Knocking on Topics’ doors Pablo Francisco Calle Yachay Tech University English Language Program Yachay, Ecuador
Credits Knocking on Topics’ doors Pablo Francisco Calle English Language Program Yachay Tech University Level 6-005 Teacher: David Montenegro December 23, 2016 San Miguel de UrcuquĂ.
Contents 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Portfolio letter Response essay Interpretation essay Argumentation essay Final research project essay Thank you letter
December 23, 2016 Dear Reader: My name is Pablo Francisco Calle and this portfolio is a recompilation of my hard work that I have completed during this semester. I would like you to enjoy every essay written as much as I did. I truly believe this portfolio is the ultimate proof of my writing skills, grammar usage and overall knowledge of English. I have to say that during this semester I have become more confident while talking in front of people. Although that was never an issue for me it has been good practice all the expos I have done during this time in English class. I especially like the debate we had, because it made think faster and smarter to overcome my adversaries. As I said before my speaking has receive a major improving this semester. I think this is the most important skill because a good pronunciation could get you in or out of trouble or an embarrassing situation. My improvement is not only notorious in my fluency while talking but also while writing. This semester helped me to improve my writing skills which is much appreciated. I had to think deeper and clearer in order to hook the readers and my teacher so that my essays are not pointless, senseless or boring. I have to admit that I still make silly mistakes while talking, but those mistakes do not worry me so much because I know that whether I put more attention to them they would disappear. In conclusion I would like to say that this semester I had a lot of fun with my classmates and teacher. I end this English semester knowing that every experience lived in class has helped me to improve and become the student and person I currently am. I close this letter with my gratitude for your time and attention. -Pablo Francisco Calle
Response Essay Title: What if everyone on Earth spoke the same language? Languages or some form of oral communication have always been present throughout the history of men. Sadly scientist cannot be sure about where, when or how exist so many languages. What they do know is that there is no evidence of a single mother tongue spoken by humans. But what about if one global language took place in the future? Would that be the end of our diversity and identity? Would one global language be enough to unity all nations? With this speculations linguist around the world believe that we are heading towards one global language. There are also other linguists that believe that would not happened in a million years. What people should understand is that they have to be open-minded because nowadays everything is possible. A global language lays on globalization and how this factor has made communication easier. Experts say language is closely related to culture. (What if everyone on Earth spoke the same language?
(Cancio.Colleen.).
Retrieved
November
29,
2016,
from
http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/what-if/what-if-everyone-spoke-onelanguage2.htm) It is true that the representative of a culture is its language but it is also true that it is not the only thing. As I stated lines above, people should stay open-minded due to everything is changing. Sure currently people learn a different language in order to get better opportunities to their future, but that does not mean that those people forget their mother tongue. This is because our native language is part of our past. One global language may interfere in culture but then again, one global language will convert every language that currently exist in world’s first share cultural thing.
People also think one global language would help in decreasing global problems due to language is consider a barrier between nations. They consider that one language would finally
unity humanity. (C. C. (n.d.). Can a Planetary Parlance Co-exist with Mother Tongues? Retrieved November 29, 2016, from http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/whatif/what-if-everyone-spoke-one-language2.htm) well I consider that those statements would never be completely true because a lot of conflicts had happened between nations that speak the same language. Let’s take for example the war between Ecuador and Peru. Although those countries share the same language that was not enough to avoid war. An even better example is the ongoing war between Israel and Palestine both of those countries spoke Arab. Language does not affect the way people think and act. In one case were political decision what origin war and in the other is religious. Language was not part of those conflicts therefore one global language would not be the only thing we need to be united.
One global language would make even easier to communicate between countries and it would certainly delete that barrier. Everything is evolving including language and the origin of one global language is imminent. We cannot focus on minor details such as identity or cultural issues to deny the possibility that we need a global language in order to give that next step as humanity.
Interpretation Essay Title: Seaport with the embarkation of Saint Ursula Written by: Pablo F. Calle, Andrea B. Gordillo, Alejandro I. Senges Incredible pieces of art have survived throughout the years and they have showed us how powerful, descriptive, graphic and imaginative the human mind can be. It is well known that in ancient times during many years, women were not recognized as member of the society. They were mistreated and discriminated because of their gender and also because there was the belief in men’s superiority. Women were considered as people who had to be at service of her husband, take care of her children and home chores. Seaport with the embarkation of Saint Ursula is a piece of art made by Claudio de Lorena that we believe shows a contradiction to what at that time people thought a society should be structured. The composition of this picture consist of gorgeous architecture, women in power, embarkations, men working, ships, bows, and the sea. All these elements triggered us and make us try to understand and comprehend what the painter is trying to say. We think that this piece of art represent the role and power of the women in this kind of strange society represented in the mentioned picture. When we first watched this picture we were astonished by one little detail: the presence of a lot of women that looks like they are in power. This is strange because as we stated before, cultures at that time were ruled by men. We think the culture embodied in this work of art is totally against the role of the position women should have occupied. There is also another detail on the women in the painting and it is that all of them are wearing a bow on their shoulder. We think that the bows are symbols of strength and authority and also we believe this means that those women were departing to war or maybe some type of diplomacy event. But again this is exactly the opposite of what cultures used to think. Which we believe is the reason that catch the painter’s attention. Something curious is that men in the picture don’t wear a bow or other gun, so can assumed that the painter assigned them a role of inferiority with respect to women.
