My Visit to Centennial Village Historical Site in Greeley

I was pleasantly surprised on how much I enjoyed visiting the Centennial Village historical site in Greeley. I happened to visit this museum on the perfect day because there were children from different schools dressed up and â€Å"living† how the people in Northern Colorado lived more than 100 years ago. With the children all dressed up like people used to dress, and doing the chores that they used to take on really made it the feel like I was back in time. I got to experience dozens of historical sites, live animals, schools, and businesses that really helped me understand part of Northern Colorado’s history. One of my favorite parts about this museum was how we got to see all the different immigrants homes that made this region so culturally diverse. If I were living in Colorado around these times I most likely would be living in a Stone House because teachers typically lived in these types of houses. These houses where located on Eagle’s Nest Ranch right out of Greeley and were made up of stones. These houses where primarily made up for ranchers and teachers. Another type of house is called the Swedish-American House, (STUGA) these homes tend to be a little nicer than the Stone houses and reflect a blend of Old and New World Culture. These one room framed dwellings with a boxer roof were typically houses for the Swedish immigrants. Another group that migrated to Northern Colorado was the Spanish. They migrated to Weld County to take advantage of the jobs that were created

Tribal Feminism Free Essays

Paula Gunn asserts in her work â€Å"Pushing up the Sky† that tribal life of Native Americans possess an acceptable and dominated element of matriarchy and female- dominance. But she also make it clear that â€Å"tribal feminism† present in the tribal life was different to the concept of feminism that surged the modern society since late 1960s. The cotemporary feminist movements consider the tribal society as lame centered in which women were subjugated and oppressed. We will write a custom essay sample on Tribal Feminism or any similar topic only for you Order Now She suppose that this misconception on the part of the new feminists are due to tampered literature that present a distorted image of women condition in the tribal societies. She provides examples from a specific narrative (that conveys a totally different meaning and context of a ritual ceremony and woman role in it in the tribal society) to prove her point. Let’s examine her point of view in details. Paula Gunn Allen has juxtaposed modern feminist approaches to that of â€Å"tribal feminism† as persisted in the Native American tribes. She further implies that pre-conceived notions of the modern feminists can not be attributed to the tribal feminism and that feminism (tribal must be observed and analyzed in its contextual framework using employing the basic tenets of feminist thought. She provides reason for this as  Ã¢â‚¬Å"[t]he contexts of Anglo-European and Keres Indian life differ so greatly in virtually every assumption about the nature of reality, society, ethics, female roles, and the sacred importance of seasonal change that simply telling a Keres tale within the an Anglo European narrative context creates a dizzying series of false impressions and unanswerable (perhaps even unoposable) questions.† (p. 238) For this purpose she takes the example of marriage. According to modern feminist approach, marriage is considered as an operational tool for masculine supremacy and dominance. (p.237)   It provides justification to every masculine act of domestic oppression and subjugation of women in way or the other. But for Keres and for most of other American Tribes, it has no anti-feminist connotations. She says in this regard, â€Å"[P]aternity is not an issue among traditional Keres people; a child belongs to its mother’s clan, not in the sense that she or he is owned by the clan, but in the sense that she or he belongs within it.† (p. 238) Modern feminist viewpoint will consider the information that the have received through different information channels. The foremost of these channels are the narratives that are written by Anglo-European writers. For example the narrative of Gunn describe Kochinennako as cause of conflict and thus maligned the woman character in the tribal society but Paula is of the view that truth is different from what a modern feminist takes from Gunn’s narrative. She asserts that from a native point of view, Kochinnenako is serving as a social tool in the narrative and â€Å"it is through her ritual agency that the orderly, harmonious, transfer of primacy between the Summer and the Winter people accomplished.