The comments I received were, in my opinion, weak. I was able to pull a few things out. First of which was the need for a better and stronger thesis. I thought I had a decent one in there, but it doesn't jump out. Even looking at the essay a week and a half later, it was hard for me to pick out what it was. A better thesis is as follows:
The answerless questions philosophers have spent decades pondering over are still without an answer. Why waste the time in pondering these questions? We, as a society of human beings, need to focus not on these answerless questions, but on a way to preserve and continue our thinking and cognitive abilities beyond the time when there is no sun to give us energy, no moon to look up at, and no earth to live on. We need to develop a way to continue human thought beyond the time of the sun's death. If we don't, then "after the sun's death, there won't be a thought to know that its death took place" (Lyotard 9).
The last paragraph, I was commented on stating "there is no point" reguarding how answerless questions serves no point. Basically, I think my commenter called me stubborn, but in nicer words and I agree with him. It definately caught my eye, so for a stylistic perspective, I am going to try to stay away from comments such as this one.
My next step is to hit the books and web for some research.
No comments:
Post a Comment