As said lines above men are at women’s service and they are loading the ships with what appears to be provisions to their journey. But we also believe this is not their first journey, because we think the painter chose a day where other ships were arriving to the seaport to show maybe that their trip was not successful. So they have to sacrifice more women. But this time it looks like it is different, they have come to the decision of sending the “Queen” herself in order to stop this madness, this awful war. We can tell there is a “special” women whom we called a “Queen” because this painting portrayed her carrying a flag. To us the flag gives her characteristics of leadership and control but also that she is willing to give her life if needed. We believe that the Queen is carrying the flag up high because she is not afraid, we feel her national pride because as she carries the flag she is also carrying the whole nation on her shoulders. Not only that but maybe the “Queen” is tired of this situation and wants to put an end. She does not want more blood on her hands, it has been enough. She cannot allow this any longer. This picture is also composed of gorgeous architecture that we believed it is design as some kind of castle/fortress. Its walls are high so that possible invasions would be harder to execute. But this fortress also plays really well with the environment. It combines beautifully with the sea. This is not peculiar due to at that time many structures and cities were built around bays or near the ocean. Something that is a little odd is there is not ramparts, of course the walls of the castle are high but they are not ramparts. Which make us believe that this city was pacific, or at least they had never had the necessity of building structures as such. But at this point we wonder if this castle really is a castle. What made us doubt is that on the background of the painting we appreciate there is another
castle-shaped structure and this is way bigger
than the main structure before mentioned. Could this castle be the Queen’s home? Possibly, but we will not know for certain. Maybe that is why this “castle” does not look like it is weaponized.
Something interesting is the combination of colors used by the painter. It is not clear if the ambiance is set on sunset or dawn but we think is dawn. Thus, it supports the idea mentioned before that the queen is departing to war. We observe a mixture of soft and bright colors. We associate the bright colors with freedom and the rising of a nation but also with peace. We also believe the use of these colors shows audacity and positivism that connects with the supposed trip that would be done. There are two girls using green dresses on each side of the “Queen� and maybe at that time green was not associated with hope but it could be that is the reason why it started. The soft colors gives us an idea of serenity and are perfectly related with the sea but not to the idea of war.
Argumentation Essay Title: What if everyone on Earth spoke the same language? Languages or some form of oral communication have always been present throughout the history of men. Sadly scientist cannot be sure about where, when or how exist so many languages. What they do know is that there is no evidence of a single mother tongue spoken by humans. But what about if one global language took place in the future? Would that be the end of our diversity and identity? Would one global language be enough to unity all nations? With this speculations linguist around the world believe that we are heading towards one global language. There are also other linguists that believe that would not happened in a million years. What people should understand is that they have to be open-minded because nowadays everything is possible. A global language lays on globalization and how this factor has made communication easier. Experts say language is closely related to culture. (What if everyone on Earth spoke the same language?
(Cancio.Colleen.).
Retrieved
November
29,
2016,
from
http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/what-if/what-if-everyone-spoke-onelanguage2.htm ) It is true that the representative of a culture is its language but it is also true that it is not the only thing. As I stated lines above, people should stay open-minded due to everything is changing. Sure currently people learn a different language in order to get better opportunities to their future, but that does not mean that those people forget their mother tongue. This is because our native language is part of our past. One global language may interfere in culture but then again, one global language will convert every language that currently exist in world’s first share cultural thing.
People also think one global language would help in decreasing global problems due to language is consider a barrier between nations. They consider that one language would finally
unity humanity. (C. C. (n.d.). Can a Planetary Parlance Co-exist with Mother Tongues? Retrieved November 29, 2016, from http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/whatif/what-if-everyone-spoke-one-language2.htm) well I consider that those statements would never be completely true because a lot of conflicts had happened between nations that speak the same language. Let’s take for example the war between Ecuador and Peru. Although those countries share the same language that was not enough to avoid war. An even better example is the ongoing war between Israel and Palestine both of those countries spoke Arab. Language does not affect the way people think and act. In one case were political decision what origin war and in the other is religious. Language was not part of those conflicts therefore one global language would not be the only thing we need to be united.
One global language would make even easier to communicate between countries and it would certainly delete that barrier. Everything is evolving including language and the origin of one global language is imminent. We cannot focus on minor details such as identity or cultural issues to deny the possibility that we need a global language in order to give that next step as humanity.
Final Research Project Essay Title: How Euthanasia has helped around the world?
Life has always been seen as a gift from “God� or something/someone that is superior to the human race, but lately with the advance of science in every possible field, humans have discovered that almost everything is possible, even the creation of life itself in laboratories. One thing is create life and another is end one, that is where the word euthanasia appears.
