The difference between reading and viewing images is that viewing images really helps the person viewing the image gets the picture in their head. Reading an image is more along the lines of putting the image into perspective as reading an image really takes it a step farther. Sometimes just viewing an image doesn’t have the same effect as reading an image because some images need that extra context. The difference comes into how we interpret the image because sometimes reading an image is more required to get the full picture. Reading an image is really meant to dig deeper into the image in question and to understand and learn what is being pictured.

Viewing an image is a little different because I feel like most of the time this is what most people do. It is a lot easier to just view an image once and move on because most of the time the image isn’t anything with meaning behind it. There are some more sensitive images where really reading into what is happening not only clarifies what is being pictured, but allows for us to grasp the concept on a much larger level. Both reading and viewing images include looking at an image but I feel like reading just takes a much more in-depth look at the image.

As once sung in the song “Genesis” by Dua Lipa: “In the beginning God created Heaven and Earth.” at least that’s what many people have believed for many centuries prior to the scientific advancements that we know of today. When it comes to the creation of life on Earth as well as the creation of the universe as a whole, there are several different theories that many people like to look to. The one that I believe in the most/trust the most is the theory of the Big Bang and then for life, the theory of evolution. These theories have the most evidence backed by science and they’re the ones that I’m the most familiar with. My education in the public school system did also expose me to some aspects of creationism which I ultimately did not really agree with and found to be quite inaccurate. The theory of evolution is back by so much science that for me to even try and think of it as a falsehood is almost impossible.

Each of these theories are interesting in their own way because Evolution describes how humans are so closely related to other life on Earth yet we think that we are above and beyond everything that lives among us. Creationism is interesting because it puts humans at the center of the theory and is very intertwined with religion. The Big Bang is the most interesting to me because the whole theory relies on science to explain it and how the universe kinda exploded and somehow we ended up here. With my education and my religious background I have put much more significance onto the theories of Evolution and the Big Bang that ultimately they are the theories that I believe in the most.

There are several sports teams in America that have offensive names mostly aimed at Native Americans including the Kansas City Chiefs, Chicago Blackhawks, and probably most notoriously the Washington Redskins. These teams have been able to use these names rather unchallenged for many, many years, but the question remains: Should these teams be allowed to do so? These sports teams absolutely should not be able to keep these names and should change out of respect for the offended people. The fact that the targeted group in each of these team names is aimed at Native Americans, a group that has been discriminated against since the founding of America is disgraceful. The issue comes in with the fact that these teams have been marketed with their original names uninterrupted and forcing them to change may cost a lot of money not only to the organization to rebrand but also to fans to buy new merchandise.

This is not a valid excuse because these teams certainly have the financial capabilities to do so. If certain ethnic groups are calling for the names to be changed it is most likely the right idea to do so. There is way too much political correctness in today’s society but separating political correctness from just plain racism is fairly easy in this situation. These teams all have Native Americans as their mascots and that is where a major problem comes in because it’s basically using a whole minority group as a mascot. The answer for all of this is fairly simple and seemingly effortless when the financial resources like these big sports teams have and the answer is to just change the name. Changing the name of the sports team will save everyone the trouble of these constant claims to change the names and also will give these minorities much more peace of mind.

I think that gender is heavily influenced by religion and literature. In a very famous example almost every single religious text puts man above woman in some way or talks about how women have harsher rules to abide by. One example that we read about is in the Koran how women can have only one husband but men can have several wives. In more modern religions such as Mormonism views like this are still indoctrinated. Women are typically always more regulated in some way while men have much more freedom. Gender stereotypes are seen to this day as all religious leaders are male in all of the major religions.

Gender influences literature in several ways as in much of early literature men were the more important characters while women were more of the supporting roles. Women also are typically written about as those who need help which has lead them to be thought of as weak and needing to be saved by a man when this isn’t the case. This is exemplified when looking at many works of literature such as stories about superheroes or princesses or even many works of old literature such as religious texts. Gender has always influenced religion and literature because women have always been written about needing a man and this is just simply not true.

The Koran has impacted my ideas about Islam in a very interesting way. I used to be extremely unaware about anything the Koran talked about and all I really knew about it was what I read online. I think much of what I read in the Koran was fairly similar from story to story but the story’s chapters all had a different way of delivering the message to worship and devote your life to God. I still do not have any real opinion on Islam because I just do not personally have any opinions on religion. I think the Koran has broadened my horizon in terms to what people of faith believe in and just a little bit about what the Koran talks about.

These stories are fairly repetitive about devoting your life to God, praying to God, worshipping only one God, and those that do not will be punished. The Koran talks about how it is not to be questioned because it is the word of God. I think much of what I have read about has not really impacted my opinions on Islam but it is much better for me to have an idea of what they practice and worship. Reading the Koran has broadened my horizon on Islam and it has made me a little bit more aware of what exactly the Islamic faith is about.