†(p. 238) So she is a dominant force according to Keres viewpoint that enables the society to create harmony and balance in the tribal life. Paula further sustains the viewpoint that a modern feminist will read a Gunn’s version of a story, will consider tribal society as patriarchal and male-centered   in which Kochinennako marries an indifferent and violent person against her will. Her will or approval is not considered necessary. So tribal society   bvdoes not take into account the feminine feelings and their ultimate right to choose. A rather radical supposition that will come out of this reading is about the abuse of power where common folk is afflicted with pathos and miseries due to Kochinennako’s â€Å"unfortunate alliance†. Paula further illustrate that these interpretations of Gunn’s story are not in align with tribal socio-economic patterns and structure of Keres but rather it’s manifestation of Anglo-European tradition that are forcefully and/or wrongly implied to the tribal structure of Keres. She further asserts that it is the narrative structure of the Gunn’s story that is woven in a way â€Å"to confirm a feminist’s interpretation of the tale as only another example of low status of women in tribal cultures.†(p. 235) Gunn’s narrative version itself is tampered with Anglo-European sexist, classicist and racist notions and concepts. Consciously or unconsciously, these notions and other related values are immersed in the mainstream tribal thought in a subtle way that an ordinary reader can not detect them. Furthermore, the linguistic inability of one language to transmit the concepts and values of another culture is another problem that renders alteration to the cultural concepts of one culture. Paula says in this regard, â€Å"So while the problem is one of translation, it is not simply one of word equivalence. The differences are perceptual and contextual as much as verbal† (p.225) Third factor that further deteriorates the situation is non-understanding of a proper contextual framework in which values, rituals and traditions operate. To understand a tribal narrative it is mandatory to comprehend its contextual framework. So Paula assumes that Gunn’s version is tampered on the same pattern and his story contains notions of â€Å"Christianization, secularization, economic dislocation† patriarchal tradition of Anglo-European life etc. together â€Å"with linguistic inequivalence and lack of contextual understanding. Or this purpose she provides the example of Hiut-cha-mun-ki-uk. Guinn has translated this as â€Å"broken prayer stick† but Paula says that it originally means â€Å"——-. Furthermore, Gunn is unable to provide cultural assumptions and orientations related to these terminologies. That’s the reason that these terminologies are perceived in wrong connotations. Paula further says that Gunn has neglected the broad contextual framework in which the whole story operates. This narrative version is related to a ritual that celebrates the seasonal change i.e. the coming of Summer. Additionally, as this story is taken from yellow woman story, and;  Ã¢â‚¬Å"[t]he themes and to a large extent the motifs of these stories are always female-centered, always told from Yellow women’s point o f view. Some older recordedVversions of yellow woman tales (as in Gunn) make yellow woman the daughter of the hocheni’s. Gunn translates Hocheni as â€Å"ruler†. But Keres notions of the hicheni’s function and positions are as cacique or Mother Chief, which differ greatly from Anglo-European idea of rulership.†(p.226) Paula further reinforces the idea that woman has a special place in the Keres of Lagua and Acoma Pueblos. Yellow woman is regarded as an epitome of certain extra human abilities. Paula elaborates that â€Å"in many ways Kochinennako is a role model though she possesses some behaviors that are not likely to occur in many of the women who hear story†. (p.227)   Paula wants to imply that her feminine character is different not only on the chronological basis but due to a different concept of woman hood in the tribal societies of Native American. So distortions and immersion of western thought in the narrative of Gunn also blur the vision of Modern feminists who consider a different view of â€Å"women status in the tribal life† that has nothing to do with real tribal society and its feminist notions. Paula assertions seem valid about the distortion of contextual framework and its negative effects on the feminine perception of tribal women life. She thinks that incapacity of Western mind to understand and interpret the true tribal mindset and values pertaining to feminism in particular and other socio-cultural phenomenon â€Å"because they are generally trained to perceive their (tribesmen) entire world in ways that are alien to tribal understandings.† (p. 243). Her point of view about the linguistic tampering due to various mentioned facts is also convincible. But sometime she draws upon far-fetched arguments to prove her point of view. The tribal society as depicted by her illustrations of Gunn’s narratives, clearly manifest a balanced and just society where both male and female members of the community are on equal terms. Although particularly in the domestic sphere they have dominance but they are absent from other aspects of mainstream social life. However, the arguments of Paula contain logical assumptions. But the supposition about the difference between modern feminist concepts and â€Å"tribal feminism† due to the misconception due to biases of the narrator and narrative structure is valid and authentic.    How to cite Tribal Feminism, Essay examples

Untitled Essay Research Paper Discussion of the free essay sample

