A Compare and Contrast: The Teachings of Jesus and Other Classical Era Teachings

Take a look at the compare and contrast chart below and notice the differences and similarities between different schools of thought. 

For a larger view, click on this link.

Compare/ Contrast Teachings Chart

The Cause of an Empire

We know empires lead to vast political change, expansive trade networks, complex social classes and extravagant legends. But what is it that causes an empire? Why do empires form? Let's take a look at some examples from China, India and Rome to see how empires in history have formed.

The first thing that allows an empire to be able to be formed is the lack of a strong political system and the vulnerabilities these leave open in who controls the region. In India, the withdraw of Alexander the Great from the Punjab gave an opportunity to Chandragupta Maurya to expand and conquer India and parts of Bactria. In China, the fall of the Zhou dynasty left China in "the warring states," a time of political limbo until the Qin dynasty asserted itself and began taking over other Chinese states in order to bring China under a unified rule. Finally, in Rome, unrest in the cities and a huge gap between the social classes caused urban poor to join armies with generals who held their own agendas. It was in this way that Julius Caesar came to power and established a centeralized government.

That is not why empires form though. Empires form because of centralized rule and conquest. In India, Chandragupta Maurya brought much of India into a centralized rule, and the Mauryan empire later took and controlled even more of India. Both centralized rule and conquest were present in the development of the Mauryan empire. In China, Qin Shihuangdi declared himself first emperor of the Qin dynasty after he brought Chinese states into a strict centralized government built on legalist fundamentals by conquering them. Finally, in Rome, the Roman empire grew to include all the land around the Mediterranean sea. Julius Caesar brought Rome on the path to a strong centralized government, and the Roman empire was finally brought together as an empire under Augustus, who also conquered land in Anatolia and northern Africa.

It is centralized rule and conquest that cause an empire to form, but the lack of a strong political or military force is what helps the rulers who engineer these empire come to power.

Wikipedia vs. Textbook: The Ultimate Showdown

One of the most prominent sticking points in high-tech education so far, is Wikipedia. Is it reliable, especially when compared to textbooks? Is one better than the other? More efficient for teaching? Let's look at a little case study, looking at Buddhism in both Wikipedia and the text book. What did we find? For one, both Wikipedia and the text book had the same information, but that's not to say they are the same at all.
The book, although it broached all the major concepts and important facts, was concise to say the least. The Wikipedia page included background, detailed facts about beliefs held by Buddhists, the history, origin and the goals of Buddhism. In short, the book provides facts about Buddhism in context to historical development, which may be useful for a test. Wikipedia, on the other hand, provides detailed information and perspective from the present, which is incredibly useful in building opinions and connections to the world we live in today.
Now, does one work better or teach better than the other? I don't think so. I think both are good sources of information and perspective, but in different contexts and for different reasons. Because of this, I don't think their usefulness in the classroom and be compared and one placed above the other. Personally, I don't carry a preference one way or the other about which I would rather use. I think they are both education and beneficial to understand the rapidly changing world that we live in.
The bottom line is, I don't really think a class based on either one or the other is really the way to go, I think using both together to compare and contrast a historical aspect's effect on history and its effect on the present is the best way to learn about and interact with the knowledge presented to us.

A Comparison: The Bhagavad Gita, Zarathustra and Confucious

Along with rapid political development and the unification of large areas into one perceived "nationality," during the Classical Era, the expansion of thought was also rapidly evolving across societies from purely ceremonial and mechanical religions into something deeper. With that in mind, I would like to look at and compare three major thought groups and theologies from the Classical Period; The Bhagavad Gita (Buddhism), the teachings of Zarathustra (Zoroastrianism), and the thoughts of Confucius.

First, lets look at the Bhagavad Gita, the main document on which this post is based. It talks about the caste system, and more directly about the importance of being a brave and noble warrior in order to achieve honor. These teachings of nobility and honesty, are key to the caste system, stating that one who runs from battle is not noble of carrying the caste of kshatriya. Some of these teachings are very close to the teachings of Zarathustra. Although Zarathustra did not focus on anything that would be able to be related to the caste system, he did teach of an afterlife, in much the same ways that Buddhism taught people to seek to become removed from the cycle of reincarnation by performing caste duties,  Zarathustra's teaching preach of living a wholesome and honest life, and that in return when the forces of good win over the forces of evil, those who lived good and moral lives will have their souls moved to a heavenly paradise.

The teachings of Buddhism and the Bhagavad Gita called for renunciation and to go through life without purpose, while the teachings of Zarathustra called for individuals to participate in and enjoy their lives. This way the two teachings present a huge deviation from one another.

