Back all these point up Strory has a very honest tone that can be seen from the gre 1 1. Andrew Carnegie wrote this book in order to leave his story behind for his friends and family who persisted on having “an account of mine”. And being persuaded by enjoying an autobiography written by a fellow friend, Judge Mellon, which gave him much pleasure. 2. I believe he did by giving an in depth view (maybe a little too indepth) inside of his life involving not only his philanthropic activities and ideas, but his strong family life as well. * Andrew Carnegie's central theme is underlined in his Dictum (Andrew Carnegie's Dictum) which states to spend 1st third of your life on educating yourself, 2nd third on earning all the money you can, and finally …show more content…
to give it all away for worthwhile causes. This relates to the purpose by giving a legacy to his friends, family, and followers a measurement by which they can feel successful as he has…. “continue to influence succeeding generations of his family to live life well” The author doesn’t clearly state this but those mentioned in throughout his autobiography by encompassing his life from ‘rags to riches’ and events he portrays importance in such as his Gospel of Wealth speech and giving away of over 350 million dollars to charity and source of education such as schools and libraries such as the Carnegie library named after himself.
His actions are important to history because they “exemplified the large scale philanthropy of the newly rich in industrial America” Zunz, Olivier (2011). Philanthropy in America, A History: Politics and Society in Twentieth-Century America which is conveyed his speech the Gospel of Wealth. His actions that led to his wealth were similarly important as he was on the forefront of the industrial revolution under his steel empire. And controversies involving the Homestead Strike and Johnstown Flood. The author gives support to these points by stating “The question of aid to our own higher educational institutions often intruded itself upon me” showing his intrigue for higher education and “a controlling interest the general management of public matters, especially those connected with education and improvement of the poorer classes.”. And “I believe that higher wages to men who respect their employers and are happy and contented are a good investment” stating he was absent “in the highlands of
Scotland” Q http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/05/books/review/Parker.t.html?fta=y&_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/30/books/30gord.html http://web.a.ebscohost.com.lsproxy.austincc.edu/lrc/detail/detail?vid=5&sid=f6a31b82-3d34-4dd5-b0a7-55fb93cce1ee%40sessionmgr4002&hid=4206&bdata=JnNpdGU9bHJjLWxpdmU%3d#AN=22171857&db=lfh http://web.a.ebscohost.com.lsproxy.austincc.edu/lrc/detail/detail?vid=7&sid=f6a31b82-3d34-4dd5-b0a7-55fb93cce1ee%40sessionmgr4002&hid=4206&bdata=JnNpdGU9bHJjLWxpdmU%3d#AN=18063365&db=lfh http://www.ushistory.org/us/36c.asp Include scholarly journals or research papers! 1 “ I resolved to stop accumulating and begin the infinitely more serious and difficult task of wise distribution” “andrew Carnegie was also dedicated to peace initiatives throughout the world because of his passionate hatred for war.” http://www.ushistory.org/us/36c.asp “Carnegie became a tycoon because of shrewd business tactics” and using “VERTICAL COMBINATION, an idea first implemented by GUSTAVUS SWIFT” to further grow his business tycoon of Carnegie and Steel and his railroad enterprise Robert A. Divine, et.al., America: Past and Present, Volume II since 1865 (state this is supported in the textbook of his hard work and innovative building techniques when ((above)) is mentioned as in his autobiography as Carnegies motivation for success is apparent in his slogan of "Make nothing but the very best."
In the documents titled, William Graham Sumner on Social Darwinism and Andrew Carnegie Explains the Gospel of Wealth, Sumner and Carnegie both analyze their perspective on the idea on “social darwinism.” To begin with, both documents argue differently about wealth, poverty and their consequences. Sumner is a supporter of social darwinism. In the aspects of wealth and poverty he believes that the wealthy are those with more capital and rewards from nature, while the poor are “those who have inherited disease and depraved appetites, or have been brought up in vice and ignorance, or have themselves yielded to vice, extravagance, idleness, and imprudence” (Sumner, 36). The consequences of Sumner’s views on wealth and poverty is that they both contribute to the idea of inequality and how it is not likely for the poor to be of equal status with the wealthy. Furthermore, Carnegie views wealth and poverty as a reciprocative relation. He does not necessarily state that the wealthy and poor are equal, but he believes that the wealthy are the ones who “should use their wisdom, experiences, and wealth as stewards for the poor” (textbook, 489). Ultimately, the consequences of
He goes over how a man with a plentiful amount of money who only keeps it to himself is basically a waste and he even says in (Doc B) ‘The man who dies rich dies a disgrace’. In that quote he is basically saying that a rich man should give and help while he is still around. By dying rich this shows that he didn’t help as much as he could, and he kept his fortune to himself. Carnegie is basically saying what is the point of being rich if you can’t help others in good ways. He was so helpful he helped by giving away libraries to other places showing he cares about the education of
...on helped pass the Agricultural Labor Relations Act in California, the only law in the nation that protects the rights of farm laborers to unionize. But more than anything, I believe, his contribution to society has been his legacy of service to others and the commitment to social justice for communities fighting against inequalities.
