The Academic Paper of Awesomeness

The day of reckoning draws dearer, our papers are due tonight! I guess I could've posted about my progress earlier in the week, but as I'm sure we can all attest to, this week has been insane!! Either way I would very much appreciate your input, even at the eleventh hour.

As I'm sure some of you may have already inferred by my comments about it in class, (and I apologize if they've gotten annoying, I just really like this topic) my academic paper is about the political ramifications of applying print to legal texts.

 Here's my intro paragraph:

"The American Revolution, the English Civil War, and the French and Russian Revolutions, all are examples of unprecedented political and social change that occurred after a particularly pivotal event in history – then invention of the printing press. The application of printing to the law led to greater political change than any other singular event in history. This primarily brought about a change in the way people communicated legal knowledge, and thereby how they communicated their ideas on the subject. There are two main results of printed law that directly caused this change: greater public access to uniform legal decisions and court proceedings, and a more public discourse regarding law and its functions leading to the wide dissemination of political ideas. While some may argue that the transition from spoken to written law or some other turning point in history was more groundbreaking in its nature, it’s quite apparent that the transition from oral and written legal traditions to the printed word had an effect with far greater scope than those of other developments."


In case you didn't catch it, my thesis is, "The application of printing to the law led to greater political change than any other singular event in history." I think it's simple, provocative, and gets my point across. 

What are your thoughts? Did this really lead to more political change than ANY other single event in history? The only one I could think of was possibly The American Revolution, which I believe depended a lot on print knowledge in the first place. I think it's a pretty divisive statement, so I'm sure there will be someone who disagrees with me. Thanks in advance for your input!

Law and Religion - Indivisible in India

Last week I posted about my findings while reading from the Mahabharata, an ancient epic poem written in India that contains key beliefs of the Hindu culture. I dedicated this week to reading from the Bhagavad-Gita, a sacred scripture taken from the Mahabharata that is so important to Hinduism that it is often treated as a free standing text. The poem recounts a conversation between Lord Krishna (later revealed to be the Supreme Being himself) and a prince named Arjuna who questions the war he’s fighting against his own cousins. As they stand on the battlefield with both sides ready for conflict, Lord Krishna (often referred to simply as “the Lord”) teaches Arjuna his duties as a warrior in the caste system of India and also instructs him on how to live a righteous life. As such, this text allows us to have a better understanding of Hindu theology and the caste system of ancient India.