I think people prefer not to discuss religion because it is a very controversial topic that has been at the center of many conflicts in the past. Religion is a topic that is very near and dear to many people’s hearts while to others it means very little to nothing. This makes it difficult to talk about religion because many times it does not lead to a productive conversation but rather an argument. The possibility of engaging in an argument turns many people away and most likely makes them prefer not to talk about it. Either way, it is important to try to understand everybody’s perspective and respect each and everybody’s opinion on religion.

I personally do not like to talk about religion because I have not practiced a religion since 2007. I identify as an atheist and many people just would rather not hear my opinion on the matter because religion is very close to people’s hearts. I completely respect people’s rights to practice their own religion so this doesn’t bother me because everyone is allowed to worship the way they want to. Many people may feel like me because religion just simply may not matter to them and speaking with people who are devoutly religious may not lead to anything productive.

1960s American Culture plays more of an underlying role in Cat’s Cradle. The opening of the Cat’s Cradle talks about the book that John is writing called “The Day the World Ended” which is about the atomic bomb being dropped on Hiroshima. Much of what is written throughout the story talks about morals and power and during this time period there was quite a bit of tension among the world superpowers with the ongoing Cold War, Cuban Missle Crisis, and Vietnam War. Vonnegut models each of the characters in a rather humorous way or a stereotypical way like the men having more character development and are more relevant than the women. Each of the characters plays on different criticisms of human beings and failings.

On the other hand, each of the women’s roles is very stereotypical and are much less major than that of the men’s. This matches 1960s American Culture perfectly as men had much more important roles as women were still fighting for the equal respect that they deserve. One example of this is Dr. Breed’s secretary being female and Sandra’s role being a prostitute. There are also criticisms of war which also makes sense as there were many anti-war protests against the Vietnam War during this time period.

I think between the “Apology” and “Crito”, that “Crito” best explains Socrates’ fate. In the “Apology”, much of what Socrates talks about is why he’s on trial and why he’s smarter than other people. It really is much more of Socrates telling his side of the story rather than an actual apology. Socrates talks about how his criticism is helpful rather than a bad thing and says that by sentencing him to death, the jury is only hurting themselves. “Crito” focuses on Socrates after the trial while he is in prison and having a conversation with his friend, Crito. Crito mentions trying to save Socrates by smuggling him to exile. Socrates ultimately tells Crito about how escaping prison would be very unjust and cites the Laws of Athens and speaks about how every citizen must follow the laws.

After reading both passages I believe that “Crito” better explains Socrates fate as he basically flat out says to Crito that he is going to accept his fate which is death. In the “Apology” it ends on the sentencing of Socrates which does not really go into depth or explain anything that will happen afterward. “Crito” ends on Socrates saying to Crito that he will accept his punishment because if he doesn’t he has violated his role as a citizen in Athens and no other society would want him to live there. For this reason, I believe that because Socrates rejects the notion of escaping to live in exile and accepts his sentence to death, that “Crito” is better explains Socrates’ eventual fate.

After reading the biographies and introductions I feel that I personally would rather meet Socrates. After reading Socrates’ bio I find much of what he went through to be much more interesting than that of what Plato went through. Socrates served in a hoplite, which is a very heavily armored infantryman, during the Peloponnesian War with Sparta for the Athenian army. Even though he most likely was not rich he still lived a very frugal lifestyle mentioning that he didn’t really bathe and was always barefoot. He also seems to be a very outspoken man for his beliefs, which I find very noble. In his bio, it says that he was the lone vote against an illegal motion which would have tried a group of generals who didn’t pick up dead bodies after a battle at sea.

Socrates’ charisma is what drove people to want to listen to him and I feel like I would really just want to sit down and hear what he has to say. Even Plato was someone who really enjoyed listening to what Socrates had to say as much of his writing takes after much of what Socrates spoke about throughout his life. Plato even represents a Socratic philosophy according to his biography and much of his writing questions people about the conventionally recognized ethical virtues. Socrates main point that he spoke about extensively throughout his life was about virtues. I feel like because of this I’d rather sit down and listen to what Socrates had to say not only because he had an interesting life, but because he really stood up for what he believed in until the day he died.

There are several differences between reading or hearing a story. In the way distant past it was much easier to just hear stories because there were no tools to write with and more importantly no one was literate. Many times when hearing stories it can cause differences between the original story and the versions of the stories that are told after. Reading does not typically encounter this problem as it allows for the original words to be published and prevents any alterations from being made to the text. Many early stories were just passed down through the word of mouth and much like Gilgamesh, it leads to many different versions of the story. Many times those who publish their own version of Gilgamesh there are several differences between the story due to their respective interpretations.

Hearing and reading stories both allow the reader/listener to use their own creativity to imagine themselves in the situation that is being painted for them. Many times reading stories allows for a more personal connection to the story rather than hearing a story as told by someone else. Reading stories allows the reader to try and interpret the text that is in front of them in their own way which can lead to many different pictures being painted for everyone. When hearing stories, those that are listening to the story really do have to rely on the person telling the story to paint the picture for them. But, when being able to read a story it allows the reader to reread portions that confuse them and allows them to paint a clearer picture.