Critical Thinking - Book Report/Review Example

Critical Thinking Essay Task for page 17 Modern people have lost their faith in people around them. They do not believe their neighbors or passers-by. Unfortunately, a high degree of mistrust results in the necessity of a total control. Nevertheless, these conditions are inappropriate in the modern democratic country. In the article by Dershowitz, it is evident that an optional national identity card is suggested as a perfect way out of disturbance and turmoil. Very often it is relevant to weigh positive and negative aspects of decisions made. In this case, there is an evident loss of a certain degree of anonymity, but on the other hand, there is an evident increase of security option. Therefore, the game is worth the candle. There are many ways to support our right for anonymity, but there are no less rights to support our rights for security and national safety. A national ID card with a chip that can match the holder’s fingerprint is another optimal solution. There is no doubt that the number of terroristic attacks would be decreased. Civil liberties can be endangered. People have to pay for their safety. To my mind, those people, who do not have something to hide, will readily accept national ID cards. In case there is an option to identify and reduce a certain number of illegal immigrants it can be considered as a great advantage of this measure too. On the one hand, it is better to consider a national ID card as a civil liberty and to look for positive sides of this innovative measure of national security. With respect to horrible terroristic attacks on September 11 it is evident that there was no relevant program of security. Computerization and availability of the system, which enables identifying an individual, is a guarantee of criminal actions’ prevention. ID card, in its traditional form, outlines a name, address and phone number of an individual. Fingerprints are necessary for a more effective information processing and identification of a criminal instantaneously. Nevertheless, safety of some people at the expense of independence of other people is not very attractive to all citizens. Very often people want to live their lives from day to day and they do not want to spare their time and energy on making some fingerprints. They are sure that their anonymity and freedom of choice means much more than a fake possibility of a terroristic attack. Their truth cannot be criticized and it is appropriate for these people to live one’s life and not to accept introduction of ID card. Task for page 26 We are lacking of real emotions…We live in concrete jungles and it is difficult for us to relax and get rid of our prejudices. People, who are in a constant need for expressivity and a nervous upheaval, prefer doing expressive actions. They are not afraid of even burning their flag in the name of their protest. This antipatriotic action can be surely criticized, but on the other hand, it is evident that emotions and feelings of these people are not chained in their hearts. They are free and are not afraid of moral constraints, but prefer living an independent and a free life. A burning of a flag is an extravagant kind of protest against certain actions of the state. That does not happen every day. The government and the country should not do anything wrong otherwise they can arise a revolt of the indignant civilians. To burn a flag of the country means to undermine a strong international basis of the country. There is a need to teach people to respect their culture and country. To burn a flag of the country means to show dishonor to the country. It is a very serious violation of the norms of behavior. On the one hand, it is appropriate to punish these people, who violate norms of behavior and want to undermine a symbolic uniqueness and identification of their country. Flag is a symbol of a national justice and people of different nations associate their national pride with it. So, there is no way to allow this moral deviance. The author of the article discusses the real cases of flag burning around the world. There is an apt organization of the essay by Saginaw. Many people consider that flag burning should be legal. It is very good that the author provides the readers with different points of view, because some of anarchists consider that they have a right to burn their flag to oppose to their country. The article by the author is rather comprehensible. It is not difficult to understand his main viewpoints. The usage of pathos by the author makes this article very patriotic and the Americans are able to experience a great feeling of patriotism between the lines of the article. When the soldiers go home in their coffins, they are covered with flags. This fact is very disturbing…It is really tragic to think that the most saint thing or symbol of the nation covers a coffin of a soldier, who protected his country. In the second and the third paragraphs the author claims that flag burning is possible not only in case of Vietnam, but also he compares the violence of this act with torturing of a gay person. Flag burning is as much serious as torturing of a human being. Freedom of speech is often associated with people’s right to burn their flag. This violent act is a reflection of emotions