The teachings of Confucius, on the other hand, stressed the importance of not being involved in religion, as he believed it was beyond understanding. This proposes a clear divide between the thinking of Zarathustra and the Bhagavad Gita, as both greatly center around a religious aspect. However, both the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita and Confucius tell us that who holds government positions is important. Confucius believed that highly educated, good and thoughtful people should be placed in government, while the Bhagavad Gita focuses on the importance of the caste in both government and fighting, and how one must work to maintain his caste's expectations. In these respects, the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita and Confucius are very much in tune with one another.

How to Grade a Blog? My Thoughts and Opinions

There is not doubt, it's a tricky question: how do you grade a blog? Do you grade grammar and spelling, or do you look to the facts presented and what has been written? Who should do the grading, and what should be the requirement. I think to answer this question we need to look to what a blog is. As far as I am concerned, a blog should be your personal feelings expressed and displayed, but also supported with evidence. Personality and opinion should be the one thing that comes through after reading a blog, You should be able to read a post and know how that person feels about the topic they were blogging about.

What about mechanics though? Should grammar even matter, what about spelling? Surely that should count for something with the spell check button right there! If there is anything that we have learned from the upcoming generation of technology, its that unformatted and unstructured information can be more efficient if used properly. Should this be true for blogs? I don't think so. I think a blog post should be well edited and written. Spelling and mechanics should count, but not carry as much weight as the personality and factual context within the post.

Who should grade the blog? Personally, I think that collaboration and peer communication is a great thing, but posting a comment on a blog just doesn't fulfill that requirement. I think a grade should be determined by the teacher, and that after they are graded we should critique as a whole, go look though friends posts and see what they are missing, be it length, context, personality or relevance. This would help future blog posts receive a higher grade.

How to break down the grading? This is always a key question. Based on what I have written about in this post, I think that the following should be used as a grading mechanism:

• Personality and personal opinion is clear in post - 1 pt 

• relevant information is posted and all factual information is correct - 1 pt  

• Writing mechanics are well developed for the post - .5 pt  

• Thoughts and expressions are clear and post is easily understood - .5 pt

As you can see, the personality of the post receives more weight than the mechanics, but factual information and clarity of the post are still important and count toward the final grade of the post.

A Modern Day Lesson from Confucius

"Book I. 5          The Master said, “In guiding a state of a thousand chariots, approach your duties with reverence and be trustworthy in what you say; avoid excesses in expenditure and love your fellow men; employ the labor of the common people only in the right seasons.” "

Although the quote above might seem like nothing more than simple morals,  it actually holds quite an interesting concept for government: simplicity. It's no secret, our government is as ornate, elaborate and complex as it gets. Just this year we repeated the horror of the Bill Clinton days as we contemplated another government shutdown, in which we would lose all non-essential government branches, and then over the summer we all crossed our fingers in hopes of resolving the debt ceiling crisis, and muttered under our breaths when the credit rating of the United States dropped from AAA to AA+ in August. Simply put, our government is a mess, and Confucius can tell us why. In his quote he says:

"Avoid excess in expenditure... ."

Clearly, this is something that our government has overlooked.  This quote puts forth many concepts that would be directly useful to our government and politicians.

1. "Approach your duties with reverence..."
It would be a lie if I were to say that the government does not do its job. Our government does its job every day, and we see the results of that every day. But it would not be a stretch to say that perhaps our government could use a little more reverence. Politics has become nothing more than match between who can hold out the longest. Our government could use a new approach, one that emphasizes modesty and agreeing on a solution, even if it's not the one you wanted the most. Respect and dignity, all implied with reverence, are both things that our government could use today to help solve out nations extensive problems.

2. "...be trustworthy in what you say..."
It is as if our government has become one big conspiracy theory to the media. Focusing on more forward and trustworthy administration tactics could help our struggling nation return to a booming economy, instead of the mud slinging and media frenzy that have become the main source of information for the public.

3. "...Employ the labor of common people only in the right seasons."
Our modern world is one that is broke and war-torn. Maybe if we though more about the common people we were sending to the front lines every day, we would be more reluctant to jump into war and think more about what could be done to resolve the problem. Instead, we focus on building the better weapons and forcing other countries to back down. That's not to say that we don't need wars to battle threats like terrorism and the mistreatment of people around the world, but perhaps more discretion in war could be a good thing.

Finally, the concept I started this post on, excess spending. It is perhaps our biggest problem, and one that needs fixing. If we were to listen to Confucius and spend what we needed in government and politics, the world would be a better place. There would be less poverty and social class division, and the common man would be able to succeed in politics, as opposed to only the wealthy and powerful.

If our government were to examine and try to implement these concepts, the world in which we live would change greatly. It's not that our government isn't trying, it's that too many of the odds are against us, and it's not hard to see why in the fast paced and modern society in which we live. So maybe the best thing to do would be go back to a different time and take a lesson from Confucius.