given it a distinguished place among ’s dramas. The tragedy’s lack of “classical” structure—the abundance of scenes separates it both from plays as immature as Romeo and Juliet and as mature as King Lear—probably caused critics to neglect it in favor of those dramas which are more obviously “Aristotelian”. Mark Van Doren suggests that Antony and Cleopatra has nothing that Aristotle would have called a plot,1 but whatever the truth of his judgment, his comment reflects the critical view dominant until a few decades ago. So too, Bonamy Dobree, usually a careful of , suggested in 1929 that Shake­speare had not genuinely dramatized North’s Plutarch but had merely turned narrative into dialogue. “To read North, and then to read Antony and Cleo­patra, is to be amazed at how little brought his creative activity to bear on the structure of the play. Similarly, in one character only, that of Enobarbus, has he set his imagination to work; the rest are as he found them in North.”2 Mr. Dobree has forgotten the unforgettable clown, scarcely de­scribed by North, who brings “the pretty worm of Nilus”; and in the remainder of his essay he makes no mention of Enobarbus* contribution to the plot, as though enlarged on North for no purpose other than to provide an actor with an abundance of words. More recent critics, however, have tended to redress the balance, and now the poetry—or rather the imagery—has been worshipped both sides of idolatry.

Chiefly under the influence of G. Wilson Knight, several perceptive writers have given the drama an exalted place in their minds and quarterlies. S. L. Bethcll, for example, finds the drama a success because of its poetry rather than its drama. “The immense superiority of Antony and Cleopatra over Dryden’s All for Love is quite clearly a superiority in poetry. Indeed, strip the poetry from a play of , and what is left but a rather haphazard story about a set of vaguely outlined and incredibly stagey characters?”3 In point of fact, of course, a great deal would be left even if one were foolish enough to strip away the poetry (I assume Mr. Bethel! means to substitute our words for Shake­speare’s), and part of the beauty of the play is due to the careful arrangement of episodes. The contrast, for example, between the first and second scenes is

1 (New York, 1939), p. 273.

* Restoration Tragedy (Oxford, 1929), p. 70.

* b the Popular Dramatic Tradition (London, 1944), p. 16.
Published by: Folger Shakespeare Library in association with George Washington University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2866993

Recognition and Reversal in Antony and Cleopatra, by Sylvan Barnet © 1957

©2000-2010 ITHAKA.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Aristotelian Science and Rhetoric in Transition: The Middle Ages and the Renaissance Author(s): William A. Wallace

In the High Middle Ages clear lines of demarcation were generally drawn between science and rhetoric. Science represented the summit of intellectual achieve-
ment. Different from the science of our day, with its accent on ex-
periment and measurement, medieval science aimed at a loftier
ideal: universal truths that are necessary and cannot be otherwise.
It sought knowledge that is certain and unrevisable, because cer-
tified through the causes that make be what they are. Such
causes, when uncovered, functioned as middle terms in a special
type of syllogism known as a demonstration. The canons govern-

1 Thomas Aquinas, for example, defined scientia as knowledge of something through its proper cause (Summa contra Gentiles, Bk. 2, chap. 94). In this he was merely epitomizing Aristotle’s characterization of “unqualified scientific knowl­edge” (episteme, translated into Latin as scientia), which reads as follows: “We sup­pose ourselves to possess unqualified scientific knowledge of a . . . when we think that we know the cause on which the fact depends, as the cause of that fact and no other, and, further, that the fact could not be other than it is” (Posterior Ana­lytics, 71b8-ll). For a summary explanation of what the definition entails and how the kind of knowledge it represents is related to modern science, see the article “Sci­ence (Scientia)” in the New Catholic Encyclopedia, ed. W. J. MacDonald et al., 15 vols. (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1967), 12:1190-1193.

2The term “demonstration” has a technical meaning in the Aristotelian tradi­tion, presupposing as it does the concept of scientia explained in the previous note. Its are explained in detail in another article in the New Catholic Ency­clopedia, that on “Demonstration,” 4:757-760.


ing this scientific syllogism were set forth in Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics, then regarded as the basic treatise on scientific meth­odology. Rhetoric (or rhetorica), on the other hand, was much the same as we understand it today. Rather than be concerned with necessary truths, its domain was contingent subject matters. Its three kinds of proof (logos, ethos, and pathos) moved an audience to prefer one opinion over another, but it drew the material for its dis­course from the general type of knowledge found in topoi or loci, employing these not in the demonstrative syllogism but in the less rigorous mode of enthymeme and example.

Intermediate between the two in the medieval scheme, and serving to enforce the clearcut distinction between science and rhetoric, came dialectics (or dialectica). Aristotelian dialectics is not to be confused with Plato’s dialectics, or even less with Hegel’s the­sis, antithesis, and synthesis. It is basically concerned, as is rheto­ric, with topoi, and not surprisingly its procedures are explained in Aristotle’s Topics and, more simply, in the De topicis differentiis of Boethius. Aristotelian dialectics could treat either necessary or contingent subject matters, and thus it shared common terrain with both science and rhetoric. But its distinguishing feature was that it used only logical principles, not proper causes as did sci­ence, and that it used these in the syllogism and induction, more formal modes of reasoning than rhetoric’s enthymeme and ex­ample. It did this to establish an opinion that was firm, while not excluding completely an opposing view. Dialectics thus shared with rhetoric its broadness of scope, its ability to deal with any sub­ject matter. It was also the ally of science in that it could aid in the discovery of causal principles on which a strict demonstration could be based, although without this discovery and on its own merits it attained only probable truth.

Whereas scholars in the Early Middle Ages were content with dialectics and its sic et non procedures, later to be refined into the scholastic disputation, those of the High Middle Ages were strongly attracted to the ideal of science found in the Posterior Ana­lytics, newly introduced into the Latin West at the end of the twelfth century. Recent studies of William of Auvergne, Robert Grosseteste, Roger Bacon, Albertus Magnus, and Thpmas Aquinas reveal how these investigators rediscovered the Analytics and ap­plied it methodically to uncovering the secrets of nature. All had confidence that truth and certitude could be attained using the Ar­istotelian canons, that they could arrive not merely at “knowledge of the fact” but also at “knowledge of the reasoned fact” once its causes were properly ascertained. This they believed even thoughthere were many matters—the heavenly bodies and the elements, for example—on which doubts not only could be, but actually were, expressed.

