According to Cabeza de Vaca “Four naked unarmed outsiders were led by hundreds, even thousands, of Indians. They were fed and protected and passed off from one indigenous group to the next, as if they were prized possessions moving along an ancient trading route across the continent (Resendez 188).” Cabeza de Vaca’s point in this paragraph is that not all Native Americans were savages as they were and have been portrayed. It shows that even though Cabeza de Vaca and his crew were these Natives captives they still treated his group with respect.

Cabeza de Vaca is surely right about surrendering to the Indians because, there are too many dangers regarding lack of food and undernourishment. These problems are detrimental to his crews health. This was made worse buy the crewing falling into call water, leaving them susceptible to hypothermia.

The Wiki article on Estevanico is relevant as it talks about his exploration of North America. I feel the article is neutral albeit too short when compared to articles on the other survivors in his party. I feel all aspects of Estevanico’s life are underrepresented in this article because of its length. The links to the cites work although not all of them are used in the article. The talk page has a few extra facts on it but other than that not much activity. It is part of several Wikiprojects and should be updated soon.

They Say I Say chapter two and the introduction of A Land So Strange  is about telling a story the way it happened and not exaggerating it to make it seem more grandiose than it actually is. This can be seen in a land so strange when the author Andres Resendez says, “It is tempting to narrate their journey as an extreme tale of survival: four naked men at the mercy of the natural elements, facing an extraordinary array of native societies (Resendez Pg 3).” This shows that Resendez wants to accurately depict De Vaca and his companions travels.

The reading Creolization in the America clarifies how cultures “assimilate” with one another when two previously unfamiliar cultures come into contact with one another. He says the word Creolization is a better term then assimilation. He backs this saying that to have a donor culture and receiving culture makes no sense because all cultures borrow from each other albeit at different rates and different aspects of each culture it is irrelevant when looked at in the long run. I find this argument to be persuasive because of the evidence it has to back it. Also I feel it makes more sense logically that a culture can not donate aspects of itself they are merely taken by other cultures that feel it would be appropriate to take.

William Cronon is talking about people who oppose liberal education. These people believe liberal education is in place to brainwash people and create ideological zealots that spout brainwashed ideals. This is the only purpose of liberal education in the minds of these skeptics, mainly because they have been brainwashed by their own ideals and cannot see the other side of the argument.

The other side of the arguement is that liberal education is in place to help peoples minds fluorish. This is done by subjecting people to a wide array of opinions and points of view so the student can see all sides of the problem or arguement. By educating people this way they become true scholars with a genuine passion for learining and knowledge. Cronon uses evidence of how people who are educated in a liberal fashion have the ability to listen, read, talk, write, and solve problems more effectively than others.

I find this arguement to be very persuasive because without considering all points of view you become narrowminded, to truly learn you must open your mind to all possiblities.