http://insidiousdeath.wordpress.com/
Beduya, Lemuel
Misa, Tatiana
Miyerkules, Hulyo 13, 2011
Linggo, Hulyo 10, 2011
Paraphrasing Exercise
1. Time is also described in Chassidism as the flux of ratzo v'shov -- a continual positive/negative oscillation of creative energy that drives all phenomena of the cosmos. Just as hearts beat, lungs inhale and exhale, energy pulsates in waves, particles vacillate between negative and positive states, so too the very substance of the cosmos continually oscillates between a state of being and not-being. This oscillation, as well, "precedes" Time as we know it. The essential continuum of Time in our world is the eventual manifestation of this higher form (Tzvi Freeman, http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/74335/jewish/What-is-Time.htm
© 2011, What is Time)
Paraphrase:
Freeman (2011) states that in Chassidism, Time can be defined as "the flux of ratzo v'shov", that is a postive and negative fluctuation of energy that makes up universal phenomena. The concept of how the universe fluctuates "between a state of being and not-being", is the same as how our lungs exhale and inhale air, how our hearts pump blood in and out, how energy can be produced in waves. This movement leads to how Time exists. In our world, this succession of Time is the effect of a higher form.
2. Why does creation necessitate ratzo v'shov? The standard explanation in Chassidism goes as follows: For anything to exist, two opposite processes are necessary. On the one hand, the object must be sustained by the will of its Creator. On the other, it must feel itself as a detached and distinct entity of its own. Ratzo v'shov is the artifact of this dynamic of conflict. In this way, it is the glue, or intermediary, between the creative force and the created being. In the words of Rabbi Menachem Mendel of Lubavitch (the "Tzemach Tzedek", 1789-1866), Time is the intermediary between the cosmic soul and space. Time is the process of being, as opposed to the content of being ((Tzvi Freeman, http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/74335/jewish/What-is-Time.htm
© 2011, What is Time.
Paraphrase:
According to Freeman (2011), in Chassidism, there are standard explanations of why creation require ratzo v'shov:
Two opposite processes should take place for something to exist. The object should be
dependent on it's "creator", but at the same time, the object must feel that it is not related to its creator and has a sense of identity.
With that concept, ratzo v'shov is the object of this changing conflict. This means that it is the bridge of the "creative force" that connects to the "created being". As Rabbi Menachem Mendel of Lubavitch (the "Tezemach Tzedek", 1789-1866) has stated, Time connects the "cosmic soul" and "space". Time is the means to existence, in adversary of existing.
© 2011, What is Time)
Paraphrase:
Freeman (2011) states that in Chassidism, Time can be defined as "the flux of ratzo v'shov", that is a postive and negative fluctuation of energy that makes up universal phenomena. The concept of how the universe fluctuates "between a state of being and not-being", is the same as how our lungs exhale and inhale air, how our hearts pump blood in and out, how energy can be produced in waves. This movement leads to how Time exists. In our world, this succession of Time is the effect of a higher form.
2. Why does creation necessitate ratzo v'shov? The standard explanation in Chassidism goes as follows: For anything to exist, two opposite processes are necessary. On the one hand, the object must be sustained by the will of its Creator. On the other, it must feel itself as a detached and distinct entity of its own. Ratzo v'shov is the artifact of this dynamic of conflict. In this way, it is the glue, or intermediary, between the creative force and the created being. In the words of Rabbi Menachem Mendel of Lubavitch (the "Tzemach Tzedek", 1789-1866), Time is the intermediary between the cosmic soul and space. Time is the process of being, as opposed to the content of being ((Tzvi Freeman, http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/74335/jewish/What-is-Time.htm
© 2011, What is Time.
Paraphrase:
According to Freeman (2011), in Chassidism, there are standard explanations of why creation require ratzo v'shov:
Two opposite processes should take place for something to exist. The object should be
dependent on it's "creator", but at the same time, the object must feel that it is not related to its creator and has a sense of identity.
With that concept, ratzo v'shov is the object of this changing conflict. This means that it is the bridge of the "creative force" that connects to the "created being". As Rabbi Menachem Mendel of Lubavitch (the "Tezemach Tzedek", 1789-1866) has stated, Time connects the "cosmic soul" and "space". Time is the means to existence, in adversary of existing.
Miyerkules, Hulyo 6, 2011
Precis Assignment
- 1. It's worth emphasizing that although we say this form of Time lead creation of the physical world, its lead is not in terms of physical time that has any form of measurement -- just as we have no form of measurement of any of the higher worlds or the phenomena within them. Furthermore, this form of Time is also a creation, just as all else within the higher cosmos. It leads the creation of the physical world, but is not primal in an absolute sense. That is to say, the very concept of precedent and antecedent is a creation.
Freeman (2011) states that Time lead on how the physical world was created but this does not mean that it can be measured; also it is a creation itself, just like any other form of phenomena. Therefore, the thought of how it was before and how it is today is a creation as well.
