The Formation of Empires

Empires usually form when an already powerful society loses its leader and a power struggle arises.  The leader who rises to power then decides to expand this society and give himself absolute power to form an empire.  In the Roman empire, Augustus took what was already a powerful republic and succeeded power from his uncle Julius Caesar to become emperor.  However, he was careful to structure his government with leaders loyal to him and try to make the lower class have a voice to promote unity.  In India, Chandragupta Maurya used military power to form a large empire.  He simply filled the role of leader after Alexander of Macedon left.  Another example of an empire rising is in China where Qin Shihuangdi was able to step into leadership and enforce military power.  He used standardized laws and a system that would continue this style of rule after his death.
In all societies there are conflicts of power, and in certain ones a single man is able to rise above the rest and influence his power to unite more lands.  Power is always the motivation, and some leaders have more success with it than others, as we see throughout much of the world where power struggles are very different, but at the same time have striking similarities.

Wikipedia vs. Textbooks

Personally, I like Wikipedia for brief summaries of a topic, but I do not always trust everything that is written. That is why teaching a class based on Wikipedia seems unrealistic, because there is not usually enough detail and not all the facts can be trusted. As far as Wikipedia vs. The textbook goes, Wikipedia actually gave a very good overview of Buddhism. Wikipedia organizes it all into subheadings, such as origin, founder, and customs. However there were a few facts that contrasted with the textbook's, and I trust the textbook over Wikipedia. I believe if you need a five minute summary of a topic, go to Wikipedia. However, if you want to prepare for a test and learn in depth about something, the textbook is the only way to go.

Caste Duties of Bhagavad Gita

The caste duties of Bhagavad Gita emphasize that death is inevitable, so it is more important to just do your job and not worry about it.  It highly emphasizes death before dishonor, and that trying to cower away from a fight or not fighting as bravely as one can will lose the respect of their peers and enemies, which will also lead to only more sin.  It teaches that upon death a heaven is entered, and that the perished are the victorious.  It also teaches that as long as the individual gives their best effort, the fact of winning or losing the battle is irrelevant. 
Zoroastrianism teaches similar concepts in the overall idea of "karma", that if good things are done by a person then good will come to that person.  However, Zoroastrianism emphasizes more free will, or the ethical choices a person makes.  The caste duties emphasize more a structured life and people "knowing their place" in whatever role they play in society.  As long as they carry out their role to their best ability, they will be honored.  The teachings of Confucianism have similarities again relating to people doing good, but is much more structured and requires the leadership of a sage for guidance.  Also, Confucianism does not address religious aspects of heaven and the afterlife the way the caste system highlights it.  Confucianism focuses on bringing out the good in people through a structured life to better themselves, whereas the Caste teachings are more focused on doing a job honorably and dying before dishonoring oneself and having an unpleasant afterlife.  All three teachings are similar in their overall concepts, but because they arose from different parts of the world were different issues were present, there are obviously going to be some differences.

How to Assess blogs...

I believe that blogs should not be assessed based on length, because longer is not necessarily better.  Students often repeat themselves or write unnecessary details into their posts just to make them seem longer and do not even always answer the question.  Quality and individuality of the post should come into play.  A unique blog that stands out or has a new perspective on a topic deserves to be rewarded.  Since blogging is a form of social media, I believe grammar should not be graded too strictly, unless the errors affect the fluency of the blog.  To receive a 3 for a homework grade I believe the blog must answer a question thoroughly and offer a new insight on the issue.  A 2 would be deserved if the post simply answered the question, but was not very in depth or creative.  A 1 should only be given if the question was not answered, or if it looks like the post was composed last minute just to receive some credit for the assignment.  I do not think anyone who takes the time to write a post deserves a 0, unless the post is so bad it is not worthy of an AP student.  No student in this class should have to worry about receiving a zero as long as they put an honest effort into their post. 
 As far as us grading each others' blogs, I do not think this is a great idea.  Although it is important to comment on our peers blogs to share ideas and generate new thoughts, I think kids are too nice and won't be honest enough to give most people less than a 2 or 3.  Also conflicting ideas could slant someone's grading to a lower score.  It is Mr. Whitten's job to give us grades, so let him do the grading and us do the learning. 

The Analects could teach U.S. Officials a thing or two...

 
Book III. 16          The Master said, “The gentleman understands what is moral, the small man understands what is profitable.”
Members of congress should read this passage because all of them feel that they are powerful men due to their wealth.  This passage should strike a conscious in some of them who work only to make people money.  Although money must always be a primary concern in government, there are some obvious issues that seem to be overlooked.  Hopefully this passage could make these wealthy politicians feel humbled and start looking at the moral issues facing our country.  If officials looking to be elected used this as a campaign slogan the people voting would be inspired and this could help win the election.  The more important thing is for officials to act on this slogan and not just say it. Problems are not solved by just talking.