Home

Essay outline he provided :
Outline of an essay that would demonstrate understanding: 
Begin by elaborating what Aristotle claims is the true meaning of “happiness”
1. start from Aristotle’s claim that the “nature” of a human being is what it is when fully developed
2. the “nature,” in this sense, of human being is a being able “to put into action the power of reason (1097b 24-1098a 4).”
3. this is “action” as eudaimonia, i.e., as the objectively truly “good” action in a given context
4. it is “the realization and perfect practice of virtue”
“a being-at-work of the soul in accordance with virtue, and if the virtues are more than one, in accordance with the best and most complete virtue”
5. virtues are of two kinds, moral and intellectual
“the best and most complete virtue” is the virtue of “justice” as the practice of “complete virtue” in relations with “one’s neighbour” Nicomachean Ethics Book V, chap. 1  
its practice, therefore,  is itself eudaimonia as “the realization and perfect practice of virtue”
6. provide some detail about the moral virtues such as their connection to the concepts of “hexis” and “mean” that are relevant to explaining why pleasure, honour and wealth cannot be the ultimate objects of rational desire 
make use of Sachs’ “Three Little Words” here
6.1 hexis
“holding oneself in a certain way”
“one holds oneself in a stable equilibrium of the soul, in order to choose the action knowingly and for its own sake”
“in a condition from which one can’t be moved all the way over into a different condition”
“Virtue cannot, by this account, be an inflexible adherence to rules or duty or precedent.”
role of “habit” in the development of hexis
child has an inborn potential for such development
to develop the potential, the child has to be enabled to settle down out of the emotional turmoil of childhood
“habit” is the way of doing this – Sachs uses Hamlet’s advice to his mother to illustrate the idea
the key point is that “habit” creates a condition in which “hexis” in the above sense (not a habit) can develop
when developed, hexis makes virtuous action possible as action actualizing the “mean”
this is action chosen knowingly as an end it itself – i.e. it’s an action actualizing moral virtue as eudaimonia
6.2 the “mean”
the person with fully developed moral virtues, i.e. fully developed hexis,  is a spoudaios, a person of moral stature
such a person is able to directly perceive, in any particular circumstances, the act that will actualize the “mean,” i.e. the act that will actualize the moral virtues as eudaimonia
fully developed hexis is required for perceiving things “as they truly are”
“This sort of perceiving contains thinking and imagining, but what it judges, it judges by perceiving it to be so.”
this enables objectively truly “good” action as the action that actualizes the “mean” – eudaimonia,
the idea of this as a “mean” divides failures to achieve it into those that involve “excess” and those that involve “deficiency,” both being  failures to fully develop hexis
It is not necessary to take this into account when determining what will be “beautiful” in a given context; fully developed moral virtues, i.e. fully developed hexis makes the “beautiful” action in a context directly perceivable
7. the “virtuous soul” as a “unity”
“We sometimes think of life as a conflict between the head and the heart, but in such a situation there is no unity of the human being, but only truces, compromises, and temporary victories of parties with divergent interests. The virtuous soul, on the contrary, blends all its parts in the act of choice.