Untitled Essay, Research Paper Discussion of the Feasibility of Miracles and the Grounds for Christianity bing withoutMiracles. Kurt Erler Philosophic Classicss 11/11/96 In the undermentioned Discussion, I will indicate out the facts and thoughts that disagree with Hume # 8217 ; s thoughts. The thoughts are the 1s on miracles in An Question Refering Human Understanding affecting Section 10 Of Miracles. The thought of this is utilizing the circle philosophical statement. If one agrees that Christians believe in the Bible, and that miracles have people understand the Bible as Hume points out, so Christians must believe in miracles. If one takes off any of these things, the statement does non keep. In this instance, the remotion of the Bible is used. Hume confronts the thoughts of faith straight by saying that without the luster of miracles, Christianity and other beliefs would non stand. He states that miracles are used to do us believe the Bibles. This is non true, since from the starts of Christianity there were non ever scriptures. There were pieces of art work done for coevalss before the texts were written and after that, they still had to be published. From at that place, merely the rich were good away plenty to afford such a book. In fact, the Gospels were written from 20-100 old ages after Christ died. The Acts were a aggregation of plants made from two hundred to three hundred old ages after the crucifixion, collected from different histories. And so there are the letters, which were written about four hundred and 50 old ages after the fact. They were written by St. Paul, who was besides a soldier for the Roman ground forces and killed 100s of Christians, who believed and followed God, without the Bibles that Hume negotiations approximately. From this, if you take away the Bibles, God # 8217 ; s church carries on and if you take the people from the church, God # 8217 ; s church still survives. The Bibles do non do people believe, they help people understand. For this Hume is right. He states that miracles help Christians understand what they believe, but the belief and religion are deeper. Miracles and fables helped people believe and understand what was to be our religion, but they are non what religion is approximately. You can take any miracle, and religion will still be. Miracles are besides going more understood. There is thought that as Hume nowadayss, some miracles are in themselves fast ones of nature, such as the splitting of the Red Sea. At a clip of utmost low tide one can traverse, and that the Egyptian ground forces sank because of the clay or their heavy armour they were loaded with. There are organic structures and armour found underneath the Red Sea that is Roman and there exists grounds of this being the cause of it. Hume says that miracles are the rebelliousness or the breakage of the regulations of nature. In his account, the lifting of a house or mountain is merely every bit large a miracle, as is the lifting of a feather by the air current. As stated, in this Hume is perchance right, that miracles are phenomena of nature that can, with progresss in scientific discipline, be explained. This is what Hume calls Transgressions of a jurisprudence of nature. Hume specifying non-natural events is led to believe that they are miracles, but all the clip miracles, through scientific discipline, are seen to be possible, so a miracle so is non a miracle as much know, yet the religion is non broken. Hume is besides seeking to stop in his head, what he thinks is superstitious notion. He thinks that when we start to believe clearly about faith, we will get down to lose our belief in it. Again he is utilizing the statement that is stated in the above paragraph. Hume # 8217 ; s unfavorable judgments are non aimed to state you that your spiritual beliefs are false, alternatively he does non hold with the grounds given to back up their strong beliefs. He says the lone advantage to keeping onto your spiritual beliefs or being able to back up them, is that you could give an unbeliever ground to portion your beliefs. If you think that there is rational grounds for your beliefs, so you can travel out and portion them and acquire others to believe the same. Again, Christianity holds without the miracles, for in the beginning, there were no miracles that were talked about. Here is where a fideist is true. A fideist is person who is willing to lodge to their spiritual beliefs without holding to see cogent evidence or miracles, so they merely have faith. The advantage is that they are what people would be without miracles and that they are what would transport the church if all the other cogent evidence and miracles didn # 8217 ; t occur any longer, for Jesus even said that Blessed are they who believe without seeing, for the land of God is theirs. Hume now goes on to state that we can neer for certain know that miracles do be. He says that the closest thing we have to believe in miracles is the evildoings of a jurisprudence of nature ( p. 77 ) . Our beliefs in nature are the strongest. He says that otherwise, grounds and informants can be incorrect, and so the grounds found must be obliging adequate that its falsity interruptions Torahs of nature. For these grounds, we will neer hold plenty or strong adequate grounds to turn out that a miracle occurred. Again, since we depend on experience, as Hume provinces, to cognize or explicate what we see and what goes on, how can we cognize what a miracle is or looks like, such as similar as