None of these inferences can be supported by textual evidence.Īdapted from “Geographical Evolution” by Archibald Geikie (1879) ![]() Take a look! You will not find any reference to Jefferson's personal past roles in government, only his vision for how these offices will interact with the people going forward. ![]() Now, from the title and knowledge of the basics of American history, you will know that Jefferson has just been elected President of the United States, and while you might not directly remember that Jefferson was a congressman (he was), it is certainly reasonable to assume that the President elect was previously elected to Congressman, but this is NOT indicated directly by the text. Now, we run into the key distinction this, and any inference question, will ask of you: the distinction between what is reasonable or even logical to assume about the situation and what is a logical inference to draw from the text. Although conflicts are mentioned Jefferson's role, and indeed the military particulars of these conflicts are not mentioned, so we can rule out this answer fairly quickly. There is absolutely no indication or mention of the military in the speech. We start with the question text handing us the specific inference we are to investigate, namely that the text gives us direct evidence that Jefferson is a former general or US Senator, or a religious leader. This question interrogates your ability to recognize the sufficiency of evidence for a given inference. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question. Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. I believe it the only one where every man, at the call of the law, would fly to the standard of the law, and would meet invasions of the public order as his own personal concern. I believe this, on the contrary, the strongest government on earth. I know, indeed, that some honest men fear that a republican government can not be strong, that this government is not strong enough but would the honest patriot, in the full tide of successful experiment, abandon a government which has so far kept us free and firm on the theoretic and visionary fear that this government, the world's best hope, may by possibility want energy to preserve itself? I trust not. If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it. We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists. ![]() We have called by different names brethren of the same principle. During the throes and convulsions of the ancient world, during the agonizing spasms of infuriated man, seeking through blood and slaughter his long-lost liberty, it was not wonderful that the agitation of the billows should reach even this distant and peaceful shore that this should be more felt and feared by some and less by others, and should divide opinions as to measures of safety.īut every difference of opinion is not a difference of principle. And let us reflect that, having banished from our land that religious intolerance under which mankind so long bled and suffered, we have yet gained little if we countenance a political intolerance as despotic, as wicked, and capable of as bitter and bloody persecutions. Let us restore to social intercourse that harmony and affection without which liberty and even life itself are but dreary things. Let us, then, fellow-citizens, unite with one heart and one mind. ![]() Adapted from the First Inaugural Address of Thomas Jefferson (March 4th, 1801)ĭuring the contest of opinion through which we have passed, the animation of discussions and of exertions has sometimes worn an aspect which might impose on strangers unused to think freely and to speak and to write what they think but this being now decided by the voice of the nation, announced according to the rules of the Constitution, all will, of course, arrange themselves under the will of the law, and unite in common efforts for the common good. All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |