регистрация / вход

Chivalry Essay Research Paper Chilvalry is the

Chivalry Essay, Research Paper Chilvalry is the most significant concept throughout history. Chivalry, in its formal code, came to exist in the Middle Ages around the 12th century. It is

Chivalry Essay, Research Paper

Chilvalry is the most significant concept throughout history. Chivalry, in its

formal code, came to exist in the Middle Ages around the 12th century. It is

not clear as to whether the Romans, the Franks, or the Germans gave rise to

chivalry, but each culture brought the seeds of conduct with them. The

formal code was based on knightly conduct, with special emphasis on the

courtly manners towards women. Chivalry was such an important aspect of

morality that the church became heavily involved. The church used the code

of chivalry to reshape the idea of the social warrior. In doing this, the church

wanted citizens to identify with virtue, military excellence with courtesy, a

sense of justice, piety, and honor.(Ventura, pg. 46) People familiar with

King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table know that a chivalrous act

usually involved someone, usually a damsel in distress and a brave knight

who comes to the rescue. For the sake of arguing, we need to establish our

definition of chivalry. ?Our reparative definitions are as follows: Chivalry-

the qualifications of the ideal knight. Dead- extinguished no longer existing.

Our Stipulative definitions are the following: Chivalry-for our purposes,

chivalry are the characteristics of a person who follows and believes in the

principles of the Chivalric Code. Dead-no longer occurring Chivalric Code:

I. Live to serve king and country. II. Live one’s life so that it is worthy of

respect and honor. III. Live for freedom, justice and all that is good. IV.

Choose death before dishonor. V. Never attack an unarmed foe. VI. Avoid

lying to your fellow man VII. Administer justice. VIII. Defend the week and

innocent. IX. Destroy evil in all of its monstrous forms. X. Show Respect to

authority. XI. Exhibit manners. XII. Do not allow anger to blind you, a cool

head will win the day. XIII. Exhibit courage in word and deed. XIV. Never

abandon a friend, ally,

or noble cause. XV. Never betray a confidence or comrade. XVI. Remain

loyal to one’s friends and those who lay their trust in thee. XVII. Fight with

honor. XVIII. Die with honor.?(Berger,pg.28) The code of honor that

chilvarly made people live by left a cultural tradition to be carried out many

hundreds of years.

Today, morality and ethics are rare commodities. One could generalize

these principles down to everyday situations, but even then, one would find

that the majority of people just don’t live by this code. Today, the majority of

people just do not hold these values true to their hearts. And it should be

clarified that just because you hold a door open, or pick up books for a

female you are not chivalrous. Chivalry is code that one must live their life

by, not simply picking and choosing a few to follow. For example, schools

no longer teach morality; but religion is able to reach only a few and families

are often broken. We see the results of this problem nightly on the television,

news, and in dailypapers.

Nobody in the world will do the right thing every single time. We are

going to pick for aspects of the chivalric code and demonstrate how they no

longer exist. Argument #1 Deductive Reasoning For our purposes cheating

will be defined as obtaining an unfair advantage to benefit oneself. It has

been shown through research that cheating is a common occurrence at all

college campuses. Of 68 people that were polled at Cal Poly 80% (or 54

people) admitted that they have cheated at one time or another. Cheating is a

direct violation of the Chivalric Code. P1 Cheating is obtaining an unfair

advantage to benefit oneself. P2 Cheating is a common occurrence at all

college campuses. P3 80% of Cal Poly students admitted to cheating at one

time or another. P4 Cheating is a violation of the Chivalric Code. Therefore,

C Chivalry is dead. A.R.G. Conditions Acceptability: Premise 1 is cogent

because it is a definition and not an arguable statement (common

knowledge). Premise 2 is acceptable because it is not easy to refute and gives

no evidence of not being acceptable. Premise 3 is a different case. It is

acceptable under the proper testimony clause. The premise is a fact from a

poll taken at Cal Poly and there is no reason to doubt the fact that the results

are true. Premise 4 is true by simple logic. Premise 5 is defended by the rest

of the argument and is therefore acceptable. Relevance: Relevance is also

evident in this argument. Premise 1 clearly defines the ambiguous term of

cheating for premise 2. Premise three is a proof of premise 2. It gives a

specific example to the broad statement made in premise 2. Premise 4 is

definitely relevant. Premise five is not relevant to premise 3 or 4 but is

relevant to premise 1 and 2. Grounds: This argument meets the G condition

because all the premises are true and relevant to themselves and support the

conclusion. Counter Argument P1 For this purpose we will define cheating

as directly copying someone’s work. P2 Cheating is not a common

occurrence in college classrooms. P3 Of the 68 people polled at Cal Poly

only 19 of them admitted copying off a neighbor’s work. P4 19 of 68 is less

than 51% that is needed to prove a majority. P5 Some people will always

defy the Chivalric Code but a majority is needed to prove the code is

nonexistent. Therefore, C Chivalry is not dead A.R.G. Conditions

Acceptability: Premise 1 is a stipulative definition and can not be argued.