of people. The author thinks that this action should be illegal and he does not support legalization of flag burning. It is evident, because he provides only two facts about why it should be legal. Another important thing, which I noticed in the article by Saginaw, is that he uses reliable and strong sources for referencing. The Texas Vs Johnson is a resonant case. Another source “Alice in Wonderland” by Carroll is one of my favorite readings. Nevertheless, the author does not strongly operate with statistical data. Reliable sources of statistics should have been used better, but it seems to me that the main objective of the author was to evoke consciousness of the readers. Luke Saginaw in his critical essay “Why Flag-burning Should Not Be Permitted” appealed for the inner thoughts and patriotic emotions of the readers. It seems like the author wants to evaluate the situation with flag burning effectively, but he is lacking of reliable sources to support his arguments. From another perspective, figures do not intensify patriotic feelings of the readers. Any conscientious citizen knows the fact that one’s homeland, country’s support and strong beliefs of the individuals are leading principles of one’s life. Task 3 about West Virginia Law (1989) West Virginia Law (1989) has often been criticized by teenagers. This vivid discussion between a proponent and opponent of this law is presented in further dialogue between a student and a teacher. Student: Missis Jenkins, hello! I would like to tell you something I have been thinking about recently. My family does not have enough money and we have always suffered a lot from having scarce financial resources. It is of great interest for me to graduate from the high school, but I am afraid I will be looking for a job before graduation…The only thing, which is scaring for me, is the danger of having do driving license. Teacher: Hello, Jane! I think that you do not have a right conception of education! To my mind, education is an anchor of an individual’s life. It does not make sense to drop it out once you started learning. Yes, the law of West Virginia about restriction of driving license issuing for the students, who dropped out, is very effective. The officials of the State claim that a graduation rate is climbing up after introduction of the law. Student: Missis Jenkins, I understand this policy, but to my mind it is unfair to restrict one’s freedom of choice by forcing the students to graduate against their will or external conditions, which are sometimes very critical… Teacher: West Virginia law goes even further. Actually, high rates of graduation mean that our students will leave a successful and a prosperous life. From this perspective, driving license is not a right, but a privilege of a student and this should be well-known for them. This law is a supporting basis for the system of education in general, because if one of four students only graduates, than it is relevant to introduce educational reforms. Student: There are a lot of depressed and indignant students because of that law! When you a teenager and you do not have a car, you do not have an opportunity to live a sound and interesting life. That’s why very often my friends visit school and tries to graduate against their own will. They are restricted from having an opportunity of making their own choices in their lives. These students want to graduate without interest, but only for having their wheels!!This is a wrong motivation, I think. It is better not to force students to go to school, but to make a process of education more interesting and not oppressing. Teacher: I can understand this juvenile maximalism, but in the future these students will be grateful for having an opportunity of graduation. Driving license restriction is a strict, but effective measure and there is no need to criticize it. Of course, opponents can argue, but to my mind it is better to try different measures to keep students learning. Education is a guarantee of a successful future and there is no doubt about that. In case a student drops out after reaching 16, loses his driving license and does not receive a new driving license until he reaches the age of 18. We can say that 2 years of “oblivion” is a fair measure taken against a student, who decided to drop out. It is very simple to take away a student’s right for freedom and change it for his successful and prosperous future. Student: Wait, please! Think that this law causes too much harm and it is worth considering whether this harm overweighs good or not…It is very important to think about that. On the one hand, I will graduate, but on the other hand, I will have to visit school against my will for two years! It seems that this is beyond my abilities. The State’s leaders think that it is possible to force students to study, I think that education is a freedom of choice and it should not be obtruded on someone without his own will. To my mind, we are the masters of our destinies and there is no way to oppress us, a young generation of America, which will be spoiled once being oppressed… Works cited Barnet, Sylvan, and Hugo Bedau. Current Issues and Enduring Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking and Argument, with Readings. 8th ed. Boston. Bedford/St.Martins, 2008.Print. Read More