In the first point, the author's style is clear, concise, friendly, and reasoned. He presents himself as a professional with an understanding of the topic, but also as a teacher who wishes to impart his knowledge to others. An examination of his definitions is sufficient to understand the simplicity with which he writes. For instance, he describes globalization as "a set of processes that bring about a palpable sense of worldwide interconnectedness" (Prabu 14). This definition allows readers of all levels to understand the concept of globalization. Others who have a more advanced understanding of this topic may argue that this definition is too simple, but here it shows an advanced understanding of his audience and a desire to make his argument without the frustration of complexities. In addition, Prabu continues by using simple language to identify what he sees as a problem in international relations -- the conflicting nature of globalization and nationalism -- as well as his argument for change.
In addition to clear language, the author uses familiar and adequate arguments to support his thesis. Instead of supporting his thesis with arguments with international relations theories...
He sites well-known public figures such as Ghandi, and grants generous quotes to Hanks Kung, explaining a concept that even first grade students understand -- talking instead of fighting. Finally, Prabu uses the United States as a canvas to suggest that the model he presents can work successfully. These arguments are not only familiar, or easy for the readers to understand, but adequate, in that they suggest his thesis is not only the stuff of common sense, but also working today in the United States.
Finally, the author's argument is admirable in that it is logical, reasoned, and easy to follow. Prabu first outlines the trends in the international world today. Then, he explains the controversy. Finally, he presents his idea as logical both in concept and in reality, using both great thinkers such as Ghandi and Kung and the United States as support. By the end of the article, readers cannot help but buy into Prabu's argument, as the concept of talking instead of fighting seems simple and understandable.
Thus, in his article, Prabu asserts that international dialogue among cultures and religions will satisfy the contradictory issues of globalization and nationalism. He makes this argument for his audience of academia well by presenting clear language, a using familiar and adequate arguments, and using reasoned, logical arguments.
Works Cited
Prabu, Joseph. "The Clash of Dialogue of Civilizations."
However, when it comes to health-related issues, I do not believe that subjective personal impressions and feelings can influence one's ethical decision-making. The evidence is clear that smoking is harmful to the smoker, and also to the person who inhales second-hand smoke. Additionally, we were in my parents' home. I know that they have hard and fast rules about smoking on their property. My friend took a different point-of-view: he acquiesced
Philosophical Legal Theory: Analyzing the Rhetoric in Civil Rights Speeches by King and Wallace While Martin Luther King, Jr. (MLK) is remembered as a hero in the Civil Rights struggle, it is important to keep in mind that, during his time period, he was vilified by many who claimed that his efforts to secure equality for African-Americans were somehow unnatural. One of his most vocal opponents was George Wallace (Wallace), the
His social contract put forward the notion that citizens at some point give their consent to live under a "certain political structure" and that requires a social contract. John Locke is often seen as the "…philosopher of the American Revolution," Heineman explains. Locke's view was that in the early period of human existence, mankind lived in a state of nature, but though it was reasonably pleasant, there were problems. And
In fact, tolerance often stands in the way of engagement. Tolerance does not require us to attempt to understand one another or to know anything about one another. Sometimes tolerance may be all that can be expected. It is a step forward from active hostility, but it is a long way from pluralism" (Eck 1993). Achieving true dialogue and understanding, of course, is easier said than done. Also, teachers must
Philosophical Approaches The question of ethics, what the right thing to do vs. The wrong thing, can be a difficult one. There are occasions where right and wrong are black and white distinctions. The right thing to do is easy discernable, though it may not be the easiest things to do. However, this is the rare occasion. More often than not trying to determine right and wrong in a given situation
Philosophical Analysis of Animal-Human Interactions Both animal rights and ecocentrism discourage hunting, although for different reasons. Thesis: Animal rights philosophy views hunting from a moral perspective, as the unnecessary infliction of suffering on sentient beings, no less immoral than the persecution of human beings. Ecocentrism views hunting from a perspective of self-interest, as an activity with unforeseeable consequences which could threaten the ability of many life-forms to sustain themselves on planet