1 / 5

Miller’s arguments: · Individuals must stand in opposition to collective injustice.

Miller’s arguments: · Individuals must stand in opposition to collective injustice. ·Inflexible, intolerant ideologies can be dangerous and harmful. ·Courage involves doing something even though it can be difficult and fearsome. ·A person is innocent until proven guilty.

rivka
Télécharger la présentation

Miller’s arguments: · Individuals must stand in opposition to collective injustice.

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Miller’s arguments: ·Individuals must stand in opposition to collective injustice. ·Inflexible, intolerant ideologies can be dangerous and harmful. ·Courage involves doing something even though it can be difficult and fearsome. ·A person is innocent until proven guilty. ·A clear moral outcry can spring even from an ambiguously unblemished soul. ·During challenging times, individuals often give in to hysteria, paranoia, and fanaticism. ·When confronted with challenges to safety and the social good, individuals in positions of power often act irresponsibly.

  2. REMEMBER: In the essay prompt you were told to "clearly identify one argument from his play and then take a clear position that either challenges or supports the argument that you identified." To consider... You can qualify your challenge or support of Miller's argument. That is, you can mostly or even somewhat challenge or offer support for what Miller is saying. For example, you might say (in a thesis statement) that "Miller is mostly correct in arguing that individuals must stand in opposition to collective injustice. However, there are situations when the concerns for personal safety and well-being are more important."

  3. Also remember: No matter what you identify as an argument that Miller is making, be sure to discuss not only how this argument applies to the Salem witch hunt, but also how it applies to the Red Scare and the witch hunts in the 1950s, which Miller is, of course, also addressing. So... you will need CDs (quotes) from ·the text of The Crucible AND ·the article "A Decade of Fear" or the article "Why I Wrote the Crucible"

  4. AND FINALLY REMEMBER: The prompt also encourages you to include "personal experience and/or contemporary examples." There is an opportunity for you in the "So What?" conclusion to add your thoughts about why Miller's argument is valid (or not valid) based on more recent challenges to civil rights and liberties. HINT: remember our work from class on Tuesday.

  5. Miller’s arguments: ·Individuals must stand in opposition to collective injustice. ·Inflexible, intolerant ideologies can be dangerous and harmful. ·Courage involves doing something even though it can be difficult and fearsome. ·A person is innocent until proven guilty. ·A clear moral outcry can spring even from an ambiguously unblemished soul. ·During challenging times, individuals often give in to hysteria, paranoia, and fanaticism. ·When confronted with challenges to safety and the social good, individuals in positions of power often act irresponsibly.

More Related