In the introduction of “A Land So Strange,” the author Andrés Reséndez highlights the importance of the journey that Cabeza de Vaca, Estebanico, and two other Spaniards take in the American Southwest and northern Mexico. Principally, the author wants to bring to attention that their story of colonization is rather unconventional as it sought to create an alliance with the natives and connect two different worlds. He mentions two texts that have contributed to people’s previous awareness of the story, but he believes that the topic of this extraordinary venture that offers an essential image of pre contact North America has faded from present view. With this book, he hopes to bring the story back to light and correct any misconceptions. Although I do not know much of this significant encounter yet, this introduction is persuasive because the author explains how necessary their story is. Their interactions with the natives were humane and their journey was one of understanding, adaptation, and survival. The story of Cabeza de Vaca also serves as an integral part to our country’s history and the author confirms this with the statement, “It is, in essence the story of America.” I find this to be very compelling! Reséndez uses evidence from the Joint Report and the work of Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo among other information to develop this tale accurately and reveal the true intricacies of this important encounter.

The article by David Buisseret emphasizes the use of the term “creolization” to describe the multilateral intermingling of cultures and people. This opposes the terms “acculturation” or “assimilation” which depicts a culture that is dominating an inferior one. I find the concept of creolization to be very positive as it is more of a holistic word to describe something developed in the New World. It takes into account not only one’s own culture entering a distinctly new one, but environmental factors and influences of resident creoles. Interestingly, creolization did not occur at a stagnant rate. The author points out that several factors, such as self-importance, material abundance, and number affect the rate of creolization. The author uses many examples as well as various authors’ findings to support the concept of creolization. He goes on to list numerous examples of architecture, agriculture, food, language, and music that all exemplify creolization. One example I found particularly interesting is the exchange of medicine that Samuel de Champlain had to use to treat his sick men. Evidence like the latter makes the author’s view toward the idea of creolization a more convincing one. Towards the end of the article, Buisseret presents the stages of creolization from the perspective of different authors and offers feedback to each one. Overall, I found the article to be very persuasive because the author not only presents his view, but explores the ideas of other intellects. The countless specific examples also demonstrate and further support the idea of universal creolization. To me, creolization is the correct way to describe the mutual fusion of cultures and people.

In the article “only connect”, the writer William Cronon argues that the meaning of a liberal education is distorted and he gives his own understanding of the liberal arts education to the viewers. First, in the perspective of a historian, Mr. Cronon talks about how the word “liberal”comes from Latin and the actual meaning of the word “liberal” both in the ancient greek and in the Old English. This comparison gives me a view of how the people in the ancient age define the word “liberal” and It helps me to have a clear understanding of what the author actually tries to do. Then, in order to reinforce his stance, he further blames on the behavior of actually listing the classes which classes the students should take in order to become liberate. The author considers the listing of classes a direct mislead for students to become liberated people. With the example of an institution that tries to states as the “objects of the liberal education”, the author continually dismissed the idea of listing what should be done in order to achieve the goal of liberation. However, surprisingly, he, in the end, ended gives us a list of what he calls as ten essential personalities that shows a person is liberated .

Personally, there are some parts that I do find trustworthy. For example, when he talks about how world “liberal” relates the ancient greek word “eleutheros”, how it originates from the latin and how it is akin to the old english word leoden. It does give me a clear view of how to define the word “liberal”. But, when he considers the institutions are misleading students into the wrong road by give them a list of what should be done in order to become liberated, I totally disagrees with him. The liberal arts education in the U.S ( except for those who have one hundred percent bogus liberal arts education) is what drives me ten thousand miles away from China to purse my future study in U.S . Our higher education in China is distorted. It is extremely weird that students spend day and night in the high school, receiving force-feed education and working very diligently in order to receive a satisfying grade in the university entrance examination. But once when they do and successfully go to the universities, they feel like they are freed and there’s no need for hard working. Even those institutions are in nod with what the students think. As long as they do not fail that class, they can literally do go the class every time. I think It is not an environment that nurtures the future pillar of the state, but the parasitic disease for the whole society. Though, the students are physically liberated, they’ll never be mentally liberated. The U.S higher education system, in my own point of view, is the world first class educational system. Especially for those who study in the college, as long as they completed the so called “misleading” list that the college provides them, becoming the liberated is only a step away. I do not mean to directly argue against the writer and indeed the personalities he gave us are extremely persuasive. But, in my opinion, as long as there is no any sign of how to implement what he believes into reality, I will always be a strong of supporter of the liberal arts education.

The liberal arts education in the U.S is the true liberal education.

