Robespierre and The Reign of Terror

The reign of terror takes shortly after the revolution between the The monarchy of France with the ordinary people of France. naturally the people won due to greater numbers. soon after they created a system where there is limited monarchy, where the people share the same power. but out of this grew new radical ideas. for example, since religion was believed to be old fashioned it was said that all the churches in Paris were closed and put away. however the biggest radical idea was the guillotine. This machine was a device that would slice a person's head off using blade falling at rapid speeds. many people would be killed this way based on accusations and thoughts that were against the new regime.
Out of this a new radical leader came to power, who was Maximillion Robespierre. This man was a person who was very dedicated to the new regime, in fact so dedicated he killed the widow and people that were related or the people that she knew. people began to worry that everyone was now a victim of his dictatorship. Even though he was a dictator, people also believed he was a scared man. during this time Austria had become a big problem to France, the legislative party urge to wage war against them. however, he did not. This was another one of the factors that led to his death and execution with the guillotine(irony). Out of his death came a new appointed leader, Napoleon Bonaparte.

French revolution

1. The reasons why the people of the 3rd class didn't like the higher up's is that because they were highly unfair. They didn't have to pay much tax, they got what they wanted and got to also benifit off the 3rd class. so as for the 3rd class they realized they had it the worst and wanted to do something about it

2. He might have been angry about how his life was pretty much dull and misshapen, he would probably have to pay a tax so huge he wouldn't be able even to feed him self and much less his family(if he had one)

3. source A describes how the higher up's too advantage of the peasants and other people in the lower class's. so its pretty obvious the one all the way at the bottom is the 3rd class peasant.

4. they were bad since In that example that couple would have to pay 2 feudal lords and then came the taxes which took the bare leftover money they had after they would pay everything

5. Yes it does. It shows that the poor had a very hard life, and that they had to pay to support the rich. It shows why they would want to revolt against the rich and have a revolution to avoid the harsh times.

6.The french peasants would be most influenced by Rousseau because it was about how the french peasants were treated and how everyone should be equal.

7. Whoever wrote the pamphlet of source D, was a person who believed in natural human rights and that not man had the right to take that away from another man. so naturally it would be taken away from the people of the higher up positions due to the freedom expressed in this pamphlet

John Locke and "The Enlightenment"

The age of enlightenment was a age of where people were given what they used to call "natural rights". These rights were based upon the words of John Locke. In fact they even used him in the declaration of independence. Through this, we were able to get the freedom's we do today in America. John Locke was of English decent, he was brought up in a family where much freedom wasn't given to him by his family or teachers, due to his Puritan upbringing. However many thought him as a hypocrite since he was an investor in slave trading. Needless to say he still manged to influence presidents, philosophers and scholar's.
The age of enlightenment was a age where people were more inclined to think in their own diverse way. Since it did start in England and manage to spread to certain parts of Europe. John Locke was pretty much in the middle of all of it. But he has also made other contributions besides the Declaration of independence. For example he made certain theories about the value of property and ownership which is also based up him. This is olny some of his achivements. After he died , people began to slowly forget what he did and what he stood for, but since he words are now placed in the declaration of independence he death is not much of waste.

Copernicus and the trial of Gallileo

During the scientific revolution Europe came across two scientists that would be held against their own words, even though it was the complete truth. In the beginning there was Copernicus who had a theory that it was the earth that was the center of the universe, but rather the sun. He created a new model for his discovery called the heliocentric model. However since he had no actual proof, just assumptions and hypothesis what the difference were to be if the sun was to be the center and if earth were the center. He did publish a book, however very few bought it, since most saw him as a crackpot, but to the public astonishment the pope Paul II took an interest of the book and actually finished it. however nothing major happened till Galileo created the telescope.Galileo is know today as the father of astrology, this is all due to his creation of the refracting telescope and the theory he formulated with. But, this is not what made him famous, it was actually his infamous record of going against the pope and the bible. Unlike Copernicus, the pope during Galileo's time was much more stricter and took this as a huge offense. This all started because he presented his ideas to a local university, until someone told about his lecture about actual proof of the sun being the center of the universe. due to this he was under arrest and placed in a jail cell for about 2-3 months and then house arrest for 4 years. during this time he was able out to even out certain parts of his theory. But since he was afraid no one would be able to hear about his theories. He one day took several copies and just started to throw them out the window and the locals and peasants, hoping they might enlighten mankind. However this got out and he was placed under arrest again.It can be said that Galileo was able to prove Copernicus right and the catholic church was proven wrong. But even scientists later on were able to further able to prove Copernicus right. Newton came up with another theory involving the sun's center holding the rest of the universe at balance. eventually more bigger and powerfull telescopes came later on and were finally able to put out the the public that the sun was indeed the center of the universe. Eventually the Church was able to put their mistake in past and just accept the fact they made a huge mistake.

Scientific Revolution: The Scientific Method

The scientific method in general is a series of step to evaluate a problem and try to solve it. It was used in a lot of theories, gravity is a good example. With out these evaluations people would have made errors that they made back then, such as the universe theory into modern problems. The scientific method has always been used in science from anywhere from children science projects to modern day discoveries, such as the Large Hadron Collider. which was actually a mistake in their own scientific method. so like most scientists who had been proved wrong, were willing to give their experiment another shot by the scientific method.
The scientific method is begun by first stating a general problems. for example "why do things fall". Then is followed by a hypothesis which might not be a correct answer later. the hardest part is trying to create an experiment to either prove your point or just to solve the general problem. After that can come a step of procedures to conduct the experiment. which is finally followed by the conclusion. At this point your hypothesis can either be proven wrong or right. another possibility is finding out that your procedure does not relate to your problem and the entire thing was a waste of time.

Evolution vs Creationism

Evolution states that things began as the most simplest life forms, such as bacteria or parasites, then gradually made its way to humans and greater life forms after a long while (a million years or two). But darwin aslo had some back up as to why not all forms of life could not live. this was through "natural selection". survival of the fittest. For example, a life form that had advantages in a certain habitat or area, could surely survive than one that did not have that advantage
Creationism is more like a step of processes that eventually created human life. For example, one day there was light and so forth. But the ultimate argument is that can it be proved this life form exsists and did all of this within 7 days. There was also a belif that the 2 first humans were called "adam and eve" and through those two, created a human population and made us the way we are today.
I belive in evolution rather than creationism, because unlike creationism it has a strong foundation. but like many therories it does have flaws and problems. For example, even before evolution, how did the first life start and how was it created?. even though it is hazy, it does make more sense than creationism ( at least in my opinion ). because creationism says that one supposedly great created everything in 7 days like a recipe or somesort. Im buddhist, so they tought me to belive in other things rather than one indivual idea or statement. But, the person who created this theory was human after all and could have made a huge mistake into thinking we started as simple life forms.

test

test