Because of Grosseteste’s and Bacon’s interest in light rays and their geometrical mode of propagation, mathematics exerted a strong attraction for these Oxford Aristotelians. Through the use of geometry, for instance, they gained certitude in their science of optics, much as do mathematical physicists in the present day. Albertus Magnus and his fellow Dominican Thomas Aquinas, on the other hand, concentrated more on the discovery of physical causes, a difficult undertaking because of the contingency that at­tends nature’s operations. Indeed, Albertus cites several times a statement of Ptolemy to the effect that naturalists always disagree over their science while mathematicians do not, implying that mathematics alone should lay claim to strict certitude. But by em­ploying the principle that nothing is so contingent that it does not involve some element of necessity, Aquinas explained how it is possible to have a true science of nature despite the contingency of its subject matter. In effect his method consists in formulating reasonable “suppositions” on which scientific syllogisms can be based, on which account the procedure came to be known as dem­onstration ex suppositione. A supposition is a kind of hypothesis, and so Aquinas’s procedure bears some similarity to the hypothetico-deductive method of modern science. It differs from the latter, however, in that it yields not probability but certitude, granted that this is based not on the absolute necessity found in mathematics but on the suppositional necessity found in the world of nature.

The doctrine on suppositional necessity and demonstration ex suppositione was not known to Averroes and seems not to have been part of the intellectual equipment of the Latin Averroists. It surely was not appreciated by the bishop of Paris, Etienne Tempier, who construed the natural philosophy of the Paris Aristotelians as a type of metaphysics that was incompatible with the Catholic faith. He struck forcibly at the alleged truth and certainty of many theses of the Averroists concerning man and the physical universe, some of which were also theses of Thomas Aquinas, in the Condemna­tions of 1270 and 1277. As a result of such condemnations, the Do­minicans came under a shadow first at Paris and then at Oxford, and their traditional rivals, the Franciscans, were able to challenge them on grounds of orthodoxy at both centers of learning.

Late Medieval Science

Let us take 1277, then, as the point of demarcation for the late Middle Ages. The characteristic note in philosophy and theology for that period, as found in two Franciscans, Scotus and Ockham, though in different ways, was the accent on will as opposed to intellect, which favored a type of voluntarism over the intellec-tualism that had hitherto prevailed. For those interested in the his­tory of science, Ockham exerted the decisive influence. In his view,reality is a collection of absolute singulars that depend for their being on the will of God, which can accomplish anything that does not imply a logical contradiction. In effect this implied a universe radically contingent on the divine will, in which there is no natural necessity and thus no solid basis for causal reasoning. Ockham wrote a treatise De demonstratione, but in it he did not defend dem­onstration as yielding truth and certitude; for him, the best it could attain was probability, since God could intervene at any time and impede the expected effect. In this way scientia was demoted by Ockham, moved down a notch, as it were, to bring it closer to dia­lectics and rhetoric.

In England, where Ockham’s nominalism early took root, “that uncertain feeling” became quite pervasive. Logic flourished, to be sure, and all the modes of consequentiae and of hypothetical reason­ing were investigated in exhaustive detail. But the natural philoso­phy of English nominalists never yielded a conclusion that could give ecclesiastical authorities cause for alarm. Sophismata and du-bitabilia became the stock in trade of those pursuing the science of nature. Working secundum imaginationem, investigators at Merton College, Oxford, explored in tedious detail the kinematics of mov­ing bodies. They studied the properties of uniformly acceleratedmotion, for example, and yet not one of them thought of applying them to the natural fall of bodies, so absorbed were they in logic, so insulated from concern with the real world.

The nominalism that developed across the channel at the Uni­versity of Paris in the fourteenth century owed much to Ockham and the Mertonians. Still, there are two important particulars in which Parisian terminists, Jean Buridan and his followers, de­parted from Ockham and his interpretation of Aristotle. The first was in their understanding of motion and the causality involved in its production, and the second was in their estimation of the truth and certitude to be found in the science of nature. Ockham, with a sweep of his mythical razor, had denied that motion was an abso­lute entity and so held that it did not require a cause. He further invoked the Condemnation of 1277 to argue that the study of na­ture, and of morality along with it, could never achieve certain truth. Buridan rejected both theses, the second by invoking Aqui-nas’s earlier teaching on demonstrations made ex suppositione natu­rae, the first by laying bare hitherto unknown causes and effects of local motion. He and his group, the Doctores Parisienses, brought the science of dynamics to its most advanced state, and were hailed on that account by Pierre Duhem as “the medieval precursors of Galileo.”

Despite this defense of the Aristotelian ideal of natural science, however, subsequent saw that ideal rarely being realized. During the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries authors of textbooks turned eclectic, giving equal time to nominalists and to realists, even though this meant embracing contradictory solutions to many problems in natural philosophy. As the fifteenth century wore on, with the invention of printing and the publication of the Opera om­nia of the medieval doctors, the situation was exacerbated even more. Religious orders exerted their influence in the universities, and soon there were not only nominalist chairs but Thomistic and Scotistic chairs as well. In the sixteenth century there was a scho­lastic revival at the University of Paris wherein Augustinians, Dominicans, Franciscans, and secular masters vied with each otherin the preparation of manuals. Each school, to be sure, could see its distinctive positions as true and certain, but the overall impres­sion was unmistakable. On key issues in natural philosophy, then still called scientia naturalis, there was no universal agreement, no publicly verifiable certitude about any of the propositions being taught. Science had degenerated to dialectics, and rhetorical over­tones were already discernible in disputations among the various schools.

The Renaissance and Second Scholasticism

The dividing line between late medieval and Renaissance sci­ence is difficult to draw. But with the rediscovery and publication of Greek commentaries on Aristotle, one could say that there was a rebirth of learning even in natural philosophy. Unfortunately, the rebirth succeeded in adding another voice to the many already clamoring at the end of the Middle Ages, that, namely, of the Pe­ripatetics who took their truth straight from “the master of all who know.” Not that there had been any abandoning of Aristotle among the scholastics; all still claimed allegiance to him, and his text­books, including the Posterior Analytics and the Physics, were the backbone of university instruction throughout all of Europe, not excluding Oxford and Cambridge. The problem came with the ap­plication of Aristotle’s Organon to refractory material in the world of nature. Here there was no uniform success and a crisis was clearly in the offing.