Premise 2 uses the stipulative definition of premise 1 and makes a general

statement. This premise is accepted provisionally based on the fact that the

other premises aim to prove that statement true. Premise 3 is yet another fact

that can not be argued and is therefore acceptable. Premise 4 states a simple,

logical fact and can not be argued either. Premise 5 is easily refutable and is

not acceptable. Relevancy: Premise one is directly related to premise 2.

Premise 2 is proved true by the facts presented in premise 3. Premise 4 is

related to premise 3 through its usage of the information in 3. Premise 5 is

not relative to any of the other premises and allows this argument to not meet

the Relevancy condition. Grounds: This argument does not pass the G

condition because it does not meet the R condition. Premise 5 needs to be

supported by a sub-argument in order to be acceptable on the G condition.

Argument #2 Conductive Reasoning In today’s society people attempt to

cover up their mistakes, hoping that nobody will notice, this is not an

honorable act. Most people are not courageous or brave and rarely help when

someone is in trouble. Now days, people are quick to sue and often greedy

when it comes to money and financial matters. People are only generous

when others are watching. The more money the better! Loyalty is rarely seen

in any way shape or form. From the smallest social circle to family situations

across the nation, all lack loyalty. We live in a world of aggression and

revenge. If we are wronged we want to get that person or persons back. All

of these above principles, which happen to be in the Chivalric Code, are

often not seen in present day society. P1 In today’s society people attempt to

cover up their mistakes, hoping that no one will notice, this is not an

honorable act. P2 Most people are not courageous or brave; people no longer

help when they see that a person is in trouble. P3 Now more than ever

people are sue happy, intending to get everything that is theirs and more;

they are generous only when they have to be. P4 Loyalty is rarely seen

people cheat one another everyday, parents abandon their children, and

people talk about each other when they are not around. P5 People who are

able to “forgive and forget” are not common. Revenge, lawsuits and

aggression have taken their place. P6 Honor, courage, generosity,

forgiveness, and loyalty are rarely seen. Therefore, C Chivalry is dead. 1 + 2

+ 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 C (Converging Premises into one conclusion) Counter

Argument Honorable people treat others fairly and keep their word. People

are usually courageous and help those in trouble with out thinking of

themselves. People would rather give than receive showing that most

everyone is generous. People hardly ever ask for the return of something they

have loaned. People rarely cheat on each other or leave friends, children or

anyone else they love. These are all part of the Code of Chivalry. P1

Honorable people treat others fairly and keep their word. P2 People are

courageous and help those in trouble with out thinking of themselves. P3

People would rather give than receive showing that most everyone is

generous. P4 People hardly ever ask for the return of something that they

loaned. P5 People rarely cheat on each other or leave friends, children, or

anyone else they love behind. Therefore, C Chivalry is alive. A.R.G.

Conditions Conductive Argument P1 A- known to be a priori true R-

positive relevance P2 A- matter of common knowledge R- positive relevance

P3 A- matter of common knowledge R- positive relevance P4 A-known to a

priori true R- positive relevance P5 A- matter of common knowledge R-

positive relevance P 1-5 G- all grounds for cogent argument Counter

Argument P1 A- Highly refutable, not acceptable R- positive relevance P2

A- premise is refutable on the basis of common knowledge R- positive

relevance P3 A- highly refutable R- positive relevance P4 A- vague or

ambiguous, not acceptable R- positive relevance P5 A- begs the question R-

positive relevance P 1-5 G- all grounds for argument Argument #3 Inductive

Reasoning P1 On an average day in North Carolina, 100 women are victims

of rape or attempted rape and many others are battered, predominantly by

men that they know. P2 The population is bigger in California than in North

Carolina. So probably, P3 On an average day in the California, over 100

women are victims of rape or attempted rape and many others are battered,

predominantly by men that they know. P4 Rape is a form of assault to a

woman, and assaulting a woman shows no respect for a woman. P5

Respecting a woman is a rule under the code of chivalry. Therefore, C

Chivalry is dead. A.R.G. Conditions First, we will test the premises of the

subargument for acceptability. P1 is acceptable based on testimony. P2 is

acceptable based on common knowledge. Next, we will test for relevance.

Both of the premises are positively relevant to the conclusion. Finally, we

test for good grounds. Both premises being acceptable and relevant,

therefore, there are good grounds for the conclusion. Now we will move on

to the whole argument. P4 is acceptable based on common knowledge. P5 is

acceptable a priori based on the code of chivalry. The subargument, P4, and

P5 are all positively relevant to the conclusion. There are also good grounds

provided for the conclusion. Therefore, this argument is cogent. Counter

Argument P1 60% of men polled at Cal Poly open doors for women. So

probably, P3 Around 60% of men in San Luis Obispo open doors for

women. P4 Opening a door for a woman is a sign of respect. P5 Showing

respect for a woman is a rule under the code of chivalry. Therefore, C

Chivalry is not dead. The previous argument also uses inductive reasoning.