- 2. Time is also described in Chassidism as the flux of ratzo v'shov -- a continual positive/negative fluctuation of creative energy that drives all phenomena of the cosmos. Just as hearts beat, lungs inhale and exhale, energy pulsates in waves, particles waver between negative and positive states, so too the very substance of the cosmos continually fluctuates between a state of being and not-being. This oscillation, as well, "precedes" Time as we know it. The essential continuum of Time in our world is the eventual manifestation of this higher form.
According to Freeman (2011), Chassidism defined Time as “the flux of ratzo v’shov” which is a fluctuation of positive and negative energy that make phenomena happen. The concept of Time in our world is just the fluctuation on how it has lead to what we know of it today only in a higher form.
Miyerkules, Hunyo 22, 2011
Plagiarism Exercise
student revision 1
Mickey Mouse is a well loved symbol of the greatness of America because he represents a long carefree era when everything in the world has gone well for the most prosperous nation on earth. The fame of Mickey Mouse has spread around the world in the same way that Coca Cola and MacDonalds have arrived in even the most obscure corners of the earth. He symbolises the prosperity of Americans throughout a period when they have dominated the world both economically and politically. Mickey Mouse has become a movie star and a household name. This symbolises the American dream where everyone (including apparently rodents and quite possibly many other non-human personalities) can expect freedom of speech, freedom of actions and freedom to make an honest living.
While it is true that Mickey Mouse symbolises America this should not be regarded as a positive but rather a negative feature of the small rodent's character. He has been promoted by the American publicity machine. This is a form of insidious colonialism that is far more evil than the European colonialism of the past. In their era the Europeans were unstoppable just as Mickey Mouse and all that follows is unstoppable. The important difference is that European colonialism was immediately noticeable and, therefore, more possible to resist.
Mickey and Minnie Mouse demonstrate socially acceptable inter-personal behavior with their collection of animal friends. These characters have developed as vehicles for teaching young children the key elements of social behavior. Parents of today have grown up on the antics of Mickey Mouse and his friends and are happy for their children to do so. However, some people think he is not the role model who shows children how to interact socially with groups of friends and with individuals of the opposite sex. But he is a dictator who moulds children to social behaviour patterns which are alien to their society. He fosters rampant consumerism among nations who are economically unready for it, thus, creating bankrupted dependent client states. He also contributes to linguistic colonisation.
________________________________________
Is this text guilty of plagiarism? If so, what exactly is wrong? How can you correct it? Your comments:
Yes, the text is guilty of plagiarism because the writer has not credited his/her sources. There are no quotations in the texts acknowledging where the writer got it from, therefore confusing the reader if the idea is from the writer or his/her source. Also, some phrases have been copied word by word. Lastly, there are no citations whatsoever in the text.
The text should have quotations, and the author of the source. The writer could have at least paraphrased some ideas, and added his/her ideas as well. The writer should have cited his/her source to somehow acknowledge where and who he/she got it from.
Credit: David Gardner.University of Hongkong. Text retrieved from http://www4.caes.hku.hk/plagiarism/Source_A.htm
student revision 2
R.O. Dent says that Mickey Mouse is a well loved symbol of the greatness of America. He represents a long carefree era when everything in the world has gone well for the most prosperous nation on earth. He symbolises the prosperity of Americans throughout a period when they have dominated the world both economically and politically.
Michel Souris says Mickey Mouse, the charming little mouse from Walt Disney, is known around the world. He is considered a playful character who often gets into trouble but inevitably comes out on top. His resourcefulness and wit are regarded as symbolising all that is best about America and the Americans. While it is true that Mickey Mouse symbolises America this should not be regarded as a positive but rather a negative feature of the small rodent's character.
R.O. Dent also says that it is significant that a creature often viewed in other countries as a pest to be eradicated can rise in the United States of America to become a movie star and a household name. This symbolises the American dream where everyone (including apparently rodents and quite possibly many other non-human personalities) can expect freedom of speech, freedom of actions and freedom to make an honest living. It is important to note in this context that the rise to fame and or riches of an underdog has long been a popular theme in the folk lore of western countries in general but of America in particular.
Michel Souris also says that the fame of Mickey Mouse has spread around the world in the same way that Coca Cola and MacDonalds have arrived in even the most obscure corners of the earth. It has been promoted by the American publicity machine. This is a form of insidious colonialism that is far more evil than the European colonialism of the past. In their era the Europeans were unstoppable just as Mickey Mouse and all that follows is unstoppable. The important difference is that European colonialism was immediately noticeable and, therefore, more possible to resist.
He also says that for nine tenths of the world Mickey Mouse is not, in fact, the loveable underdog who manages to succeed in the land of plenty. He is not the role model who shows children how to interact socially with groups of friends and with individuals of the opposite sex. He is, by contrast, a dictator who moulds children to social behaviour patterns which are alien to their society. He fosters rampant consumerism among nations who are economically unready for it, thus, creating bankrupted dependent client states. He also contributes to linguistic colonisation.
