Buck of The Call of the Wild
The main character of the novel, The Call of the Wild, is a St. Bernard and Scotch Shepherd mix, named Buck. As I read the book, I found out that Buck can be very loyal and trustworthy to his master, if his master is loyal to him. Also, at times I found that Buck could turn into an enraged beast very easily.
At home, which was a large house called Judge Miller’s Place, in the sun kissed Santa Clara Valley in California, Buck ruled over all of the dogs that were there. Buck was Judge Miller’s inseparable companion, until a man named Manuel, who was one the gardener’s helpers, committed a treacherous act. In order to cover his Chinese lottery gambling debts, he stole Buck from his sound sleep and brought him to a flag station called College Park. There, the exchanging of money took place. Buck was loaded onto an express car to Seattle. On his way to Seattle, he found that a man in a red sweater repeatedly beat him. From then on, I knew that Buck would never forget that experience. In that part of the book, I found out that Buck was now an enraged animal and could only be tamed by repeatedly being hit with a club or a whip.
At this point of the book, I was thinking about Judge Miller. He would’ve sent out a message or an investigation in order to find Buck. Because Judge Miller had a big house to live in, the book implied that he was wealthy. The trip to Seattle must of taken days and by then, Judge Miller would’ve been worried sick about his inseparable companion. As the story goes on, Buck’s first experience of snow left him feeling pretty stupid. When the train got to the station in Seattle, two men named Perrault and Francois bought him. Then, they put him on a ship called the Narwhal. At this point of the book, I was thinking about the cruelty of animals and how the humans treated them. It was cruel, but I guess they didn’t care.
The Narwhal took Buck to the Yukon where he was trained to be a
sled dog. There were other dogs that Buck had grown to know well during his training.
First of all, the protagonist of The Call of the Wild, Buck, is a complete alpha dog. Realistically, nobody can catch up to Bucks skill level. Buck’s muscles became as hard as iron, and he grew callous to all ordinary
Six a.m. and the sky is turning a light blue. The night's shade is dissipating slowly, and I can begin to see my surroundings a little better. A shot rings out from the west, and that signals nearby hunters. I hope they drove some game my way. Within a few minutes, there is rustling in the brush below me. A young buck is coming within range. He's a big one too; I can see about eight points from where I am. He is cautious and sniffs at the air and flicks out his tongue often. His coat is a light brown color like khaki. There are white markings along his flank, and he has a stubby little white fluff of fur for a tail. I disengage the safety on my rifle. The bolt is forward on the gun, and I know there's a round in the chamber. I steady myself. I turn ever so slightly to get a better angle.
In The Call of the Wild, Buck finds comfort in his relationships with man. When he is initially removed from Judge Miller's house in Santa Clara Valley, he is given his first exposure to the wild where, "every moment life and limb were in peril" (London 31). But soon he finds himself not entirely ready to leave civilization and answer the call of the wild, because he must first experience love. Buck establishes a relationship with John Thornton, and "love, genuine passionate love, was his for the fir...
In doing so, he creates a character that acts like an animal, but thinks like a man. His humanity is what allows him to survive under the rule of man. He understands his role as being inferior to man, but superior to the other dogs. Buck learns that the men and dogs around him “knew no law but the law of club and fang” (London 15). Therefore, Buck adapts and abides by this law, creating a place for himself in the social hierarchy of the Northland. “The ability to keep his mental strength, even when his physical energy was sapped, is one thing that separates Buck from the other dogs” (Kumin 103). Although all dogs are the heroes in The Call of the Wild, Buck connects the most with the reader. As the story is told through his perspective, the reader empathizes with Buck more than the other dogs. The mental strength that Kumin references in the above quote stems from Buck’s human characteristics. Buck is a character that exemplifies the traits of all men, including Jack London himself. His human spirit makes this connection possible, and creates a bond between Buck and the
Political society today, has taken many lessons from Plato and Aristotle’s political ideas. As was the case in Ancient Greece, there are many different political ideologies and regimes that will may serve the purpose for one society, but in another, could cause utter chaos. Aristotle attributed the need for there being a number of political regimes due to the fact that there are “many parts to a city.” (4.3.1) The many parts to a city that he was referring to, simply enforces the necessity of having different forms of office for each of these parts. Not every method will work for each society. Aristotle’s concepts of political regimes have deeply rooted itself in society today. In order to understand the concepts of regime as suggested by Aristotle, this paper will consider the three different types; royalty, aristocracy, and constitutional government, as well as each of their deviations.