The triggering influence came from the mathematicians in the person of the Polish astronomer, Nicholas Copernicus. The Py­thagorean alternative to a geocentric universe, and the simplifica­tions it seemed to introduce into theories involving eccentrics and epicycles, diverted attention once again to mathematics as a pos­sible source of truth and certitude about the cosmos. Here the dis­putes between schools overflowed into larger arguments over disci­plinary domains—particularly well suited for rhetorical appeals. Who was better equipped to yield a certain conclusion about the heavens, the philosopher or the mathematician? The conventional wisdom then was that the mathematical astronomer could do no more than “save the appearances”; the philosophical astronomer had to pass on the natures of the heavenly bodies and the physical causes of their motions. Mathematical theories, the argument went, would have to be based on arbitrary suppositions and these could be false, thus rendering them incapable of generating cer­titude in the domain of physics.

An interesting development then took place at Padua in the late sixteenth century, when Peripatetics in the person of Alessan­dro Piccolomini reacted against the mathematicism there gaining vogue. Piccolomini and his colleagues wrote a number of treatises on the certitude of the mathematical disciplines in which they at­tacked not only the certitude of applied mathematics but that of pure mathematics as well. They contended that all mathematics failed to meet the rigorous canons of Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics, that it did not demonstrate strictly, that it had no knowledge of causes, and that its conclusions were therefore not certain. With that the apodictic character of what had traditionally been re­garded as the most certain science was called into question, once again the distinction was blurred between science and dialectics, and dialectics itself moved closer to rhetoric in the heat of the sub­sequent debate.

A final complication came from the religious sector. The Prot­estant Reformation by this time was in full flower, and the Catholic Counter-Reformation had already begun its course. The scholastic revival initiated at Paris at the onset of the sixteenth century now flourished as Second Scholasticism in Italy and on the Iberian pen­insula. Thomistic and Scotistic and nominalist rivalries were as pervasive in theology as they had been in philosophy, only now a more influential faction was coming into power, the newly es­tablished Society of Jesus. Thomism had been endorsed by its founder, Ignatius Loyola, but soon that disintegrated into compet­ing schools: Molinism, Suarezianism, Banezianism. The papacy tried to mediate the resulting disputes between Dominicans and Jesuits, and ended by allowing each order to teach its own doc­trines, say, on grace and free will, provided it did not accuse the other of heresy. Thus there had to be some latitude in the cer­titude accorded to the teachings of dogmatic theology. In moraltheology the emerging problems were even more difficult. Proba-bilism was countenanced in many areas, and rigorous solutions given up in this most delicate field of Catholic teaching.

All of this could not help but exert an influence on the certitude to be expected in Renaissance science, for theology then was still regarded as a science, indeed “the queen of the sciences.” The Jesuit professors on whose class notes Galileo drew when begin­ning to teach at Pisa present an interesting case in this re­gard. When dealing with the problems presented by Aristotle’s De caelo, they saw the possibility of mathematical demonstrations providing new knowledge that could be used to emend his conclu­sions in that work. This led them to question whether the heavens were truly incorruptible, as Aristotle had taught, whether they were composed of the same matter as earth, whether they were moved by informing forms or assisting forms, and so on. Fre­quently they expressed their teachings in degrees of probability: one position was probable, an alternative with modification was more probable, and yet another, perhaps the opposite of the first, most probable. Note here the probabilist language of the theolo­gians cutting into the certitude of conclusions hitherto accepted without qualification in universities throughout Europe. And evenamong the Jesuits there was the competition arising across disci­plinary domains: their mathematicians did not always agree with their philosophers, nor the philosophers with the theologians. On some issues emotions ran so high it was easy for dialectical dispute to give way to angry rhetoric, although the tight system of cen­sorship within the Society prevented any of this from erupting into print.

Galileo and the “New Science”

Galileo was imbued with this polemical spirit when he began his own teaching career at the University of Pisa. The professors who had taught him there were conservative Aristotelians, as were those in European universities generally. All shared a grounding not only in Aristotle’s scientific works, but also in his Analytics, his Topics, and his Rhetoric, and perforce they had a good knowledge of classical humanism. This breadth of training is reflected in Galileo’s early dialogue on motion, written at Pisa before he left there for a more lucrative position at Padua. Adept as he was in mathematics and philosophy, but no less in the litterae humaniores, it is not surprising that Galileo could emerge victorious over adver­saries who read their science in the text of Aristotle rather than in the Book of Nature. Only when his conclusions ran counter to the Book of Scripture did Galileo run into serious trouble. But even there he persisted in his resolve, skillfully combining scientia, dia-lectica, and rhetorica in his many writings, until finally he had to succumb to the power of the Inquisition.

Without the Renaissance and its preparation in the Late Middle Ages there surely would not have been a Scientific Revolution. To change the thinking habits of men on important issues strongforces had to be at work, forces that impinged not only on men’s minds but on their hearts and instincts as well. Scientific treatises in the mode of the Posterior Analytics—were they available, and at the time they were not—are powerless to effect that kind of change. To be truly persuasive at critical periods in its , sci­ence had to be buttressed with rhetorical argument. We need not get involved here with Thomas Kuhn’s Structure of Scientific Revolu­tions to make this point, but I suspect we will find it borne out in the remaining papers of this symposium.

I leave it to my colleague, Professor Moss, to expand further on the interplay between science and rhetoric in seventeenth-century Italy. But let me conclude with one paradoxical note about Galileo. Expert as he was in rhetoric and dialectic, he ended up a champion of science and the truth and certitude it would ultimately attain. How he did so I lack the time to explain here: suffice it to say that in several works I have argued for a rediscovery, on his part, of the suppositional natural necessity invoked by Albertus, Aquinas, and Buridan in earlier centuries. His masterwork was the Discorsi of 1638, written after his condemnation in 1633, which proposed a nuova scienza—a “new science,” indeed, but one that offered strict demonstrations on the model of Euclid and Archimedes, still using the canons of Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics. In this he would be fol­lowed by Sir Isaac Newton and a host of mathematical physicists tothe end of the nineteenth century. That achievement has so enam­ored scholars of the twentieth century that we forget the travail in­volved in the birth of the new physics. Like the medievals, we tend to see science and rhetoric as completely opposed, forgetting that science as we know it would not now exist had rhetoric not played a key role in its genesis and continued growth.


© The International Society for the of Rhetoric. Rhetorica, Volume 7,

Number 1 (Winter 1989).

