While reading through your essay, I stumbled upon some sections that clearly weakened the piece. The first came in the form of a statement "English is the most highly evolved language". As there are no citations, one can easily beleive that this statement is nothing but your own opinion. Can you really argue that English is more evolved than German, or used in a more technical manor then Mandarine? This statement does not only seem bias, but unfounded. English is probably one of the easiest languages to learn and therefor one of the most widespread. This does not make it the most evolved.The second aspect I found rather torubling was your interpretation of the term "mother nature". To many, this does not represent the fagility of femininity, yet it incompasses all of it's strenghts. It paints a portrait of woman as the creator (and destroyer) of life, the emblem of fertility and the goddess of protection. Nature is the only part of our world that "man" cannot yet seem to control. Sure one can attempt to predict the weather, but one cannot stop a hurrican from striking. In addition, the term "Mother nature" does not take it's roots from the english language, and has in fact been seen throughout history. It can be found in early Hinduism and in Paiganism. If it were not for "mother nature", (as the story goes) the Buddha would never have attained enlightenment under the Bodhi tree.Other than that, I found the essay to be well written and thouroughly enjoyed the openening statement. PEACE.
- 24/05/2006
- 10:02:01
- Score: 0 out of 0 people found this comment useful.