“This, I think, is the best way to understand the active state of the soul that constitutes moral virtue and forms character. It is the condition in which all the powers of the soul are at work together, making it possible for action to engage the whole human being. The work of achieving character is a process of clearing away the obstacles that stand in the way of the full efficacy of the soul.  …  In the sense of character of which we are speaking, the word for which is ethos, we see an outline of the human form itself. A person of character is someone you can count on, because there is a human nature in a deeper sense than that which refers to our early state of weakness. Someone with character has taken a stand in that fully mature nature, and cannot be moved all the way out of it.”  Sachs “Three Little Word” p 13
“the ultimate effect of moral virtue: that the one who has it sees truly and judges rightly, since only to someone of good character do the things that are beautiful appear as they truly are (1113a 29-35), that practical wisdom depends on moral virtue to make its aim right (1144a 7-9), and that the eye of the soul that sees what is beautiful as the end or highest good of action gains its active state only with moral virtue (1144a 26-33)” Sachs “Three Little Word” p 21
8. Then explain why each of pleasure, honor and wealth cannot be the source of true “happiness”
“since every kind of knowing and every choice reach toward some good, let us say what it is that we claim politics aims at, and what, of all the goods aimed at by action, is the highest. In name, this is pretty much agreed about by the majority of people, for most people, as well as those who are more refined, say it is happiness, and assume that living well and doing well are the same thing as being happy. But about happiness— what it is— they are in dispute, and most people do not give the same account of it as the wise. Some people take it to be something visible and obvious, such as pleasure or wealth or honor”
“to review all the opinions is perhaps rather pointless, and it would be sufficient to review the ones that come most to prominence or seem to have some account to give” p. 3
8.1 explain the following passage ruling out pleasure
“Most people and the crudest people seem, not without reason, to assume from people’s lives that pleasure is the good and is happiness. For this reason they are content with a life devoted to enjoyment. … Now most people show themselves to be completely slavish by choosing a life that belongs to fatted cattle, but they happen to get listened to because most people who have power share the feeling of Sardanapalus.” p. 4
To fully explain this, you should also make use of the section in Book III of the Nicomachean Ethics on the virtue of “temperance”: Book III, chaps. 10-12  A key point is that:
“the things that are pleasant to those who are passionately devoted to what is beautiful are the things that are pleasant by nature, and of this sort are actions in accordance with virtue, so that they are pleasant both to these people and in themselves. So the life these people lead has no additional need of pleasure as a sort of appendage, but has its pleasure in itself.” 1099a 16-17 Sachs Nicomachean Ethics p. 14
8.2 explain the following passage ruling out honor
“refined and active people choose honor, for this is pretty much the goal of political life. Now this appears to be too superficial to be what is sought, for it seems to be in the ones who give honor rather than in the one who is honored, but we divine that the good is something of one’s own and hard to take away. Also, people seem to pursue honor in order to be convinced that they themselves are good. At any rate they seek to be honored by the wise and by those who know them, and for virtue; it is clear, then, that at least according to these people, virtue is something greater, and one might perhaps assume that this, rather than honor, is the end of the political life.” pp.4-5
The key points here are: 1) seeking honor means the individual does not know what eudaimonic being-at-work is, but such knowledge is a prerequisite for being able to actualize such being-at-work; and 2) if an individual’s being-at-work does actualize the perfect practice of virtue, the only individual able to know this, given what it is, would be the individual whose action it is. That individual, knowing this, would not seek or desire honour. These points need to be explained in terms of the first part of the essay explaining eudaimonia.
Explain why, though honour s “pretty much the goal of political life,” it is not the rational goal, namely. political activity as actualizing eudaimonia for its practitioner.
8.3 explain the following passage ruling out wealth
“The life of money making is a type of compulsory activity, and it is clear that wealth is not the good being sought, since it is instrumental and for the sake of something else. For this reason one might suppose that the things spoken of before are more properly ends, since they provide contentment on account of themselves, though it appears that even they are not what is sought, even though many arguments connected with them are tossed around.” p. 5
In Aristotle’s particular context, obtaining a certain amount of “money” is “compulsory” because eudaimonic being-at-work requires instrumental means that, in that context, are only available by buying them in a “market” using “money.” The relations with others this requires must be inconsistent with eudaimonic relations because they are inconsistent with the reciprocal practice of “justice” in the sense spelled out above. This explains why, in Marx’s critical appropriation of these ideas, an “ideal society” cannot involve “markets” in which relations between individuals are mediated by “money.”.

The instructions for the Definition Essay are found in Chapter 10 of the textbook.
Reminders:
Use academic tone
Use correct MLA
Use the Classical Argument Strategy 
Introduction
(assuming the classical argument model)
Exigency/catchy opening – if the topic is the expense of college, as college students, surely you could think of something relevant here?