The methodology outlined in the Posterior Analytics was not restricted to the practice of science in the Middle Ages; it extended beyond this period into the Re­naissance and well into the early modern period. Harvey, for example, invoked its canons in his work on the motion of the heart and the blood, and Galileo wrote an extensive commentary on it. This commentary has just been published: Galileo Galilei, Tractatio de praecognitionibus et de demonstratione, transcribed from the Latin autograph by William F. Edwards, with an introduction, notes and commentary by William A. Wallace (Padua: Editrice Antenore, 1988).

This is the classical concept of rhetoric deriving from Aristotle; its main char­acteristics are described in a series of essays edited by J. D. Moss, Rhetoric and Praxis: The Contribution of Classical Rhetoric to Practical Reasoning (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press), 1986.

Unfortunately the Aristotelian concept is omitted by Arnold Lazarus and H. Wendell Smith in their entry under “Dialectic/’ A Glossary of and Com­position (Urbana, 111.: National Council of Teachers of English, 1983), p. 87. This leads them to the following misleading characterization of the use of dialectics in rhetoric, which follows their threefold division of the meaning of the term dialectic: “In rhetoric, an adaptation of (3) [Hegel's concept] in which the writer starts with a thesis, then qualifies it with an opposing (if minor) objection or two, then arrives at a compromise, which is nevertheless close to the original thesis.” Such a description bears no relation whatever to the Aristotelian notions of rhetoric and dialectic being discussed in this essay.

The medieval development is well summarized in Niels G. Green-Pedersen, The Tradition of the Topics in the Middle Ages: The Commentaries on Aristotle’s and Boethius’ “Topics” (Munich: Philosophia Verlag, 1984).

A fuller analysis of the relationships between dialectic and rhetoric as these were understood in the High Middle Ages may be found in W. A. Wallace, “Thomas Aquinas on Dialectic and Rhetoric,” A Straight Path: Studies in Medieval Philosophy and Culture, Essays in Honor of Arthur Hyman (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1987), pp. 244-254.

The on this subject is vast. The pioneering study was that of A. C. Crombie, Robert Grosseteste and the Origins of Experimental Science (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1953); later works include Steven Marrone, William of Auvergne and Robert Grosseteste (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983); David Lindberg, Roger Bacon’s Philosophy of Nature (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1982); James McEvoy, The Phi­losophy of Robert Grosseteste (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1982); J. A. Weisheipl, ed., Albertus Magnus and the Sciences (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1980); and Leo Elders, ed., La Philosophic de la nature de Saint Thomas d’Aquin (Rome: Editrice Vaticana, 1982).

For a synthetic treatment, see W. A. Wallace, Causality and Scientific Explana­tion, 2 vols. (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1972-1974), especially Vol. 1. Medieval and Early Classical Science, pp. 1-116.

Some of the difficulties are outlined by Edward Grant, “Celestial Matter: A Medieval and Galilean Cosmological Problem,” Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 13 (1983): 157-186, and R. C. Dales, “The De-Animation of the Heavens in the Middle Ages,” Journal of the of Ideas, 41 (1980): 531-530.

In addition to Crombie’s Grosseteste, see Gordon Leff, Paris and Oxford Univer­sities in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1968); some correctives are introduced in Wallace, Causality, 1:27-64.

For a full account, see W. A. Wallace, “The Scientific Methodology of St. Al­bert the Great,” in Albertus Magnus Doctor Universalis 1280-1980, eds. G. Meyer and A. Zimmerman (Mainz: Matthias Griinewald Verlag, 1980), pp. 385-407.

The principle is stated by St. Thomas in his Summa theologiae, Prima Pars, q. 86, a. 3; its application to the subject matter of natural science is explained in W. A. Wallace, “Aquinas on the Temporal Relation Between Cause and Effect,” Re­view of Metaphysics, 27 (1974): 569-584.

In addition to the references in the two previous notes, see W. A. Wallace,

“Albertus Magnus on Suppositional Necessity in the Natural Sciences,” in Albertus Magnus and the Sciences (note 8 supra), pp. 103-128, and the essay cited in note 45 infra.

John Case, an English Aristotelian, reproves Averroes for not allowing the possibility that the human can achieve demonstrative knowledge in any sub­ject matter; see his In universam dialecticam Aristotelis (London: 1584), p. 178. Note, in the title of Case’s work (which may be translated into English as “On all of Aris­totle’s logic”), that by the end of the sixteenth century the term dialectica had come to designate the entire corpus of Aristotelian writings on logic, not excluding the Posterior Analytics. On Case and his teachings, see C. B. Schmitt, John Case and Aris-totelianism in Renaissance England (Kingston-Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press), 1983.

Much has been written about the condemnations as they relate to the of science. For a translation of the principal theses that were condemned and a brief commentary on their significance, see A Source Book in Medieval Science, ed. Edward Grant, Cambridge (Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1974), pp. 45-50.

This was also the date assigned by Pierre Duhem as the beginning of modern science; see his To Save the Phenomena, tr. E. Doland and C. Maschler (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1969).

Ockham’s views on demonstration are analyzed by Damascene Webering, The Theory of Demonstration According to William of Ockham (St. Bonaventure, N.Y.: Franciscan Institute Publications, 1953). For an appreciation of Ockham’s role in the genesis of modern science, consult Ernest A. Moody, Studies in Medieval Philosophy, Science, and Logic (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975); for a critical evalua­tion, see W. A. Wallace, “Buridan, Ockham, Aquinas: Science in the Middle Ages/’ The Thomist, 40 (1976): 475-483, reprinted in idem, Prelude to Galileo: Essays on Medi­eval and Sixteenth-Century Sources of Galileo’s Thought (Dordrecht-Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Co., 1981), pp. 341-348.

“That Uncertain Feeling” was the title of a symposium held at the annual meeting of the of Science Society at Norwalk, Connecticut, in October of 1983. Portions of this essay are based on the author’s contribution to that symposium, subsequently published as “The Certitude of Science in Late Medieval and Re­naissance Thought,” of Philosophy Quarterly, 3.3 (1986): 281-291. There he jux­taposes his views to those of Barbara Shapiro, Probability and Certitude in Seventeenth-Century England (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983); see also his critique of her work in the Review of Metaphysics, 39 (1985-1986): 374-377.

