Desiderius Erasmus, the Great Humanist :: Biography Biographies Essays

Desiderius Erasmus, the Great Humanist Desiderius Erasmus was one of the great humanists. He was well educated and practice scholasticism. He was also a great writer, who wrote books of many types. He is even called the greatest European scholar of the 16th century (Britannica Macropedia). He was also courageous, as he criticized the Church harshly. It was said by R. C. Trench that "Erasmus laid the egg of the Reformation and Luther hatched it." Erasmus was the illegitimate son of a priest named Gerard. This fact would haunt him for his entire life. He feared that, if this fact was widely known, his life would be ruined. Therefore, there has been much confusion about his early life. It has been discerned that he as born in Gouda, Holland in 1469 and that he had a brother. Erasmus tried to keep all these facts hidden, confusing modern day historians. He died in 1536. Erasmus's writings included The Praise of Folly, a satire which pointed out major problems in the clergy, saying that monks were beggars, the clergy was greedy, and that the pope had no resemblance to the Apostles. He also wrote a short satirical skit in which Pope Julius II had trouble getting into heaven. In the skit, Pope Julius II is made out to be more of a Muslim than a Catholic. Writing this had to take considerable courage, for, though the Church was in decline, it still had considerable power. He also published the Greek version of the New Testament in Latin, so Europeans could read it. Erasmus was a traveller. He lived in many places in Europe at different times. He had lived in Rome, Paris, England, and many other European countries. His worked as a writer, but was dependant on gifts of nobles as most writers of the time were. In his travels he befriended many humanists. Erasmus became a humanist because of his education. He studied both ancient Greek and Latin. He had tried to be monk and a priest, but could not. He went to Paris where he mastered Latin. He received a good education there. This education, combined with his morality, made him a great humanist. He had both the knowledge and the ethics to criticize the Church (a person who lacked ethics and criticized the Church would be a hypocrite). Surprisingly, Erasmus was both tolerant and a pacifist. He, apparently, picked up these traits when in England.

Psychological Aspects of Remember the Titans

Quinn Psych 100 November 13, 2012 Psychology in Movies Psychology is the study of or science of how individuals and groups behave and their mental processes. Characteristics of these behaviors and mental processes are portrayed in many different ways within the movies that we create. Within the movie, Remember the Titans, many social psychology concepts are present. Remember the Titans is a movie set in Virginia 1971, its about a high school football team and how they come together in order to try and win the state championship.Unfortunately it is not that simple, this is a high school that has just been forced to integrate in a time of racial segregation, in a town where football is everything and is most of the boys’ ticket out of town and onto college. The three concepts that are evident in the movie are foot-in-the-door phenomenon, groupthink, and ingroup bias and outgroup. The first concept is foot-in-the-door phenomenon. There is a scene where the teams newly appointed A frican American head coach, Coach Boone, forces all the boys off the two busses taking them to their two week camp.Then he separates the team into two groups, offense and defense, and then pairs each player with a teammate of a different race. Coach Boone goes on to explain to them that this is also the person with whom they will be sharing a room with; this is his initial small request. As camp continues on the team gets to know each other and slowly the race lines between them fade and they become close to each other. So Coach Boone’s initial request helped the team to later comply with his request of them to play together as a strong bonded team.This later request would not have been possible if asked originally, he had to start with a smaller request and work his way up to the larger request. Groupthink is the second psychology concept within Remember the Titans. After the team returns from the football camp, where they united together, they win a couple of games but the hatred and racism is still strong within the town and they slowly disband because of this. Gerry, Julius, Rev, and Louie tell the team about a mandatory team meeting, but as the other teammates show up they start to realize that the coaches aren’t there and are about to leave.The four that organized this meeting ask them to stay and hear them out. They talk about winning games but point out that that isn’t a win, sticking together through all the chaos as a team is a true win. This meeting or decision making group decide to work for harmony within the group and let it override the realistic alternative of reverting back to the hate of each other that is the norm in the town. This entire movie is encased with ingroup bias and outgroups. A great example of this is a scene when the team is at their football camp.Louie goes to sit down at a table of all African Americans and Julius says, â€Å"What you doing man? † Louie answers â€Å"I’m eating lunch. † and Julius replies â€Å"I see you eating lunch. Why you eating over here? Why don’t you go on over there and eat with your people. † This shows Julius’ tendency to favor his own group over Louie who is perceived to be part of a group that is different than his group. Remember the Titans being set in a segregated time is all about the in-group and out-group.In conclusion, the three concepts that are evident in Remember the Titans are foot-in-the-door phenomenon, groupthink, and ingroup bias and outgroup. Adding these concepts into the plot made this a stronger storyline, by creating a dynamic story. The concept of groupthink is a concept that I think isn’t experienced enough with most people having a â€Å"me† attitude rather than the desire for harmony or that anyone should feel outside or not part of the ingroup. This has opened my eyes to all the social psychology aspects within movies.