In his essay “Only Connect…” Cronon declares that the goal of a liberal education is to “celebrate and nurture human freedom.” He considers this a widely accepted fact; it’s not an argument. The issue, according to Cronon, is in how we decide to reach that goal. Cronon is responding to the boards of various colleges and academic systems as a whole. He argues that liberal education is never complete and that it’s not a state that one can attain, but rather a journey to learn more. He also argues that liberal educations are advertised as to be for the individual, when they’re actually about community and making a difference in the world and something greater than ourselves. Cronon believes that as colleges set course requirements and post lists, they lose sight of their original goals about human freedom. He then lists qualities he thinks a liberally educated person should have, rather than required courses that person should take. His list is relatively similar to the TED talk we watched in class about how to have better conversations; they both include listening to the world and people around you, being curious, accessible rhetoric, open to learning about and from others, being supportive, and connection being the most important thing.

I personally found Cronon’s argument to be very compelling, in part because I already had similar views. His argument was also persuasive because he made his points clearly, accessibly, and they seemed passionate. He didn’t use any real world examples, other than referencing the college motto he thought was poor. He explained his arguments, even without the aid of specific real world examples, so I would say he still had evidence for his philosophy. The only part of his argument that I don’t necessarily agree with is the part about liberal education not being for the benefit of individuals. I think that while it’s true that liberal education empowers individuals who then empower the community, it’s also true that liberal education prepares you to do well for yourself without the community necessarily.

In his short article “Only Connect…” William Cronon evaluates the true meaning of the term “liberal education”. William Cronon wrote the article to respond to everyone who uses the term “liberal education” because he feels that the term has lost its meaning. Cronon argues that many colleges and universities use the term “liberal education” but when you look at how they define it their definitions are vague and confusing. Cronon points out that they, the colleges and universities, say that a “liberal education” is defined by curriculum requirements but “forget that their purpose is to nurture human freedom and growth”.

Cronon’s main argument in his article “Only Connect…” is that a “liberal education” should be defined not by the curriculum, but by the qualities that liberally educated students should embody. To argue this point, Cronon begins by talking about the flaws with the historical definition of “liberal education” and compares that to how many modern schools define a “liberal education”. Cronon then moves on to discuss the traits that he thinks a “liberal education” should teach. Cronon recommends ten traits that he believes all liberally educated students should embody, he elaborates on each trait, and describes what that would mean for a student in the modern world.

I found the article “Only Connect…” very persuasive. I think that Cronon made some very important and compelling points that made me think about my own education and whether or not I have learned some of the important skills that he mentioned.  While I did find the article convincing I was left wondering how his suggestions could possibly be implemented. The traits he described were vague and they were all subjective. While this was intentional, I was left wondering how a school could set those as standards if they are so subjective and impossible to measure. I also feel that many schools today use their current standards, however confusing they may be, to produce thoughtful students who embody the traits described by Cronon. The success of many schools today tells me that while Cronon’s definition of a “liberal education” is interesting, it is not the only one that can effectively produce students who embody the important traits he described. To make a clear distinction between Cronon’s points and my own, I used first person statements and separated my beliefs from his by evaluating his work in a separate paragraph.

The article “Only Connect….” written by William Cronon explores the ideas and concepts behind liberal education. Due to the topic that Cronon addresses, I believe that he is responding to essentially students close to our age. Within his introduction he talks about the “glossy admissions brochures that high school students receive by the hundreds”. Cronon traces the roots of the term “liberal” in order to argue the purpose of a liberal education; his use of the root words to define the significance of a liberal education is extremely helpful in conveying that a liberal education should provide the student with freedom to explore a range of topics and to familiarize themselves with a diverse mix of concepts and lessons.

Cronon dedicates several paragraphs to the exploitation of lists of required courses at colleges and universities. I find his argument very compelling and credible especially when I compare his evidence to my own schooling experiences. Even in high school, we are prompted to create “Four-Year Plans” to make sure that we can successfully and efficiently check off the certain classes that are required for graduation. After recently going through this experience, I personally agree with Cronon’s argument that a true liberal education should provide fewer lists for students to muddle through and a wider variety of classes to chose from. According to the reading from “They Say, I Say” in order to decipher my ideas from Cronon’s I would need to state early on who I am responding to, as well as be very clear about why. I would need to state my motive in a well written thesis.

From my perspective, historian William Cronon’s main argument was, in simple terms, that the goal of a liberal education is ‘only connect’. Throughout the article, he lists a series of ten qualities that he believes every person who is liberally educated should/does embody. Then, at the end of the article, he argues that the ultimate goal of all of these qualities is connection. A liberal education, he argues, gives a person the ability to connect with other people, art, sports, literature, media; essentially, a liberally educated person should be able to connect with the world around them. Not only that, but Cronon goes further to argue that it is impossible for a person to be fully liberally educated. Rather than an accomplishment, to be liberally educated is “a way of life”. Cronon argues we should always strive towards improving ourselves and making more connections with the world around us.