This development is sketched in C. A. Wilson, William Heytesbury and the Rise of Mathematical Physics (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1960); a compre­hensive overview is provided by Edith D. Sylla in her contribution to the Cambridge of Late Medieval Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), pp. 540-563, and in her lengthy article on Richard Swineshead, written jointly with

John E. Murdoch, in the Dictionary of Scientific Biography, ed. C. C. Gillispie, 16 vols. (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1970-1980), 13:184-213.

Some of the reasons for this preoccupation are sketched in M. A. Hoskin and A. G. Molland, “Swineshead on Falling Bodies: An Example of Fourteenth-Century Physics,” The British Journal for the of Science, 3 (1966): 150-182. As far as is known to date, the first author to apply kinematical reasoning to the fall of heavy bodies was Domingo de Soto, who formulated a correct “law” around 1550, con­siderably before Galileo’s writings. On Soto, see W. A. Wallace, “The Enigma of Domingo de Soto: Uniformiter difformis and Falling Bodies in Late Medieval Physics,” his, 59 (1968): 384-401, reprinted in Prelude to Galileo, pp. 91-109. For Soto’s possible influence on Galileo, see idem, “The Early Jesuits and the Heritage of Domingo de Soto,” and Technology, 4 (1987): 301-320.

On these points see the author’s critique of Moody, note 18 supra; also his survey of the development of the science of mechanics in the Late Middle Ages, “Mechanics from Bradwardine to Galileo,” Journal of the of Ideas, 32 (1971): 15-28, reprinted in Prelude to Galileo, pp. 51-63.

If motion is not an absolute entity it is not a reality distinct from the body being moved; thus it cannot be a new effect, and, to be consistent with Ockham’s philoso­phy, it does not require a cause. For details, see Herman Shapiro, Motion, Time and Place According to William of Ockham (St. Bonaventure, N.Y.: Franciscan Institute Pub­lications, 1957), esp. p. 53.

The nuance added by Buridan is that such demonstrations presuppose an order of nature that has been willed by God, wherein regularity and order prevail, and wherein a natural truth and certitude are to be found. The key text is to be

found in Iohannes Buridanus, In metaphysicen Aristotelis quaestiones (Paris: 1518, re­printed Frankfurt a. M.: 1964), fol. 9r, cited in Prelude to Galileo, p. 345 (English tr.) and p. 348 (Latin). Moody misread Buridan when he saw the expression ex supposi­tione in his writing and argued that after Buridan “an ineradicable element of hy­pothesis [was] introduced into the science of nature” (Studies in Medieval Philosophy, p. 156); this may have been true of the Ockhamist development in England, but it was not true of Buridan and his followers. See also the following note.

Duhem developed this thesis in his three-volume work, Etudes sur Leonard de Vinci (Paris: A. Hermann & Fils, 1913). It has been much controverted by historians of science, for reasons summarized in Prelude to Galileo, pp. 303-319. A more ex­tensive examination and critique will be found in W. A. Wallace, “Galileo Galilei and the Doctores Parisienses,” in New Perspectives on Galileo, eds. R. Butts and J. Pitt (Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Co., 1978), pp. 87-138, enlarged and reprinted in Prelude to Galileo, pp. 192-252.

Albert of Saxony, for example, is typical of the fourteenth-century develop­ment. In Albert’s time the question whether motion is something distinct from the object moved and from its place was much discussed, and it was customary for nominalists to answer it in the negative and realists in the affirmative. Marsilius of Inghen clearly took the nominalist stance, whereas Buridan took the realist. When Albert came to take up the difficulty in his questions on the Physics, Book 3, he straddled the fence in the following way. In Question 6, considering the problem logically, he concluded in favor of the nominalists, while in Question 7, wherein he further admitted “divine cases,” i.e., those that are supernaturally possible, he con­cluded with the realists. Following logic alone, therefore, he turned out to be a nominalist, whereas “according to truth and to the faith” he professed himself a realist. See his Acutissime questiones super libros de physica auscultatione (Venice: 1516), fols. 36vb-38ra. These and other texts are discussed in Prelude to Galileo, pp. 64-77.

This revival was effected under the influence of a Scottish master, John Major of Haddington, better known under the French version of his name, Jean Mair. The movement is surveyed in Hubert Elie, “Quelques maitres de l’universite de Paris vers l’an 1500,” Archives d’histoire doctrinale et litteraire du moyen age, 18 (1950-1951), pp. 193-243.

The secular master, Juan de Celaya, under whom Domingo de Soto studied at Paris, added a subtitle to most of his treatises, explaining that his questions were being presented secundum triplicem viam: beati Thomae, realium, et nominalium. Oth­ers added to these the realissimi and the variations among the nominalists—the Ockhamists and the followers of Gregory of Rimini. Fuller particulars may be found in W. A. Wallace, “The ‘Calculators’ in Early Sixteenth-Century Physics,” The Brit­ish Journal for the of Science, 4 (1969): 184-195, reprinted in Prelude to Galileo, pp. 78-90, as well as the earlier essay in that volume entitled “The Concept of Mo­tion in the Sixteenth Century,” pp. 64-77.

Apart from Charles Schmitt’s book on John Case (note 15 supra), see M. H. Curtis, Oxford and Cambridge in Transition, 1558-1642 (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1959), and J. E. McGuire and M. Tamny, eds., Certain Philosophical Questions: New­ton’s Trinity Notebook (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 1983, esp. pp. 3-25.

The fifth centenary of Copernicus’s birth in 1973 made a wealth of information available concerning him; see, for example, the essays edited by Owen Gingerich and published with the title, The Nature of Scientific Discovery (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1975); also the papers read at the Symposium on Copernicus under the auspices of the American Philosophical Society and pub­lished in its Proceedings, Vol. 117, No. 6, December 31,1973.

Robert S. Westman discusses the background of such disputes in his ‘The Copernicans and the Churches,” in God and Nature: Historical Essays on the Encounter Between Christianity and Science, eds. D. C. Lindberg and R. L. Numbers (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986).

This view is well portrayed by Pierre Duhem in his To Save the Phenomena, passim.

The problem was recognized by Aristotle, who discussed it in his Physics, Bk 2, chap. 2, but who nonetheless allowed for the possibility of a “mixed science,” that is, one that achieved true demonstrations by employing principles taken jointly from mathematics and physics. For an analysis of his teaching, see James G. Len­nox, “Aristotle, Galileo, and ‘Mixed Sciences,’” in Reinterpreting Galileo, ed. W. A. Wallace (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1986), pp. 29­51. On the notion of a mixed or middle science (scientia media) as this expression was understood by Galileo, see W. A. Wallace, “The Problem of Causality in Galileo’s Science,” Review of Metaphysics, 36 (1983): 607-632, esp. pp. 624-625.