the illustration that you have no ground to believe that this universe is uncomplete and needs work, because you have neer seen a completed universe. This turns into his statement of cognizing God through experience. Not merely can we non cognize God from experience of miracles, but he once more uses the thought that since we have neer experienced God, we can non specify him or what he is. This we can utilize with the statement of mathematics. We have neer experienced space, a line, a plane or many other mathematical things, but we use them in many equations and in understanding other things. Worlds are capable of groking things that we do non wholly understand. Hume # 8217 ; s statements do non keep, because of the strong beliefs and thoughts of worlds before the knowing of miracles and the similar. There is something innate approximately worlds that tell them that something is most likely at that place. The beginnings of the existence, the creative activity of life, these things and others merely do non look from nowhere. This is the same thing that makes people cognize what good and bad are. You can non believe in God, but something still tells you that killing a babe is incorrect and to assist person is right. It is the feeling in the dorsum of your caput that does this to you. This is Hume # 8217 ; s thought of morality. This is because of how we think one act would consequence the universe. Therefore, when we see one individual making many good Acts of the Apostless, we think of them as a good individual. We can non deduce that in another universe a divinity would alter the little jobs of this universe. Where of all time we have beliefs based on experience we can travel every bit far as experience Lashkar-e-Taibas us go, but no farther. This is Hume # 8217 ; s thought of understanding. Again, if one points out the mathematical accounts, this does non keep. He says we can non exceed experience, so we have no thought of immortality. We get all thought from experience. Solid beliefs come from detecting changeless happenings of something. The lone beliefs that will stand up are beliefs that give you strong imperial grounds. Skepticism leads to moderateness in positions and that is good. The changing of these positions leads us to still demo that Hume is incorrect in that religion, space, and God still exists in human heads, even though we have neer experienced him to the full. As shown, clip did non ever have miracles on text to demo them the manner. We had religion and hope, and for many that is still all the Ys have or need.Discussion of the Feasibility of Miracles and the Grounds for Christianity bing withoutMiracles. Kurt Erler Philosophic Classicss 11/11/96 In the undermentioned Discussion, I will indicate out the facts and thoughts that disagree with Hume # 8217 ; s thoughts. The thoughts are the 1s on miracles in An Question Refering Human Understanding affecting Section 10 Of Miracles. The thought of this is utilizing the circle philosophical statement. If one agrees that Christians believe in the Bible, and that miracles have people understand the Bible as Hume points out, so Christians must believe in miracles. If one takes off any of these things, the statement does non keep. In this instance, the remotion of the Bible is used. Hume confronts the thoughts of faith straight by saying that without the luster of miracles, Christianity and other beliefs would non stand. He states that miracles are used to do us believe the Bibles. This is non true, since from the starts of Christianity there were non ever scriptures. There were pieces of art work done for coevalss before the texts were written and after that, they still had to be published. From at that place, merely the rich were good away plenty to afford such a book. In fact, the Gospels were written from 20-100 old ages after Christ died. The Acts were a aggregation of plants made from two hundred to three hundred old ages after the crucifixion, collected from different histories. And so there are the letters, which were written about four hundred and 50 old ages after the fact. They were written by St. Paul, who was besides a soldier for the Roman ground forces and killed 100s of Christians, who believed and followed God, without the Bibles that Hume negotiations approximately. From this, if you take away the Bibles, God # 8217 ; s church carries on and if you take the people from the church, God # 8217 ; s church still survives. The Bibles do non do people believe, they help people understand. For this Hume is right. He states that miracles help Christians understand what they believe, but the belief and religion are deeper. Miracles and fables helped people believe and understand what was to be our religion, but they are non what religion is approximately. You can take any miracle, and religion will still be. Miracles are besides going more understood. There is thought that as Hume nowadayss, some miracles are in themselves fast ones of nature, such as the splitting of the Red Sea. At a clip of utmost low tide one can traverse, and that the Egyptian ground forces sank because of the clay or their heavy armour they were loaded with. There are organic structures and armour found underneath the Red Sea that is Roman and there exists grounds of this being the cause