P3+MWeir

A. Thesis statement and essay unity.


 * //Machiavelli has a more optimistic point of view as opposed to the one-sided opinion of Hobbes.//**

Does the thesis statement I have written at the end of the essay really express the main point that I make in the essay?
 * I believe it does.**

Does the thesis statement reflect everything in the essay? Does the essay develop everything in the thesis statement?
 * It reflects the opinion. The essay developes mostly everything in the thesis statement.**

Does the thesis statement make a positive statement rather than a negative one?
 * It makes a positive statement.**

Does your thesis posit an argument that is actually worth arguing? What is that argument?
 * It argues that Machiavelli's suggestions for mankind's management is not as one-sided as Hobbes. It is worth arguing because our contemporary society reflects some of the principals that Machiavelli and Hobbes hath written.**

Is every clause in the thesis statement in the active voice? Hobbes believes that government needs to control man completely.**
 * Nicolo Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes have similar views of mankind.

Does your thesis statement answer the questions "why?" and "how?" to the satisfaction of a doubting reader? Your thesis statement, of course, will not support or explain or provide evidence of why or how, but it should state the reasons why it is true if these will be discussed in the essay.
 * It answers the question why. It says that Machiavelli uses less pessimism in his form of government, which is why I agree with the way he rules as opposed to Hobbes.**

Is your thesis statement clear, precise and limited,controversial or informative,and defensible?
 * It is clear. It gives an opinion, however it is a bit limited. It isn't too controversial, but I think it can be defended.**

B. Introduction and conclusion.


 * Nicolo Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes have a similar view of mankind. However, they differ greatly in their opinions of government. Hobbes tends to be more pessimistic of man's ability and Machiavelli believes that they just need to be lead to the right path.** **//Machiavelli has a more optimistic point of view as opposed to the one-sided opinion of Hobbes.//**


 * //Machiavelli, although believing that mankind is a bit evil, rules with less force and more love.//** **Hobbes and Machiavelli both have ideas to lead these people, they just differ greatly.**

Is your first paragraph interesting? Does it provide concrete and specific material that is likely to catch the reader’s attention and focus it on your topic?
 * It sticks to the prompt, but it does not go out of its way to provide interest or appeal.**

Do you make a clear contract with the reader? Please summarize what you believe your contract is. Does the conclusion of your essay satisfy your contract with the reader? How?
 * I do not know what a contract is, so I'm not sure if I have one or not.**

C. Body

(Please copy your topic sentences and your best and worst paragraphs here, labeling each.)

Machiavelli focuses more on creating a good leader to rule these ignorant people.**
 * Hobbes believes that government needs to control man completely.

Best: **Hobbes believes that government needs to control man completely. Fear is used to motivate man to be "good". "Bonds have their strength, not from their own nature...but from fear of some evil consequence upon the rupture." By binding man, he is forced to behave in any manner that one wishes. In this, there is no way for man to do evil because he is evil. His rights are taken before they are given. He also believes in a sort of forced peace. "Every man ought to endevour peace...ment are comanded to endevour." In order to achieve this harmony, Hobbes says that man should be forced to be peaceful. Is it really peace, or is it hypocracy? If government takes everyone into its own hands, they have everything. Hobbes fancies using fear and control to motivate evil people into creating a perfect society.**

Worst: **Machiavelli focuses more on creating a good leader to rule these ignorant people. He doesn't go for complete control, he is more about gaining the approval of the people as well as doing what he feels is best for the nation. "It is necessary for a prince to have the people friendly." The idea of keeping people happy with their prince is alot less harsh than Hobbes' suggestion of obey or else. Machiavelli concentrates on building relationships with these people to find out what they want, what they need, and what they can have. "That his citizens will always have need of his state and of him." He doesn't use complete domination, he uses a more sly and passive sort of control.**

Do the paragraphs of your essay move in a logical direction? Does the reader have the experience of getting someplace, of answering questions and moving toward a point? Or does the essay jump around for no apparent reason? Evaluate the overall organization of your essay briefly, and then point out where you think the transition between paragraphs is strongest and where it is weakest? Evaluate the overall organization of your essay briefly, and then point out where you think the transition between paragraphs is strongest and where it is weakest?
 * They are logical. The evidents for the most part relates to the thesis and the overall argument. It doesn't concretely move to a point. It just feels like a bunch of jumble, it gets kind of repetitive and boring. I liked my transition from the first body paragraph to the second body paragraph. The concluding sentences on the body paragraphs aren't really working.**

Would your essay be persuasive to someone who doubts your thesis statement? What qualities of evidence or support would make it so? In particular, list your specific examples and clear, vivid cases that illustrate and support your points. Do you write about actual people in the essay? Where could you make the essay more interesting by adding a story, and example, or a more specific explanation? Are there places where you should introduce a source more clearly or fully or where a citation needs to be provided and corrected?
 * I think they would get the jist of it. I believe my evidence from "Levathian" illustrates the better part of my point. A more specific explanation would help.**

In the essay, do you answer the question "How do you know?" of every claim you make in such a way that a doubting reader would be satisfied? Evaluate the overall quality of the evidence you use in the essay, then comment on where you think your evidence is strongest and where you think it is weakest.
 * I hope so. It doesn't answer it as clearly as I would have hoped. I think it is the strongest in the first two paragraphs and then it is the weakest in the conclusion.**

Does each sentence in each paragraph lead to or from the central point (the topic sentence)?
 * It sticks to it.**

What is your most coherent paragraph? What your least?
 * My most coherent is probably my introduction. My least is my conclusion.**

Is every paragraph fully developed? Which are and which aren’t? What is your best developed paragraph and what your worst? Is this essay clearly written and relatively free of errors in grammar, spelling, and usage? What are your most frequent errors?
 * Word usage is questionable. I made spelling and grammar errors.**

Overall:

How interesting is this essay? To what kinds of readers would it be more interesting? To what kinds of readers less interesting? What parts are most and what least interesting? Are there parts where readers will be bored or confused? How effective an essay do you believe this is. That is, how successful would this essay be a persuading the other members of the class to believe your thesis statement? Why?


 * I don't think that it was a very interesting essay. It could have had more umph.**

analysis