^For details of Piccolomini’s attack, consult G. C. Giacobbe, “I Commentarium de certitudine mathematicarum disciplinarum di Alessandro Piccolomini,” Physis, 14 (1972): 162-193. Other works dealing with this problem are cited in Galileo and His Sources (note 3, supra), p. 136, n. 120.

The best of Second Scholasticism to date is that of Carlo Giacon, La seconda scolastica, 3 vols. (Milan: 1944-1950); a survey of the movement is given in the New Catholic Encyclopedia, 12:1153, esp. 1158 and ff.

For the distinguishing of these systems of thought, see the respective entries in the New Catholic Encyclopedia, Banezianism, 2:48; Molinism, 9:1011; and Suarezianism, 13:754.

This mediation took place at the famous Congregatio de Auxiliis held in Rome at the beginning of the seventeenth century; again see the New Catholic Encyclopedia for details, 4:168.

^Benjamin Nelson has surveyed this situation in his ‘The Quest for Certitude and the Books of Scripture, Nature, and Conscience,” in The Nature of Scientific Dis­covery (note 30 supra), pp. 355-372, followed by a discussion, pp. 372-391.

Galileo makes much of this exalted status of theology as a science in his Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina, translated by Stillman Drake in his Discoveries and Opinions of Galileo (New York: Doubleday Anchor, 1957).

The sources of Galileo’s early writings have eluded scholars for centuries, and only recently have they been identified as reportationes of lectures given by Jesuit professors at the Collegio Romano, which apparently came into Galileo’s hands through the good graces of Christopher Clavius, the eminent Jesuit mathematician on the faculty of that institution. Much of the documentation on which this discov­ery is based is given in Galileo and His Sources (note 3 supra), pp. 3-96.

Thus Ludovicus Rugerius, who taught the De caelo at the Collegio Romano in 1591, summarized his views on the corruptibility of the heavens in three conclu­sions, as follows: (1) “It is not yet completely improbable that the heavens are gener-able and corruptible through mutual transformation with lower bodies”; (2) “Much more probable is it that the heavens are generable and corruptible, but only through substantial transformation with other celestial parts”; and (3) “It is most probable that the heavens are ingenerable and incorruptible, though this cannot be positively demonstrated.” On this and other representative teachings, see W. A. Wallace, Galileo’s Early Notebooks: The Physical Question (Notre Dame: The University of Notre Dame Press, 1977), pp. 268-269, 325-330.

Records of such censorship are still available in the Roman Archives of the Society of Jesus; some instances are cited in Galileo and His Sources, pp. 17, 53, and 147, n. 156.

For complete analyses of Galileo’s rhetorical techniques in the face of eccle­siastical opposition, see the following works by Jean Dietz Moss: “Galileo’s Letter to Christina: Some Rhetorical Considerations,” Renaissance Quarterly, 36 (1983): 547­576; “Galileo’s Rhetorical Strategies in Defense of Copernicanism,” in Novita Celesti e Crisi del Sapere, ed. Paolo Galluzzi (Florence: G. Barbera Editore, 1984), pp. 95-103; and “The Rhetoric of Proof in Galileo’s Writings on the Copernican System,” in Re­interpreting Galileo (note 33 supra), pp. 179-204.

The first edition of this work was published by the University of Chicago Press in 1962, and a second edition, revised and enlarged, appeared in 1970. In it Kuhn argued against the view that there is a cumulative growth of knowledge over the centuries, and even questioned whether truth is the goal of the scientific enter­prise. While he makes many good points relating to the sociological conditioning of scientists in recent times, his thesis has been regarded by most philosophers as too extreme, for in effect it reduces science to dialectics, in the sense in which both these terms have been used in this essay. Much of current science, indeed most of it, reaches conclusions that are only probable and on this account are revisable. To con­cede that point, however, one need not banish all truth and certitude from science in the past, or to claim that it is impossible of attainment in the future. This is effec­tively what Kuhn has done, perhaps unwittingly, in The Structure of Scientific Revolu­tions. In subsequent essays, some of which appear in his The Essential Tension: Se­lected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1977), he has revised his early thesis to answer criticisms such as these.

Apart from Prelude to Galileo, Galileo and His Sources, and Reinterpreting Galileo, see the author’s essay entitled “Aristotle and Galileo: The Uses of Hupothesis (Sup-positio) in Scientific Reasoning,” in Studies in Aristotle, ed. Dominic O’Meara (Wash­ington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1981), pp. 47-77.

This thesis is argued and documented in W. A. Wallace, Causality and Scien­tific Explanation (note 9 supra), Vol. 1, pp. 159-210, and Vol. 2, pp. 3-128.

Source: Rhetorica, Vol. 7, No. 1, Symposium on the Rhetoric of Science (Winter, 1989), pp. 7-
21
Published by: University of California Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20135200
Accessed: 15/01/2010 02:24

Source: Rhetorica, Vol. 7, No. 1, Symposium on the Rhetoric of Science (Winter, 1989), pp. 7-21Published by: University of California PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20135200Accessed: 15/01/2010 02:24

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Books Reviewed

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Look inside: Homework Helpers: Grammar and Punctuation for School

Ladybird : Ladybird Minis

Hardback : 06 Aug 2009

8 – 12 years

Homework Helper Punctuation and Grammar is a quick and easy reference guide for to use either at home or at school. This titles contains key facts and useful examples for each topic.

The Ladybird Grammar and Punctuation for School book offers invaluable support for homework and a variety of suggestions to encourage good writing.