What Would Machiavelli Do - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 4 Words: 1128 Downloads: 7 Date added: 2019/10/30 Category People Essay Level High school Topics: Niccolo Machiavelli Essay Did you like this example? The Ends Justify the Meanness is a satirical work by author Stanley Bing, written to answer the titular question; what would Machiavelli do in order to achieve greatness over others and work his way to the top? The answers vary, but all intertwine into one main point; what he would do is he would play to win, and he would justify his meanness through what happens in the end (Bing, p. XXII). This book is a roadmap for people who want to get to the top, to crush their competitors and everyone else that stands in their way (Bing, XXVII). Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "What Would Machiavelli Do?" essay for you Create order It is about, and for, those who may not have the smarts or the influence right off the bat, but have the courage to exploit others more than themselves, become mean, cold, and calculating, gain many enemies, and do whatever it takes to climb up to the top and stay there, having fun all the while. It is, ultimately, a satirical look at and a critique of the foolishness of those who try to be mean and unforgiving in order to get what they want and where they want. It exaggerates and laughs at those trying to be successful by following in the great prince Niccollo Machiavellis footsteps, even giving examples of people today that seem they might be using these methods, such as Martha Stewart, who did what Machiavelli would do and made it to where she wanted. It talks about the obstacles that you must overcome to be this way, such as sentiment and feeling or caring about other people and what they think, which are things that any normal person should feel, and it paints the race to the top as only being able to be won through using these ridiculous pieces of advice (Bing, XXIII). Every chapter creates a clearer image of an insufferable human. Sociology is the study of how human society functions, this class specifically studying relations between people. This book takes a well-known aspect of human 3 society, the desire to get to the top of that social ladder and overcome others, which very much involves human relationships, and delves into it, w hile also ridiculing it. It gives an interesting perspective on how people lie and cheat and harass others to get to the top when they cannot get there through legitimate means, and shows how they must interact with others while channeling Machiavellis scheming nature to be able to overthrow competitors, all of which would fall under the study of human relations. The author doesnt necessarily outright offer any suggestions to improve society, but through using sarcasm and satire throughout the work, and hoping that people are intelligent enough to understand that the advice he gives is not serious or legitimate, he presents the follies of following Machiavellian methods to overcome others and criticizes them, showing that they are what the dregs and scummy humans would use to raise their ranks. I believe the author wants the reader to think about how much better they are than these people, the people who do whatever is necessary for their own gain, and whose personal power is the ultimate goal (Bing, XXV). He wants readers to realize that the Machiavellis of the world, those who do things like cripple those who disappoint them, feed on others discord, ruin peoples plans, and always oppose others and create wars, are the people who we should not thrive to be like, as they are the asinine people who we who may have legitimate means to overcome, such as intelligence, should want to overcome. Obviously, the author is not a Machiavellian follower himself, and he is not trying to follow the methods outlined in the book to get to the top. He indicates that these methods and qualities are the only real way to get where everyone wants to be, but he 4 obviously isnt a heartless cruel human who is actually going to try to be a Machiavelli. His perspective, shown through how satirical he writes, is that these traits are bad and will only create jerks, and that these are the less desirable qualities of people who try to make a name for themselves. These are the people who will ruin normal peoples days. I definitely feel this way, and I dont think my opinion is biased because of the authors opinion. He laughably and satirically writes these characters with these traits to be hated, but also make them seem like inspirations and people to look up to and follow in the footsteps of, but hatred is exactly how I feel about them. These are people I would never want to come across in real life, and the pedestals that they put themselves on are depressing and show the problem with trying to climb the societal ladder. Personally, I very much enjoyed reading this book. The satire made it very fun to read, and it was interesting to analyze the advice that was given, as it conveyed just how cutthroat the competition in business is when trying to get to the top, and also painted a realistic, yet exaggerated, picture of humanity. I enjoyed being able to apply the examples of what Machiavelli would do, to people in our society today who somehow rise to the top and stay there. It was interesting to read this satire, which highlighted the nastiness of people who are like that; however, it was also interesting to have to agree that the qualities that the author provides, that follow how Machiavelli and many others see life and live life, are a legitimate way to rocket yourself to the top of your company or business and make a lot of other people hate you, but give you the power that you desire. Those who want to follow their desires to go from ordinary to extraordinary, rising to the top of their corporation and taking controls of others, and people who want 5 to have power and have no qualms about doing whatever it takes to get what they want would benefit from reading this book. In a legitimate sense, however, these are the people that should not be reading this book, as, honestly, if they already have that type of personality, they would probably take all of the advice provided seriously, and even though the examples given in this book are surefire methods to get to the top, they arent the makings of a good person. People that could actually benefit from reading this book are those who the author probably intended to target, who will take the examples and advice given, and try their hardest to achieve what they want without taking the advice and being the completely soulless, amoral, selfish human being as described through the qualities in the book.