We are applying the statistics we found true at Cal Poly to the population of

San Luis Obispo. We feel that this sample is representative because we

polled a total of 68 people at various locations on campus, including the

recreation center, the library, the lighthouse, the campus store, the university

union, and the business building breeze way. We also feel that this sample

can apply to the population of San Luis Obispo because Cal Poly students

account for a large amount of the population of the city. A.R.G. Conditions

Now we must take the argument through A.R.G. First, we deal with the

subargument. P1 is acceptable because of testimony. It is also positively

relevant to the conclusion and as a result of the above paragraph it also

provides good grounds for the conclusion. Now we move on to the whole

argument. P4 is acceptable based on common knowledge. P5 is acceptable a

priori based on the code of chivalry. The subargument, P4, and P5 are all

positively relevant to the conclusion. Based on the fact that all the premises

are acceptable and relevant to the conclusion, there are good grounds. This

argument is also cogent. Argument #4 Analogy “The president of the United

States is a citizen who is entitled to represent the people of the United States

and we look up to him as a role model. Recently, the president lied about his

affair with Monica Lewinsky. If our president lies, then it shows us that it is

okay to lie. Lying goes against the code of chivalry. Therefore, seeing the

president’s actions, chivalry is dead. P1 The president is a citizen who is

entitled to represent the people of the United States. P2 We, as citizens, look

up to the President as a role model. P3 The president lied about his affair

with Monica Lewinsky. (Christian Science Monitor) For our purposes, P4

Lying is knowingly not telling the absolute truth. P5 If our president lies

then it shows us that it is okay to lie. P6 Lying goes against the code of

chivalry. (Refer to the code of chivalry.) Therefore, C Chivalry is dead.

A.R.G. Conditions As far as linking goes, P1 P2 and P3 are linked and P4 is

a subargument. Then P4 P5 and P6 are linked leading to the conclusion. P1

definitely passes the A condition because it is common knowledge that the

president represents the United States. It is positively relevant to P2 because

it ties into the idea that because our president lied he is not chivalrous,

therefore chivalry being dead. It also passes the G condition because it is

linked with the other premises that support the subargument. P2 is also

acceptable because once again it is common knowledge. It is negatively

relevant to P3, but passes on the G because it offers support to the

subargument. P3 is acceptable because it is taken from a newspaper. It is

positively relevant to the subargument, P4 and passes on the G due to the

fact that it offers support to the conclusion. P4 is a subargument, and

because it’s premises pass the A condition is automatically passes the A

condition. It is positively relevant to P5 because it is talking about lying

which ties directly with the conclusion. Believing this premise true and

bringing it together with the other premises, it passes the G condition. P5 is

a little wishy washy, so we will pass it provisionally, hoping that the R and

G condition pass. It is positively relevant to P6 and it passes on the G

condition due to the fact it is talking about the connection between lying, the

president, and the code of chivalry. P6 is acceptable on the basis that it was a

premise defended elsewhere. It is positively relevant to the conclusion and

passes on the grounds when taken collectively with all the other premises.

So our argument, passing all the proper conditions, is cogent. Counter

Argument “The president of the United States is a representative of the

people. His main job is to guide this country into economic prosperity and

solve many of the current problems in the United States today. We as

citizens, have no right to pry into the personal life of the president and

should only be concerned with his governmental duties. Therefore, your

argument (previous example) is unacceptable. (Deductive Reasoning) P1

The president of the United States is a representative of the people. P2 His

main job is to guide this country into economic prosperity and solve the

current problems in the United States today. P3 We have no right to pry into

the personal life of the president. P4 We should only be concerned with the

president’s governmental duties. Therefore, C Your argument is

unacceptable. A.R.G. Conditions P1 and P2 are premises that could stand on

their own. P3 and P4 are definitely connected because they offer the most

support for my conclusion. As far as the A.R.G. conditions, P1 is acceptable

because it is common knowledge. It is positively relevant to P2, supporting

the fact that he guides our country. It also passes on the grounds because it

goes towards supporting the conclusion. P2 is acceptable because again it is

based on common knowledge. It is definitely relevant to P3. But, whether it

is positively relevant depends on your own opinion. And it passes on

grounds because it is offering support for the conclusion. P3 it pretty much

an opinion and depending on your own views would depend on whether or

not to choose it to be acceptable. It is definitely relevant to the conclusion

and it counts in favor of P4 so it is positively relevant to P4. Pushing the

acceptability aside, if we belief this to be true then it passes on the G. P4

passes on the same conditions and in the same way as P3 did. P4 is based on

opinion and it depends on your own views In Final Analysis As one can

clearly see, the examples that we provided clearly establish the resolution

that chivalry is dead. We provided clear and cogent arguments, which

demonstrate that the Chivalric Code is something of the past that died out a

long time ago. The world has outgrown the moral codes that we once lived

by. Small hints and broad generalizations of chivalry can still be applied to

everyday life, but the practice of chivalry is and has been dead for a long

time.

317

ОТКРЫТЬ САМ ДОКУМЕНТ В НОВОМ ОКНЕ

ДОБАВИТЬ КОММЕНТАРИЙ [можно без регистрации]

Ваше имя:

Комментарий