The book can be used as:

key grammar and punctuation facts
useful examples for each topic
clear layouts for easy reference
fun illustrations for support
New learners benefit from exploring basic grammar and punctuation facts whilst the more confident writer can learn or practice new skills.

http://books.ladybird.co.uk/nf/Book/BookDisplay/0,,9781409302254,00.html?/Homework_Helpers:_Grammar_and_Punctuation_for_School

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Way to an “A”: student survival guide By Salmin S. Jadavji

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Sal inm Jadavji is a recent university graduate willi a Bachelor of Business Administration degree (BBA) The OH A is a very competitive program that accepts only about 1 out of every 20 applicants He has been involved with various youth commiuees of the Aga Khan Education Board such as being the Ismaili ’s Association Chairperson For the past few years, Salmin has been presenting seminars on How To Succeed at School for students of all ages.
MISSION STATEMENT
To provide students of all ages with the best tools to succeed in school and in life

INTRODUCTION
“Come to the edge. ” he said. They said. “We are afraid. ” “Come to the edge. ” lie said. They came. He pushed them .. And they Jim-.
(JuiUaume Apolfhkiire

I wrote Way To An “A”" to help you succeed. 1 want to push you lo fly and soar towards your dreams Way To An ‘A’fl is more than just a book about succeeding at school, it is a guide to achieving success in your life.
I have been presenting seminars on how to succeed at school for the past few years but there is only so much that I can teach in a seminar. This is why 1 wrote Way To An ‘A’” I wanted to share all the tools of success in one book with you.
Way To An * A’” covers many areas such as motivation, study skills, stress management, visioning. lime management, career planning and so much more. It teaches life skills that will help you succeed at school and in life.
Way To An W” is easy to read, it is to the point and gives you (he tools to succeed all in one book Do you have time to read many 300 page books to get all the success tools that you will find in Way To An *A’*7 As a , I know I didn’t Way To An *A** gives you all the tools you need to succeed.

Download: PDF

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Essay Writing: Teaching the Basics from the Ground Up By Jock Mackenzie

The skills required to write an essay are the same skills required to write a speech, to prepare a persuasive argument, to prove a point, or to explain an idea. If we can help our students acquire these skills as we teach “the essay,” we will have assisted them in accomplishing truly valuable life skills.

“Essay Writing” contains easy-to-incorporate lessons along with tips for teaching specific concepts that range from pre-writing exercises to revising and editing to celebrating the final product. This down-to-earth look at the foundations of good essay writing is full of useful ideas and strategies that help students: build skills in writing on a wide range of topics; distinguish between formal and informal writing;use effective pre-writing techniques such as brainstorming, making an outline, gathering information, and evaluating the relevance of information;gain confidence as they begin to recognize what works and what doesn’t.

The book incorporates a wide range of innovative approaches to teaching essay writing — from how to “picture” and “act out” an essay to a winning format for a topic sentence and using scattergrams to turn brainstorming into constructive outlines. Throughout the book, assessment tools and marking keys support simple marking techniques that consider not just the final essay, but effort and time on task.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

How to Write an Essay By Kathi Wyldeck

‘How to Write an Essay’ is a book of lessons, model essays and writing topics to help students between Grades 5 and 12 to practise their essay writing technique. The book looks at story writing, short essays, information, explanation, discussion and argumentative essays, letters to friends, business letters, letters to the editor, science reports, job application letters and curriculum vitae, writers’ techniques, poetry and prose analysis. If students attempt most of the essays in the book, they are bound to become better writers as a result of all their efforts.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Editorial Reviews for “Taking the Bully by the Horns”

Main Street Mom

Got Kids? This is a book to have on your shelves. I love the overall language and voice of this book. It is most certainly written for , but it is done intelligently and with respect to where kids are in their lives today. The layout is smart; it makes logical sense, in terms of how the bully process starts, proceeds, and ends.  “Taking the Bully by the Horns” could potentially restore the confidence of many and arm others sufficiently to prevent trouble all by themselves.  I recommend this one!

Angela Fubler – Educator & Child Advocate from Bermuda

Kathy, this is one of the easiest reads on bullying that I have come across!! Bravo! You have taken a very sensitive issue and made it bearable…even better…overcome-able! Excellent work.
Your book connected with the child in me. I was very emotional reading it. I was reading it from a child’s perspective…at first. Then I really could identify with some of the potential bully behaviour that exists within my role as a parent. It is effective and life changing! I will read “Taking the Bully by the Horns” with both of my . WELL DONE!! Thanks again for writing that fabulous book! I will do as much as I can to push it in the schools and the community at large.
Ginny’s Educational WebPages

Take time to read “Taking the Bully by the Horns.” It will give you an insight to bullies, victims, and reactions. It is written for ease in understanding; young people can tackle this book with success, learn why’s and how’s of bullying, and learn that people who are bullied don’t have to be “victims,” and actions–not reactions–can be taken to improve situations. This book can be an effective tool against bullying and at the same time provide an insight at to why young people turn to bullying.

Cyber Kids

This book contains very good advice and teaches you how to recognize different types of bullies and games they play.

The Family Corner

Noll does a wonderful job bolstering the self-respect of the victims. will certainly learn a lot from her.

Reading Times

Follow her hints and suggestions, and you will gain the power to eliminate the difficult bully worries in your life!

Bookends

Very important and perceptive book. This book should find a useful place in any school counselor’s office or school library.

Connect for Kids

Easily broken down into digestible chapters, this book addresses the seriousness of the issue, offering smart, empowering, proactive “bully” solutions.

Intellectual Capital – “When Father Doesn’t Know Best”

Kathy Noll addresses a particular question that emerged from the Columbine High School shooting in her book, “Taking the Bully by the Horns” – physical and emotional bullying. She says parents need to ponder that issue because more teens are acting on their aggressions and frustrations with guns.

GEMS

I believe in the saying, “Knowledge is power.” The information provided in this book will allow the reader to have a greater understanding of the bully cycle, thus providing a foundation for action.

Parent Soup

This original & inspiring style of writing, and her ability to talk with young people on their level, landed Kathy Noll the job of writing this ’s version of Dr. Jay Carter’s best-selling book, “Nasty People.”

Embracing the Child

Bullying is an epidemic. It did not begin with Littleton and will not end there. This is a serious issue depriving of self-esteem, and in some cases, leading to violent crimes. I recommend you read “Taking the Bully by the Horns.”

Teachers Net

Researched with support from child psychologist/author Dr. Jay Carter, Kathy Noll’s book looks at the causes and cures for the bullying problem that plagues our school population.

Teen Center

I liked this book because it explains the “Bully Cycle:” When somebody gets bullied, after a while he tries to act tough and then even *he* begins to bully others when he is feeling very small inside and lacks respect for himself.

Healthy Place

Kathy Noll discusses what you, as a parent, can do to help your child deal with bullies and/or prevent them from becoming one.

Cyber Parent

Noll looks at bullies from both the stand point of the bully and the bullied. She discusses the “bully games” and how a bully becomes one. She also discusses the victim and gives kids concrete suggestions and help for dealing with the bully.