Euthanasia or assisted suicide is the termination of a person's life in order to relieve them off of their pain or suffering. A person who decides to go through euthanasia usually has an incurable condition. In many cases, it is the person's request but there have been instances when a person is too ill and the decision is made by relatives, doctors or, in some cases, the courts. The issue has been at the center of debates for many years and it is surrounded by religious and ethical considerations. It is important to consider the main factors that could influence the decision-making process and the consequences it could bring to our modern society. Euthanasia has proven to be a merciful alternative to end the pain of very sick people and therefore it should not be treated lightly nor let it be influenced by religious points of view. It also proves that we are exercising our full right to choose.
II
People who support euthanasia state that since we live in a civilized society it should be allowed to people to decide when and how to end their life. Allowing them to die in dignity and without pain. It also should allow others to help them to do so if they cannot manage it on their own. It is wrong to make anyone live longer than they want, because supporters believe that our bodies belong to ourselves. Actually forcing people keep on living when they do not want to, violates their human rights and personal freedom. They
say it is immoral to force people to continue living in suffering and pain. Let’s take for example this particular story about a scientific who had worked with x-rays for 30 years. His body was so wounded and deteriorated that he had skin cancer, he was blinded, and had lost his left hand, two fingers on his right hand, his nose and part of his jaw and suffer constantly unbearable pain. His brother named Harold unable to ignore his brother’s cry for help, put out his brother’s misery with a pistol when he walked to the hospital and shot his brother. Harold was tried for murder. Harold’s intentions were to help his brother who was no longer living a worthy life. I think it was not an easy decision for Harold but given the circumstances he had no choice but to help his brother and end his misery. Harold was punished because of his actions but if euthanasia was legal nor Harold nor his brother would have to suffer the fate they did. Doctor Kailash Chand is in favor of euthanasia and he thinks that the law should not criminalize people who have chosen an assisted death because this is a rational decision to end their suffering due to these people are terminally ill but mentally competent. They based their statements on the fact that due to suicide is not a crime, euthanasia should not be a crime. Every person on this planet has the right to choose, so why do not we let them choose when to die?
Whether something is legal or illegal has always been subjective to current laws at the time those matters where in discussion. The argument is about the right to die with some professional’s help. The right to control our body and life is what will determine at what time, what way and by whose hand we will die. Let’s take for example this quote:
“In….cases where there are no dependants who might exert pressure one way or the other, the right of the individual to choose should be paramount. So long as the patient is lucid, and his or her intent is clear beyond doubt, there need be no further questions.” The Independent, March 2002 In has to be completely clear that whether a person wants to undergo euthanasia
that person
must be totally aware competent and of course aware of everything that this procedure implies. With this statement euthanasia is guaranteed to people who know what they want. Of course euthanasia has been applied to people who cannot decide by their own but instead a jury took the decision for them. Religious people against euthanasia say that life is a gift from God and He is is the only one who has the right to end it.
Most religions are against euthanasia. Some of them absolutely forbid it. The Roman Catholic Church, for example, is one of the most active organizations in opposing euthanasia. Reasons why religion forbids euthanasia are “God has forbidden it”, respective scriptures of different religions say something like: “You must not kill”. But the main reason why is because they consider God is the only one who has the right to end a life. “Euthanasia is a grave violation of the law of God, since it is the deliberate and morally unacceptable killing of a human person”. (Pope John Paul II. "Euthanasia - The Roman Catholic view. "The Evangelization Station.
1995.
The
Evangelization
Station.
February
18th
http://www.evangelizationstation.com/htm_html/moral%20theology/Suicide%20and%20Eut hanasia/euthanasia__the_roman_catholic.htm.) The point of view of religion about euthanasia is always from the fact to who belongs the decision to end a life. But they forget to mention that is merciless to make another human suffer.
Euthanasia has mixed opinions, it is a very controversial topic that requires analysis. Science believes euthanasia should be a viable option for terminal ill people, because everybody deserves a good death and deserves to die in peace. The right to choose it is not only exclusive of God. He gave us the will to do whatever we want as long as we do not harm other people. It is also true that as humans, some of us would be tempted to use euthanasia as an excuse to murder, but there is where the law should intervene In order to make things right.
References; 1. https://www.government.nl/topics/euthanasia/contents/euthanasia-assistedsuicide-and-non-resuscitation-on-request 2. http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/euthanasia/ 3. http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1996/12/17/euthanasia-kills-sanctity-oflife-pbtbhree/ 4. http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21656182-doctors-should-beallowed-help-suffering-and-terminally-ill-die-when-they-choose http://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/medical-law/the-right-to-die-medical-lawessay.php
Thank you for reading my portfolio. I hope that you realize my progress during this semester in level six. I have to say that this semester was full of great experiences and even greater people. And I could not be more relief to finally going to topics. Sincerely Pablo Francisco Calle
(END COVER)