Explanation of context – here, it might be a question of why some problem has arisen
Thesis: College tuition has increased approximately 260 percent since 1980 because of declining funding from state governments and the competition between colleges to attract students with ever-more elaborate services, all coupled with the normal operation of inflation.
Make transition.
Body
What pattern have you chosen for your reasons? Will you try to arrange things chronologically, in a causal chain or web, or will you go for something more like order of importance? It is best, of course, if your reasons follow the predictive thesis you used in your introduction, so we will use that precedent; for our example, order of importance.
Prove that your social phenomenon – here college costs rising – is true.
“State support for higher education has declined.” This assertion is the “Y” in our sequence, and you must prove it is true. You can look at your state – or likely any state, for that matter – or you can look at national data, but they will all tell a similar tale. You can look at gross dollars, remembering to adjust for inflation/change across time; you can look at support as a percentage of operating costs. Just as a point of pre-emptive rebuttal perhaps, note that if school budgets started increasing, then the percentage of state aid – even if the money remained steady – would look like a decline, so you need to be able to show that is not the explanation for what has been happening. Point out, for example, that even if money remained steady, inflationary action inevitably means that money supports less and less. Once you have shown your “Y,” you must then also prove the “–>,” which is the causality itself. Argue that less state funding must be made up, thus the increased tuition costs. Again, some causal connections will require less work because their warrants are more likely to be widely shareable, but you must not merely assume the connections are apparent or clear, and you must directly address the causality to at least make the links explicit.
“Colleges compete with more expensive amenities.” You must prove this “Y” true, too. Quote college presidents talking about the pressures to recruit and retain students in a highly competitive world; explain the logic that a place where a lot of students go to school is probably a place where a lot of students would like to go to school – because nothing draws a crowd like a crowd, so the colleges have to be willing to draw a crowd; demonstrate the modern rise of swanky dorms, student rec centers, highly visible sports programs, etc., all designed to capture the student imagination; at the same time, you show that these programs’ costs are borne by the students in the form of tuition or fees. Just as with any other reason, having proved the “Y,” now address the “–>” and show how increased publicity and advertising budgets, sixteen racquetball courts, climbing walls, or multiple dining halls directly add to a student’s cost.
“Inflation continues to operate.” The simple fact of the matter is that very few things in a modern economy ever get cheaper. Technology (like personal computers) often does after the first few generations, but then it levels off and even at the “cheap” price, will still get more expensive as time goes by. The nature of capitalism is the appreciation of goods and services, and colleges are not immune from these forces. Just because a history professor, for example, is still teaching the same history of Tudor England does not mean the cost of employing that person remains the same: health insurance, competitive salary, and on and on. And that does not even begin to cover the costs of operating the physical plant of the college itself: the heat, the AC, the tar for sealing the parking lots, the increasing complexity of the Wi-Fi network or electron microscopes, and on and on. Everything gets a little more expensive every year, and when there is less money, that gap compounds, and the students get squeezed.
Be sure to prove the “Y” and the “–>” for all the reasons in your chain/web.
If you have not already done so along the way, now is the time to address rebuttal. The Rebuttal might take at least three forms beyond summarizing the opposition arguments and whatever concessions to opposing strengths you need to grant. First, it is possible someone will argue your phenomenon (X) is not real or really happening; you would have pre-empted this already if you were thorough in point #1, above. Second, a critic might argue that your causes (the Ys) are not real – they did not really happen, etc. You would have addressed this with strong grounds. Third, a critic might argue that your connections (the –>s) are not real – thing X does not lead to the next thing. This would be the position of someone who might agree that Person H is poor and did commit a crime but would point out that most poor people do not commit crimes, so the causality is broken. You would have addressed that with strong backing.
An opponent may also offer a different set of causes. The writer George Will, for example, argues that college costs have primarily risen to capture the increased money available in federal and state student loans. More loan money –> students can spend more –> colleges will charge more.