In Harold C. Livesay’s Andrew Carnegie and the rise of Big Business, Andrew Carnegie’s struggles and desires throughout his life are formed into different challenges of being the influential leader of the United States of America. The book also covers the belief of the American Dream in that people can climb up the ladder of society by hard work and the dream of becoming an influential citizen, just as Carnegie did.
Carnegie’s essay contains explanations of three common methods by which wealth is distributed and his own opinions on the effects of each. After reading the entire essay, readers can see his overall appeals to logos; having wealth does not make anyone rich, but using that wealth for the greater good does. He does not force his opinions onto the reader, but is effectively convincing of why his beliefs make sense. Andrew Carnegie’s simple explanations intertwined with small, but powerful appeals to ethos and pathos become incorporated into his overall appeal to logos in his definition of what it means for one to truly be rich.
The biggest question or dispute regarding the cost of higher education is finding the appropriate monetary and economical equation to determine the percentage of personal and public responsibility. The above debate has been in question since the 1800’s when Thomas Jefferson stated; "I think by far the most important bill in our whole code is that for the diffusion of knowledge among the people. No other sure foundation can be devised, for the preservation of freedom and happiness ”. Those important words that called attention to the importance of having an educated citizenry in order to preserve democracy are until this day, words by which legislator...
Known for his contributions he devotes his earnings to making America a better place for all to live. However, he is very strict on how these contributions should be made. He believes all disruption should be made when the millionaire is alive. That after the millionaires death his contribution does nothing to benefit the society. “The miser millionaire who hoards his wealth does less injury to society than the careless millionaire who squanders his unwisely, even if he does so under cover of the mantle of sacred charity,” (p. 32) In some degree I agree with him. What does it say when contribution is made after someone death? Personally, it says that the cause wasn't important enough and now that the millionaires dead, they try to make it seem like they care and still keep their name on the radar by donating to society. Carnegie saw wealth as something that a person had to work for, and as a constant battle to maintain. Carnegie came from a poor family and worked hard to achieve his wealth.I began to learn what poverty meant," Andrew would later write. "It was burnt into my heart then that my father had to beg for work. And then and there came the resolve that I would cure that when I got to be a man." Also he said that he felt that he was given an opportunity when he was young and felt it was his duty to give others the means to be successful as well. This is important to Carnegie as someone who does come from struggling background; he doesn’t want to see the inequalities that are created in America due to a number of many factors. He wants to see society as a whole
These are some of the most important accomplishments that have occurred in or after his life.
The main problem encountered by the Gilded Age era was the administration of wealth, at least according to Andrew Carnegie. In his piece, “The Gospel of Wealth,” he proposed a solution for the abuse of wealth, and assigned duties to the rich in regards to how they should handle the responsibilities brought on by excessive wealth. However, he also addressed the concerns of the working class. He stressed the welfares of individualism and argued that it was: contemporary and innovative, enabled the affordability of luxuries to all classes, and thus ensured that money controlled by a few people would be more effective for the prosperity of the economy than it would to equally distribute national wealth amongst citizens. Carnegie intended to clarify the reasons why the newly industrialized economy and the new administration of wealth were ultimately for the benefit and harmony of both rich and poor.
Andrew Carnegie believes in a system based on principles and responsibility. The system is Individualism and when everyone strives towards the same goals the system is fair and prosperous. Carnegie’s essay is his attempt to show people a way to reach an accommodation between individualism and fairness. This system can only work if everyone knows and participates in his or her responsibilities. I will discuss Carnegie’s thesis, his arguments and the possible results of his goals.
Throughout Carnegies life he struggled to find a balance between two ideals; to make money, and to stand up for the working man. He obviously leaned more towards making money than he did working for labor rights, but Carnegie’s contributions to his community, the United States, and the world can not be understated.
First of all, I found his speech interesting because of his use of self-examples to deliver to the audiences the message of how he could succeed. This is influential because his stories are real, connect to other
led him to climb the ladder of success and break boundaries in the business and politics.
...and his passion for the car industry to merge two car companies together in order for them to benefit from each other at a precise time in the market when he was able to be successful. He understood the problems the company faced, the demand in the market, and he had a clear vision on how to solve it. He gave himself timelines and goals and each were met with great success.
Andrew Carnegie, a Scottish-American steel tycoon and one of the wealthiest men of the nineteenth century, believes that social inequality results as an inexorable byproduct of progress. In his 1889 article entitled “Wealth,” Carnegie claims that it is “essential” for the advancement of the human race that social divisions between the rich and poor exist, which separate those “highest and best in literature and the arts” who embody the “refinements of civilization” from those who do not (105). According to Carnegie, this “great irregularity” is favored over the “universal squalor” that would ensue if class distinctions ceased to exist (105). Carnegie states that it is a “waste of time to criticize the inevitable,” believing that poverty is an inherent characteristic of society rather than the result of elitist oppression (105). Carnegie may conclude that the rich do not necessarily owe the poor anything, but he also believes that wealthy philanthropists such as he should donate their vast accumulations to charity while they are still alive. In Carnegie’s mind, contributions to supporting educational institutions and constructing landmarks serves to