of it. Hume says that miracles are the rebelliousness or the breakage of the regulations of nature. In his account, the lifting of a house or mountain is merely every bit large a miracle, as is the lifting of a feather by the air current. As stated, in this Hume is perchance right, that miracles are phenomena of nature that can, with progresss in scientific discipline, be explained. This is what Hume calls Transgressions of a jurisprudence of nature. Hume specifying non-natural events is led to believe that they are miracles, but all the clip miracles, through scientific discipline, are seen to be possible, so a miracle so is non a miracle as much know, yet the religion is non broken. Hume is besides seeking to stop in his head, what he thinks is superstitious notion. He thinks that when we start to believe clearly about faith, we will get down to lose our belief in it. Again he is utilizing the statement that is stated in the above paragraph. Hume # 8217 ; s unfavorable judgments are non aimed to state you that your spiritual beliefs are false, alternatively he does non hold with the grounds given to back up their strong beliefs. He says the lone advantage to keeping onto your spiritual beliefs or being able to back up them, is that you could give an unbeliever ground to portion your beliefs. If you think that there is rational grounds for your beliefs, so you can travel out and portion them and acquire others to believe the same. Again, Christianity holds without the miracles, for in the beginning, there were no miracles that were talked about. Here is where a fideist is true. A fideist is person who is willing to lodge to their spiritual beliefs without holding to see cogent evidence or miracles, so they merely have faith. The advantage is that they are what people would be without miracles and that they are what would transport the church if all the other cogent evidence and miracles didn # 8217 ; t occur any longer, for Jesus even said that Blessed are they who believe without seeing, for the land of God is theirs. Hume now goes on to state that we can neer for certain know that miracles do be. He says that the closest thing we have to believe in miracles is the evildoings of a jurisprudence of nature ( p. 77 ) . Our beliefs in nature are the strongest. He says that otherwise, grounds and informants can be incorrect, and so the grounds found must be obliging adequate that its falsity interruptions Torahs of nature. For these grounds, we will neer hold plenty or strong adequate grounds to turn out that a miracle occurred. Again, since we depend on experience, as Hume provinces, to cognize or explicate what we see and what goes on, how can we cognize what a miracle is or looks like, such as similar as the illustration that you have no ground to believe that this universe is uncomplete and needs work, because you have neer seen a completed universe. This turns into his statement of cognizing God through experience. Not merely can we non cognize God from experience of miracles, but he once more uses the thought that since we have neer experienced God, we can non specify him or what he is. This we can utilize with the statement of mathematics. We have neer experienced space, a line, a plane or many other mathematical things, but we use them in many equations and in understanding other things. Worlds are capable of groking things that we do non wholly understand. Hume # 8217 ; s statements do non keep, because of the strong beliefs and thoughts of worlds before the knowing of miracles and the similar. There is something innate approximately worlds that tell them that something is most likely at that place. The beginnings of the existence, the creative activity of life, these things and others merely do non look from nowhere. This is the same thing that makes people cognize what good and bad are. You can non believe in God, but something still tells you that killing a babe is incorrect and to assist person is right. It is the feeling in the dorsum of your caput that does this to you. This is Hume # 8217 ; s thought of morality. This is because of how we think one act would consequence the universe. Therefore, when we see one individual making many good Acts of the Apostless, we think of them as a good individual. We can non deduce that in another universe a divinity would alter the little jobs of this universe. Where of all time we have beliefs based on experience we can travel every bit far as experience Lashkar-e-Taibas us go, but no farther. This is Hume # 8217 ; s thought of understanding. Again, if one points out the mathematical accounts, this does non keep. He says we can non exceed experience, so we have no thought of immortality. We get all thought from experience. Solid beliefs come from detecting changeless happenings of something. The lone beliefs that will stand up are beliefs that give you strong imperial grounds. Skepticism leads to moderateness in positions and that is good. The changing of these positions leads us to still demo that Hume is incorrect in that religion, space, and God still exists in human heads, even though we have neer experienced him to the full. As shown, clip did non ever have miracles on text to demo them the manner. We had religion and hope, and for many that is still all they have or need.