To support his argument, Cronon uses a plethora of evidence and examples. For example, one of the qualities he focuses on is speech. Cronon writes that liberally educated people “can give a speech, ask thoughtful questions, and make people laugh”. Personally, I find his arguments to be incredibly persuasive. I felt like I strongly agreed with a lot of the stuff he was saying about what a liberally educated person should be. I relate it to the idea of a renaissance man or woman. One who studies and is proficient in multiple different practices. Someone who can speak well, who can talk to anyone, who is well read, who deeply appreciates music and art but can also appreciate a great sports play. I almost want to say that I could not have put it better myself. That being said, I don’t think four years in college is enough to create a person like that. Surely, not everyone who goes to a liberal arts college has all ten of the qualities he described. That is why Cronon stresses the importance of making a liberal education a way of life, because you don’t just study for four years and become liberally educated. It is a life long journey.

In William Cronon’s article “Only Connect…” he outlines what a liberal education means. Cronon’s article is for people who have either graduated from a liberal arts school or who plan on attending one, but they don’t know what it means to have a liberal arts education. Cronon begins his article with what having a liberal education meant back in the 1800s to what it is now. Cronon says now it is having courses not in the students major, so they become more well-rounded. Cronon’s main point, though, is that it doesn’t matter what the curriculum is, but more the qualities a person should have by the time they go through their liberal education. Cronon’s evidence is that many people have forgotten the attended purpose of a liberal education. Cronon’s says the main point of a liberal education are ten attributes he believes every liberal educated person should have.

I cannot say whether I found Cronon’s article persuasive or not because I already agreed with them. I did not find anything on his list shocking, I agreed with everything he said. The other problem is I know a couple people who have not had a liberal education, but from a tech school, and they still have his ten attributes. I believe that his list of ten can be written in three steps; 1 appreciate people for who they are, 2 be able to problem solve, and 3 learn how to communicate effectively.

To make a clear distinction between Cronon’s ideas and my own I must make sure either “Cronon’s” or “My/I” is in every sentence.

Though it is not specifically stated in the text, “Only Connect” I believe William Cronon is responding to those who are not aware of what a ‘liberal arts’ education is.  According to the reading, liberal arts is not an education base on political liberalism, instead it celebrates human freedom to chose an education for oneself. Cronon repeatedly states that the point of a liberal arts education is to connect with others whether that being with writing, speaking, listening, understanding, solving puzzles, and empower. Conon’s argument is to connect with everyone we meet and to empower those around us.  He also states that one cannot just achieve a liberal arts education, it is more of a lifestyle choice to connect and positively influence those around us. I personally found it more educational and motivating rather than persuasive. I thought this because it did not seem that Cronon was convincing people to pursue liberal arts, instead he was informing those on how to live a liberal arts lifestyle.

According to the book, “They Say, I say” the writer/I needs to explain what he/she is responding to in a response and then make a new individual point. If I were to make a distinction between my ideas and Cronan it would be best to explain which point of Cronon’s I am responding to and then introduce my idea after. One way of doing this is by starting with a quotation, fact/statistic, or anecdote that ties to the view I am commenting on.  It is important to do so in order for the reader or listener to understand where my point is coming from as well as the original argument.

In the article “Only Connect…”, William Cronon offers his stance in an argumentative fashion of the qualities that a true liberal arts educated person should possess. He is responding to the people and educators who try to produce liberally educated people by creating a sort of “formula.” They are the people that are part of the educational system that list the necessary courses that students must take in order to achieve a liberal education and say that the purpose of a liberal arts education is to complete this set of courses. Although it is easy to follow this, Cronon states that the essence of a liberal arts education is something much more and far greater than that. To him, it is one that fosters growth, freedom, and ten qualities that he goes on to list.

His central argument is that success in school needs to be calculated by how well students live up to these ten important qualities and only then can people be described to be liberally educated. To support this, Cronon gives an example of a real institution that lists the four aims of a liberal education and explains that “it is hardly a statement that stirs and inspires the soul.” This is evidence as to what an institution should not do to create liberally educated people. As to what an institution should do, his list is a good source for what universities and schools should strive to incorporate inside and outside the classroom. In a sense, it offers the ideal example of a liberally educated person and serves as a template to mimic.

I find Cronon’s argument to be extremely persuasive because he presents a counter-arguement, his argument and reasons to support both. His extensive and well-explained list also shows that he has spent a lot of time pondering, researching, and studying what comprises a liberally educated individual. I also find his conclusion that presents the two warnings that deal with individualism and liberal education as a lifestyle shows that the author is aware of what he is explaining. He even admits that what he had said earlier in the text is misleading. Further, I found his concluding paragraph to be very persuasive and inspiring because it ties the whole text to the idea of human connection and love for one another. It evokes the idea that a liberal education serves not only oneself, but the community. However, to make a clear distinction between Cronon’s ideas and my own, I would like to read about how other people define someone as liberally educated because it can potentially mean something different to everyone, and then I can see where my stance lies.