In his Metaphysics, Aristotle defines essence as “what the thing is said to be in its own right” without qualification (1029b14). Essence includes the fundamental or necessary properties of a substance, the properties that if taken away would cause the substance to cease existing as that substance. Essence also ignores accidents whose existence is contingent upon a primary substance. Essence is found in a species (secondary substance) and is not indicative of particular referents of that species (primary substance). In order for a thing to qualify as being part of a certain species, its qualities must meet the definition or criteria of this species; these qualities are its essence. Essence is the most fundamental quality of a substance that
Aristotle believed that women were not fully human due to their lack of heat. He believed this because he though that in conception, women did not have the ability to conduct heat and become the perfect form, male. Aristotle also claimed that nature always strives to create the perfect being, male, and in not doing so, creating female, it made an imperfection. He therefore thought that “woman was the misbegotten man,”(p.19).
Socrates was born in Athens, Greece in 469 B.C. where he lived all of his life. His father was a wealthy sculptor named Sophroniscus and friend to the family of Aristides, the founder of the Delian League from which the empire arose. His mother was said to be a “midwife” (which implies nothing about her place in society) named Phaenarete.
Socrates spent his time questioning people about things like virtue, justice, piety and truth. The people Socrates questioned are the people that condemned him to death. Socrates was sentenced to death because people did not like him and they wanted to shut him up for good. There was not any real evidence against Socrates to prove the accusations against him. Socrates was condemned for three major reasons: he told important people exactly what he thought of them, he questioned ideas that had long been the norm, the youth copied his style of questioning for fun, making Athenians think Socrates was teaching the youth to be rebellious. But these reasons were not the charges against him, he was charged with being an atheist and with corrupting the youth. The charge of being impious was completely absurd because Socrates talked about the gods quite frequently and never stated to anyone that he was an atheist so it would be impossible for him to be an atheist. The charge of corrupting the youth is unjust because Socrates did not tell the youth to copy him and he is not responsible for their actions. The charges against Socrates were merely excuses by his enemies to murder him in a legal way. Socrates made his enemies by going on a search to find someone wiser than he was. Socrates went on this search because the Oracle at Delphi said he was the wisest man there was but Socrates believed that to be false (5). This lead to a futile search for a person who did have wisdom so Socrates could prove the oracle wrong. Socrates went to people who had a reputation of wisdom and then he would question and talk to them to find out if they in fact were wise. When he met someone who thought they were wise, Socrates would come "to the ass...
In The Metaphysics, Aristotle states, “All men by nature desire to know.” Although, this is a generalization, of this insightful statement about the nature of humans and human understanding this statement truly captures what Aristotle was trying to figure out about humans and their thinking. Everyone has a desire to know or to understand. As rational beings we tend to contemplate very simple ideas to the most complicated, like our existence, or parts of the universe, or the universe as a whole. Aristotle is known as the father of modern day psychology and biology, even though many of his ideas of these two sciences was proven incorrect. The most important concepts of Aristotle’s theory of human understanding are the notion of cause, the infinite, and the soul.
The subject which the question focuses on is the view of Aristotle’s ideal state. The distinction between hierarchy and equality is at the heart of the understanding of Aristotle’s ideal state. He claims that an ideal state ought to be arranged to maximise the happiness of its citizens. So happiness together with political action is the telos of human life. This end can be reached by living a better ethical life. However, he endorses hierarchy over equality. On one hand we have the equality which benefits everyone; on the other hand we have the distinction of classes meant in terms of diversities and differences where the middle one appears to be the means through which the state is balanced. Furthermore what is clear for Aristotle is that there is a notion of natural inequality which can be evidently seen with the argument of slavery by nature and the role of women in society. Thence, in this paper I argue that Aristotle’s ideal state is a place of hierarchy rather than equality. This essay will focus on several reasons why we can define Aristotle’s ideal state as a hierarchical structure. These reasons are mainly: the exclusiveness of groups in the society, the division of classes, and the concept of inferiority of slaves and women. To do so, the paper has been divided into four parts, which will show, through direct quotations from the text and then with my personal opinion linked with several arguments and counterarguments, how hierarchy is more relevant in Aristotle’s view of society. The first part analyses the importance in a state of ruling and being ruled in a cyclical way, in opposition to the exclusion of groups from power. The second part focuses on the divisions of classes and their double possible interpretation. The...
The rates for women are between 1.5 and 2.5 times higher than those for men. Depression can occur with comorbid conditions, namely dysthymia, anxiety disorders, substance abuse, eating disorders and borderline personality disorders.
Armbruster, K. (2002). “Good Dog”: The stories we tell about our canine companions and what they mean for humans and other animals, 38 (4), 351, 26. Retrieved from http://www.siue.edu/PLL/
Aristotle was born in 384 BCE in Stagira Chalcidice. He was the son of Nicomachus who was a physician for King Amyntas of Macedon. Having this connection, Aristotle probably spent most of his time in the Macedonia palace through most of his childhood. Aristotle moved to Athens at the age of eight-teen to study at Plato’s Academy. Aristotle remained there until about for twenty years and left at the request of Philip of Macedonia. Between 356 and 323 BCE Aristotle taught Alexander the Great which gave Aristotle more opportunities to improve on his teachings.2