You would need to be able to prove that Will has the causality almost exactly backward – the federal and state governments have converted much of their funding into loan programs, but that has resulted in less directly appropriated money (which you have already shown), and that leads to budget shortfalls, and that is where you came in. The amount the federal government has made available in Pell Grants, for instance, has had to increase to keep up with the lack of funding;[8] it is not the case that the increasing federal money is causing the rise; it is a result of the rise. The root cause is not greedy colleges, but parsimonious state legislatures. Just as with any other rebuttal, you must also be able to prove these kinds of claims, too.
Conclusion
Summarize what the readers have learned from your argument.
Suggest a next step or connect this causality to a larger issue. Now that the readers have learned this thing, what should they do with the knowledge? Support a realignment of state priorities? Look into alternate funding models for college?
End in some vivid way designed to stick in the readers’ minds; here some education or school-related reference seems suitable: “The next time you want to vent your frustrations about tuition, don’t blame your professor, but call your state senator, then maybe go for a relaxing swim in the campus’s new Olympic-size pool.”

The book American born Chinese by Gene Luen & The book Clap When You Land – By Elizabeth Acevedo The content of the discussion post should be involved In this post, you will want to reference the whole of the book for both books and use multiple points of evidence to fully support your central questions and topics. Be thorough in your discussion and make sure to bring multiple perspectives and ideas to the table about the books ,Keep in mind this is a Summative Assessment grade and in order to earn full credit, you need to support your thinking fully and showcase insight that enhances your speaker′s voice. Focus on your big takeaways and not just plot detail–It is important to use the perfect balance of plot detail, your perspective and supportive quotes. Please respond to one peer post Below:
Connor Morris (American born Chinese) The graphic novel American Born Chinese, written by Gene Luen Yang, is a story capturing three connected perspectives that come into contact with familiar challenges. An idea throughout this one idea is that of stereotypes and the judgment some face. The three characters Jin Wang, Chin-Kee and the Monkey King are all on separate journeys through the book, and the interactions they face as individuals portray the ideas of stereotypes very well. Jin faced this concept as young as early education from his teacher and peers. Later on, however, he is still pressed by these ideas. On page 96, after Jin’s friends make some jokes about him some bullies walk by, and say “Hey I think (with a c instead of a t) it’s getting a little nippy out here”(Yang 96). Following this, the reader can observe Jin and his friends looking at the ground, awkwardly in silence. Following this page, Jin decides to perm his hair to try and be more like the character Danny, since Amelia likes him. These two closely paired moments show the adversity Jin and his friends face and that Jin is trying to fit in more for social approval.
For the Monkey King, he is made fun of early on by the other gods in heaven. So, after proving himself to all lower deities, he faces Tze-Yo-Tzuh and is overpowered. Following this, the monkey king is trapped under a pile of boulders with a seal forbidding his achieved powers separating himself from the other monkeys. When the legendary status monk, Wong Lai Tsao requires the Monkey King’s help by order of Tze-Yo-Tzuh. To escape the boulders and help the monk, the Monkey King accepts his true identity, and changes back to his original size to help the monk. The monkey king changing back into his original form shows that he has accepted who he truly has been all this time, even with the stereotypes received from others as being a monkey. Ex: Page 150 (Yang).
Chin-Kee is something else entirely, buddy is devious at times. He is the ultimate evil cousin as he makes Danny seem less smart, and ruins his reputation every year by coming to America and it is revealed later this is why Danny keeps changing schools after he visits. On page 202, the story shows two other random students saying “His spit got on me!” Followed by, “Dude, you’d better go get checked out for S.A.R.S.”(Yang 202). I didn’t know what S.A.R.S. stood for until I researched it, and it is a respiratory disease similar to Covid, from 2002 originating from Asia. Seeing how Chin-Kee sees dirty, rude, and weird, prompts the students to assume just because he is also Chinese he could be carrying a disease. While it does make sense that saliva would get you sick, the part about S.A.R.S. is specific to Chin-Kees culture. These three examples prove how each character goes through similar challenges when it comes to how others see them, and that the resolution is in accepting who you are. This is certainly true for Jin and the Monkey King, it turns out Chin-Kee’s character runs America, and I don’t he’s worried about getting into parties in heaven or impressing girls.