choirfarm Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 Here is a paper he did earlier for an online class. He was supposed to write a two paragraph definition paper. One of his big problems is his lack of vocabulary. It showed up on the PSAT as well. I need to somehow get him to improve in this area. Madmen A madman is a person that is insane or crazy. Two famous men in history who were madmen were Stalin and Hitler. Stalin was a madman because he thought that everyone was out to kill him. If Stalin just thought someone was out to get him, Stalin would have that person killed. He had no friends and he killed people that thought they were his friends. Only a crazy person would kill people just because. Stalin also killed most of the army officers, so when Hitler attacked Russia, Russia had no experienced army officers and so Germany almost took over Russia. Stalin only cared about power, which made him a very dangerous madman. Hitler was also crazy because he blamed all his failures on other people. He believed that that the German race was the greatest race in the world and all the problems of the world could be traced back to the Jews. Once he exterminated all the Jews, all the problems in the world would go away. No sane person would think this! During World War II, he would take no advice and he expected all his generals to obey him. He was the undisputed leader, and no one could challenge him. Stalin and Hitler were very similar and in fact, both deeply respected each other. Both of these men’s lust for power made them very dangerous. Let us hope that such men do not gain control of our country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LidiyaDawn Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 Looks good to me ~ I don't know much about Stalin, but Hitler sure fits the definition of a "madman"! Good example there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ester Maria Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Madmen A madman is a person that is insane or crazy. Two famous men in history who were madmen were Stalin and Hitler. Stalin was a madman because he thought that everyone was out to kill him. If Stalin just thought someone was out to get him, Stalin would have that person killed. He had no friends and he killed people that thought they were his friends. Only a crazy person would kill people just because. Stalin also killed most of the army officers, so when Hitler attacked Russia, Russia had no experienced army officers and so Germany almost took over Russia. Stalin only cared about power, which made him a very dangerous madman. Hitler was also crazy because he blamed all his failures on other people. He believed that that the German race was the greatest race in the world and all the problems of the world could be traced back to the Jews. Once he exterminated all the Jews, all the problems in the world would go away. No sane person would think this! During World War II, he would take no advice and he expected all his generals to obey him. He was the undisputed leader, and no one could challenge him. Stalin and Hitler were very similar and in fact, both deeply respected each other. Both of these men’s lust for power made them very dangerous. Let us hope that such men do not gain control of our country. The first thing that crossed my mind is that the definition is not set up the good way: to say that a madman is a person who is insane or crazy is to speak in "labels", rather than defining what is madness, what is insanity or what is craziness. He is merely replacing one colloquial label with another one. A better approach would be, for example, saying that a madman is a person of atypical psychology / mental patterns which then manifest in what's societally regarded as "abnormal" and dangerous behavior, and that the label covers a broad spectrum of what are regarded as mental illnesses, from strong paranoia to psychotic disorders, etc. Try to get him study, structurally, how a definition is formed: see concrete examples in dictionaries, discuss what makes a good and what a bad definition. Once he comes up with a better definition, he can take extremely paranoid people as a working example, and even squeeze these concrete two to fit his example. However, still keep in mind not to slip into colloquialisms (his writing is too colloquial: "just because", for example), demagogy ("Let us not hope (...) our country", "no sane person would..."), or superficial, reductive psychologizing ("only cared about power"). I'd have him rewrite it with these remarks in mind. Has he studied logic or rhetoric? I think the problems he shows can be addressed in the sphere of those disciplines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie in MN Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 (edited) Here is a paper he did earlier for an online class. He was supposed to write a two paragraph definition paper. One of his big problems is his lack of vocabulary. It showed up on the PSAT as well. I need to somehow get him to improve in this area. Madmen A madman is a person that is insane or crazy. Two famous men in history who were madmen were Stalin and Hitler. Stalin was a madman because he thought that everyone was out to kill him. If Stalin just thought someone was out to get him, Stalin would have that person killed. He had no friends and he killed people that thought they were his friends. Only a crazy person would kill people just because. Stalin also killed most of the army officers, so when Hitler attacked Russia, Russia had no experienced army officers and so Germany almost took over Russia. Stalin only cared about power, which made him a very dangerous madman. Hitler was also crazy because he blamed all his failures on other people. He believed that that the German race was the greatest race in the world and all the problems of the world could be traced back to the Jews. Once he exterminated all the Jews, all the problems in the world would go away. No sane person would think this! During World War II, he would take no advice and he expected all his generals to obey him. He was the undisputed leader, and no one could challenge him. Stalin and Hitler were very similar and in fact, both deeply respected each other. Both of these men’s lust for power made them very dangerous. Let us hope that such men do not gain control of our country. Two thoughts: 1. I prefer to use "who" for people, rather than "that" (first sentence). 2. I have not taught the definition essay yet, so I could be missing something. But the first sentence (definition) and the second sentence (saying Hitler & Stalin were madmen) don't seem connected. And since the rest of the essay is about the second sentence, it seems like that's the essay's topic/conclusion. If the assignment is to focus on the first sentence, then some kind of transition from sentence one to sentence two would be needed in my mind, showing that Stalin & Hitler are going to help illustrate the definition of "madmen." Maybe it just needs something like, "Two examples of madmen..." as a transition? 3. And yes, there are some great vocab words out there that could spice it up better than "crazy." 4. I do like Ester Maria's points about expanding on the definition and not just trading it for another word. The word "crazy" in particular can mean a lot of things besides being a madman. Is he focusing in on "madman" as a very particular form of insanity? I mean, there are very insane people who never hurt anyone else. Julie Edited February 23, 2011 by Julie in MN clarify Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.