________________________________________
Is this text guilty of plagiarism? If so, what exactly is wrong? How can you correct it? Your comments:
Yes, this text is still guilty of plagiarism because although the writer of the text acknowledged the source, it was not properly cited. There are no quotations so readers will get confused what the exact words of the source are, and which the ideas of the writer are.
In this text, the writer should have properly quoted the words of his/her sources. The writer should have clearly written what his/her ideas are and what his/her sources' ideas are.
Mickey Mouse is a well loved symbol of the greatness of America because he represents a long carefree era when everything in the world has gone well for the most prosperous nation on earth. The fame of Mickey Mouse has spread around the world in the same way that Coca Cola and MacDonalds have arrived in even the most obscure corners of the earth. He symbolises the prosperity of Americans throughout a period when they have dominated the world both economically and politically. Mickey Mouse has become a movie star and a household name. This symbolises the American dream where everyone (including apparently rodents and quite possibly many other non-human personalities) can expect freedom of speech, freedom of actions and freedom to make an honest living.
While it is true that Mickey Mouse symbolises America this should not be regarded as a positive but rather a negative feature of the small rodent's character. He has been promoted by the American publicity machine. This is a form of insidious colonialism that is far more evil than the European colonialism of the past. In their era the Europeans were unstoppable just as Mickey Mouse and all that follows is unstoppable. The important difference is that European colonialism was immediately noticeable and, therefore, more possible to resist.
Mickey and Minnie Mouse demonstrate socially acceptable inter-personal behavior with their collection of animal friends. These characters have developed as vehicles for teaching young children the key elements of social behavior. Parents of today have grown up on the antics of Mickey Mouse and his friends and are happy for their children to do so. However, some people think he is not the role model who shows children how to interact socially with groups of friends and with individuals of the opposite sex. But he is a dictator who moulds children to social behaviour patterns which are alien to their society. He fosters rampant consumerism among nations who are economically unready for it, thus, creating bankrupted dependent client states. He also contributes to linguistic colonisation.
________________________________________
Is this text guilty of plagiarism? If so, what exactly is wrong? How can you correct it? Your comments:
Yes, the text is guilty of plagiarism because the writer has not credited his/her sources. There are no quotations in the texts acknowledging where the writer got it from, therefore confusing the reader if the idea is from the writer or his/her source. Also, some phrases have been copied word by word. Lastly, there are no citations whatsoever in the text.
The text should have quotations, and the author of the source. The writer could have at least paraphrased some ideas, and added his/her ideas as well. The writer should have cited his/her source to somehow acknowledge where and who he/she got it from.
Credit: David Gardner.University of Hongkong. Text retrieved from http://www4.caes.hku.hk/plagiarism/Source_A.htm
student revision 2
R.O. Dent says that Mickey Mouse is a well loved symbol of the greatness of America. He represents a long carefree era when everything in the world has gone well for the most prosperous nation on earth. He symbolises the prosperity of Americans throughout a period when they have dominated the world both economically and politically.
Michel Souris says Mickey Mouse, the charming little mouse from Walt Disney, is known around the world. He is considered a playful character who often gets into trouble but inevitably comes out on top. His resourcefulness and wit are regarded as symbolising all that is best about America and the Americans. While it is true that Mickey Mouse symbolises America this should not be regarded as a positive but rather a negative feature of the small rodent's character.
R.O. Dent also says that it is significant that a creature often viewed in other countries as a pest to be eradicated can rise in the United States of America to become a movie star and a household name. This symbolises the American dream where everyone (including apparently rodents and quite possibly many other non-human personalities) can expect freedom of speech, freedom of actions and freedom to make an honest living. It is important to note in this context that the rise to fame and or riches of an underdog has long been a popular theme in the folk lore of western countries in general but of America in particular.
Michel Souris also says that the fame of Mickey Mouse has spread around the world in the same way that Coca Cola and MacDonalds have arrived in even the most obscure corners of the earth. It has been promoted by the American publicity machine. This is a form of insidious colonialism that is far more evil than the European colonialism of the past. In their era the Europeans were unstoppable just as Mickey Mouse and all that follows is unstoppable. The important difference is that European colonialism was immediately noticeable and, therefore, more possible to resist.
He also says that for nine tenths of the world Mickey Mouse is not, in fact, the loveable underdog who manages to succeed in the land of plenty. He is not the role model who shows children how to interact socially with groups of friends and with individuals of the opposite sex. He is, by contrast, a dictator who moulds children to social behaviour patterns which are alien to their society. He fosters rampant consumerism among nations who are economically unready for it, thus, creating bankrupted dependent client states. He also contributes to linguistic colonisation.
________________________________________
Is this text guilty of plagiarism? If so, what exactly is wrong? How can you correct it? Your comments:
Yes, this text is still guilty of plagiarism because although the writer of the text acknowledged the source, it was not properly cited. There are no quotations so readers will get confused what the exact words of the source are, and which the ideas of the writer are.
In this text, the writer should have properly quoted the words of his/her sources. The writer should have clearly written what his/her ideas are and what his/her sources' ideas are.
Mag-subscribe sa:
Mga Post (Atom)