The Truth of aleonardo da vinci essay Conclusion

Opinion of Leonardo da Vinci essay depends on what you read into the message. read this blog post from is in the eye of the beholder, which is an expression I like to use. It is easy to conclude that if we read what others think about what we have read we will find a conclusion that agrees with what we already know or believe to be true. We need to be very careful not to generalize and say that all other's opinions are wrong just because they do not agree with our own.

We must never assume that what others think is right. Rather, we need to take into consideration their point of view and then make changes if necessary based upon our own observations and personal experience. For example, in the recent hullabaloo about the movie " Transformers " some people have accused the director of attacking the Japanese. I do not agree with that view at all. The film is an attack on a specific culture by an individual with anti-foreign feelings. That is my opinion, and I am glad you agree.

Now let us look at the leonardo essay. The essay conclusion does not take a stand for or against war. I have no problem with people disagreeing with me on this subject, as I also have different beliefs and feelings on the issue. However, the essay concludes that DaVinci was a believer in peace, and he was not a fanatic. That is a common conclusion of many of his works.

Now then, I think it is important to understand that DaVinci was a sincere and tireless worker to perfect his art. I don't question his dedication, or his desire to perfect the art of war. But he was a man who believed firmly that war was wrong and that violence caused so much destruction. He was a man who saw the war through the eyes of a simple villager. I do not question his sincerity or his belief that war was bad.

But the conclusion stops at that point. His essay is a generalization, and that is to be expected. No one is going to argue with a generalization, especially one as sweeping as this one. The question is whether that sweeping generalization is correct in its implication, or if another argument can be advanced in support of the truth of that statement.

The essay's conclusion certainly restates this fact, but does not go further. The conclusion does not even justify its own argument. The essay's focus has been on arguing the nature of war, and the ways DaVinci differed from typical artists in this debate. If that were so, then the conclusion would have merit.

But what about war as a social structure? War is social activity, and has been for thousands of years. It has been used as a means of settling disputes, often between two groups based on geographical location. One can easily say that this is the essence of war, and that is the essence of what separates a man from the rest of society.

The truth of this argument depends on what we mean by "man." Is it only a physical being, or does it also include the rational faculty, which makes an abstract man? To say that there is a difference between men is to say that there is a difference between a man and a horse, or between an oak tree and a sparrow. The essay is a broad attempt to show that there are truths that cannot be understood in physical terms. It is an argument about man that concludes, but does not prove.