A reader / educator

“Your book will enable me to do something that just might save a child’s life, and for that, I thank you.”

A reader / educator

“Your book should be taught as a class in all schools!”

A reader / parent

“It is so well written and detailed and helpful.”

************************

One of the most rewarding aspects of my work is when adults and write to me after studying my information and reading my book, “Taking the Bully by the Horns,” to share how much the book helped them and changed their lives. Here is a story and a few additional comments I’ve received that have touched and inspired me:
A sweet little boy with only one leg who gets teased at his school read my book. He opened it as a gift from his mother on Christmas morning, and didn’t put it down until he finished. He then said, “I feel a lot better about myself now; this is the best book I ever read.” When his mother told me this, with tears in my eyes I told her, “Now I know why I wrote the book.”

From :

“I’ve learned a lot from your book.”
“I was scared but your book helped me a lot.”
“It explains why some people act the way they do.”
“Thank You!”
“I like the part where you tell me how to handle the bully.”
“There’s a lot of information in one book.”
“I understand people better now.”

From a Reformed Bully:

“Your book made me realize that how I was acting was hurting others. You helped me to stop – THANKS!”

Full Review from the ’s Television Workshop:

Taking the Bully by the Horns — reviewed by Laura Gallagher

Break out of the Bully Cycle!

Abstract: In this ’s version of Dr. Jay Carter’s best-selling book, Nasty People, Kathy Noll helps her readers examine, identify, and solve bullying problems. “Taking the Bully by the Horns” tackles the seriousness of bullying and school violence while offering intelligent, proactive alternatives to the “bully cycle.”
————————————————————————
Bullying can be a serious issue for , with potentially devastating . “Taking The Bully By The Horns” teaches to effectively deal with bullying and helps them diffuse potentially explosive situations. Kathy Noll uses kid-friendly language to shed light on how cowardly bullies really are, and offers empowering and helpful solutions for their victims.
Chapter I begins with descriptions of the kinds of bullies typically encounter – leading into Chapter II, which describes the types of games these bullies play. Noll breaks down the reasons why bullies become mean, frequently reminding the reader not to let anyone take advantage of him or her.
Important topics touched on throughout the rest of the book include:
A quiz to see if you are a victim of bullying. How to identify if you are a bully. What to do when the bully is a family member. What to do when the bully is a “friend.” Proactive ideas to stop bullies in their tracks. Solutions to solving the bully problem in your life. Peer pressure bullying (drinking, smoking, drugs).
Noll cites a study that found 76.8 percent of students say they have been bullied. This book is a down-to-earth way to broach this often hurtful and embarrassing subject. The situations are true-to-life, and anyone who reads this book will learn a lot from her positive writing and upbeat approaches to difficult situations, including specific tips on how to handle the many different types of bullying.
As a former teacher who recognized and struggled with the effects of bullying in the classroom, I saw firsthand that there is most definitely a need for “Taking The Bully By The Horns.” In addition to being a terrific tool for , this book is a great parent resource for helping kids navigate their way through the often rocky waters of adolescent relationships, and teachers can use the lessons learned in it to maintain safe environments in their classrooms. The bullying examples in each chapter can easily be used in classroom role play, and teachers can use the information to teach and model specific appropriate behaviors.
Perhaps the best words Kathy Noll has to offer are, “Be good to each other.” This simple advice, along with the mantra, “I’m special and proud of who I am,” truly sum up the message she impresses upon her readers throughout the book.
————————————————————————
“The Bullying Workbook,”  as requested by educators and parents, has also been created by Kathy and is available to order.
Educators requested this follow-up to “Taking the Bully by the Horns.”  After each story in this Workbook, students take notes to discuss bullying and other serious issues while examining the actions and behaviors of the characters — including how certain situations could have been handled better. Kids are asked to compare these situations to their own lives and decide what they’ve learned. There is a Q & A section at the end of each chapter and pages for note taking.
Each chapter shows examples of someone doing good or helping someone else out who is being bullied or in a difficult situation.  This is what Kathy Noll is encouraging the bystanders of bullying to do. The book encourages kids to care enough to get involved in stopping negative behavior and preventing people from getting hurt.
This workbook helps kids build positive character traits, conquer fears, make the right choices, and improve self-esteem. The book also helps bullies lessen their anger, understand how their behavior affects others, and give them something positive to aspire to. The stories are motivational, inspiring, adventurous, and sometimes humorous to keep the readers attention so they don’t miss the “lesson.”  (& adults!) enjoy this book & benefit from it. Teachers & Parents successfully use this book with their kids in the classroom and at home. For All Ages.
Kathy was also recently published, along with a collaboration of other top self-help experts, in the successful book for adults — “How to Improve Your Life.”  It is recommended for all adults who are either experiencing adult bullying now – or the lasting effects from childhood bullying.  The chapters hit on all emotional aspects of bullying and what needs to be healed… anger, grief, guilt, self-esteem, emotional release, forgiveness…
http://kathynoll.wordpress.com/editorial-reviews/
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Page 1 of 212»

Images

  Books

Popular Searches

Expressing Love Through A Love Essay, teaching philosophy essays, essays on sociology, college admission essay explaining weak grades, college education essay importance, why our college college admission essays, child psychology essays, writting environmental science field trip essay, environmental issues essay, free essays, free online essays, free essay, custom essays, custom essay, essay, essay papers, essay writing, sample essay, free essay papers, essay helpconclusion paragraph generator examples of contrast essays types of homework punctuation helper essay contest citation generator define diagnostic essay top 50 essay topics thesis statement helper comma helper apa citation helper mla citation generator free thesis helper math forumulas extended essay guide easy thesis helper sample of informal essays plagiarism helper top 50 argumentative essay topics diagnostic essay format write a mathematical phrase argumentative thesis generator mla citation helper argumentative thesis statement generator argumentative thesis generator mla citation helper persuation essay body helper essay topics top 50 persuasive essay topics cbe citation generator thematic essay character importance how war affects children internet aim in life how character protect life healthy eating destruction of flood in pakistan a friend who made a difference in my life a friend who changed me essay on discipline usic drums Personality development powerpoint my favorite subject scuba diving cultural anthropology CLIMATE CHANGE How i live now health for all yourself essay yourself myself essay cell phone school cell phones at school outer banks vacation a sentence with break apart in it what college means uniforms

Categories