The ruling I would make on the charge of treason against John Brown, is guilty. Since the belief in transcendentalism is basically to be living on your own and not living under the government many are able to see how this may be illegal and wrong to the government. This also just gives people the opportunity to do whatever they want whether or not it is good or bad. Also, John Brown was convicted of treason due to the murder of five men and inciting a slave insurrection. I understand where John Brown was coming from, in the fact that slavery is wrong and should have been abolished. But there comes a time where we cannot recreate the actions of our enemies to retaliate, we must bring about a peaceful measure to combat these problems or else we become no better than our enemies. Then there was Ralph Waldo Emerson who just so happened to be a transcendentalist. He believed he did not have to live under the government and pay taxes and follow their society rules. He wrote poetry and he was a essayist he led the transcendentalist movement of the mid-19th century. I don't think transcendentalism is the answer to our problems with the government, it just makes it seem like we are acting like children and pretending the problem isn't there or choosing to ignore everything around us and act like we live in a bubble. This is why I believe John Brown should be guilty.
i just added more words to help reach the 250 word count :) hope this helps!
The ruling I would make on the charge of treason is since transcendentalism is basically living on your own and not living under the government you can see how this may be illegal and wrong to the government. Also, John Brown was under the charge of treason due to the murder of five men and inciting a slave insurrection. Then there was Ralph Waldo Emerson who just so happened to be a transcendentalist. He believed he did not have to live under the government and pay taxes and follow their society rules. He wrote poetry and he was a essayist he led the transcendentalist movement of the mid-19th century.
The answer, in my opinion, is the second sentence, "The coach who is an expert in the sport explained the revised rules to us". Here, the "Who is an expert", is presumably the nonessential clause.
