Loot Context Essays

Loot Context Essays Loot Context Essay Loot Context Essay Joe Orton was the son of a gardener and a mechanist, he had an ordinary schooling in Leicester, where he was born, and started working at the age of 16. For 2 years he got often sacked from his employers since what he did didnt interest him. At night he was member of many different amateur dramatic societies, what inspired him to become a professional actor. With the help of private tutition, he managed to get into R.A.D.A. He claims not to have learnt anything for the first year, but he says that he had lost his confidence. When he went into Rep he got married to one of the other students he got married to one of the other students, but of course, this rushed relationship soon came to an end. Soon enough after that, Orton started to express his homosexuality, getting involved in a relationship with another of his classmates, this time, his name was Kenneth. This personal experience reflects on his writing of the play Loot, where he shows disrespect to marriag e and relationships (in real life, Orton often cheated on Kenneth, by cottaging). His can be clearly seen in the first scene, where Fay asks McLeavy, right after Mrs Mc Leavys death, if he has considered a second marriage yet? Kenneth and Orton have experienced 3 months of jail during their relationship, after they had been sentenced for vandalising the covers of public library books. During this 3-month period, he has been overcome with this feeling of disrespect for the police force and in the play Loot, especially; he shows this feeling and uses Trustcott to undermine the police authorities. Joe Orton was influenced by other plays, before he introduced his contemporary works. One of these plays might be Look back in Anger by John Osborne. This play marked the start of a new genre on the British stage in the late 1950s. It was the first play where some views and opinions, which before had been considered inappropriate, had now been expressed to a large public. Its lines are for the first time very similar to the every-day spoken language, and the bluntness of the speeches would have been quite shocking for the society at the time. For example, Jimmy, one of the main characters, says to Alison (his wife) If only something- something could happen to you, and wake you out of your beauty sleep! If you could have a child, and it would die. This play was written in the sixties, a period of time where people wanted to liberate society from the post-war tranquillity mood that had settled in the UK after WW2. The sixties were a time of change. New music bands were influencing the new era, but not only that: the first man on the moon, new daring movie stars such of marilyn monroe, and the womens liberation movement starting to expand, with the publishing of The feminine Mystique by Betty Friedan.

Push-Pull Factors that Determine Population Migration

Push-Pull Factors that Determine Population Migration In geographical terms, the push-pull factors are those that drive people away from a place and draw people to a new location. A combination of push-pull factors helps determine migration or immigration of particular populations from one land to another. Push factors are often forceful, demanding that a certain person or group of people leave one country for another, or at least giving that person or people strong reasons to want to move- either because of a threat of violence or loss of financial security. Pull factors, on the other hand, are often the positive aspects of a different country that encourage people to immigrate in order to seek a better life. While it may seem that push and pull factors are diametrically opposed, they both come into play when a population or person is considering migrating to a new location. Push Factors: Reasons to Leave Any number of detrimental factors can be considered push factors, which essentially force a population or person from one country to seek refuge in another, better country. These conditions which drive people to leave their homes can include bullying, a sub-standard level of living, food, land or job scarcity, famine or drought, political or religious persecution, pollution, or even natural disasters. When this happens, it may be difficult to pick and choose a destination: speed is more important than selecting the best option for relocation. Although all push factors dont require a person to leave a country, these conditions that contribute to a person leaving are often so dire that if they do not choose to leave, they will suffer financially, emotionally or physically.  The Great Potato Famine, for example, pushed thousands of Irish families to immigrate to the United States to avoid starvation. Populations with refugee statuses are the among the most affected by push factors in a country or region. Refugee populations are often faced with genocide-like conditions in their country of origin, usually because of authoritarian governments or populations opposed to religious or ethnic groups. For example, Jews leaving Germany during the Nazi era were threatened with violent death if they remained in their home country. Pull Factors: Reasons to Migrate Pull factors are those that help a person or population determine whether relocating to a new country would provide the most benefit. These factors attract populations to a new place largely because of what the country provides that was not available to them in their country of origin. A promise of freedom from religious or political persecution, availability of career opportunities or cheap land, or abundance of food could be considered pull factors for migrating to a new country. In each of these cases, a population will have more opportunity to pursue a better life compared to its home country. Students entering universities or seeking jobs in more developed countries, for example, are likely to receive larger salaries and greater opportunities than in their countries of origin. For some individuals and groups, push and pull factors work together. This is particularly the case when push factors are relatively benign. For example, a young adult who cannot find a lucrative job in her home country may consider immigrating only if the opportunities are significantly better elsewhere.

Preservation of Justice as the Power to Rightness Essay

Preservation of Justice as the Power to Rightness - Essay Example In the fall off the devil, Anselm says the angels that did not fall are free, and yet cannot sin. This proves that to Anselm, freedom construes the right, and ability to act in the right reason, or meaning having the right intention that cannot lead to sin. In this paper I will review the validity of Anselm’s argument in the statement that â€Å"after Satan fell, the angels that did not fall are free and yet cannot sin.† First I will evaluate Anselm’s view relating to the nature of God, secondly, I will review Anselm’s argument concerning, being and the essence of being. This will then lead to the relation between ‘being,’ and preservation of good and evil, evaluating how a being is regarded to be good or evil as related to act and intention of such a being. Finally I will evaluate the dilemma concerning freedom of choice, which will be essential in proving the hypothesis above. In Anselm's argument on free will, God, angels and humans are con sidered as rational beings able make viable decisions. Anselm view justice as the ability to will what one ought to will, meaning they possessed justice in willing what they ought to will, and sine they were rational beings, the good angles had the potential to sin, but refrained form it by choice. The essence of any being is to obtained justice by wiling what they ought to will; just as the good angels refrained from sin. ... er He has, and all other things have something only from him, and just as they have from themselves only nothing, so they have from him only something† (Anselm, 216). Anselm argues that everything has its essence through God, and nothing exists devoid of his power and will. This affirms the importance of ‘will’ in any action. God having been the first being to will implies that any subsequent rational beings have to share this quality. God being the absolute rational being, could only have created other rational beings in his own image, meaning that as God has freedom to will, only so could other rational beings be created. God has imparted the freedom to choose in all rational beings. Secondly, Anselm elaborates on the will and freedom of God to create and preserve any being. God is responsible for being, and what ‘is’ as He conserves in existence what’ is’. Every being is, because it was created by God, and He conserves it in existence. The theme of conservation in this case is responsible for the state of everything which is, without which a being cannot be. â€Å"But if you consider existing things: when they pass to not being, God does not cause them not to be†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. But also being cannot remain how it was made except by his conserving† (Anselm, 217). It is through conservation that a being is, without which the being would return to not being. Ekenberg (17) further elaborates this notion by arguing that God is only a cause of what is, not of ‘what is not.’ God according to Anselm cannot make something not to be, but by removing his conserving over the being, such a being automatically returns where it belonged to; in not being. Therefore, God’s will is positive and not meant to destroy; though God has freedom to preserve that which He wills.

2010 Arizona law about checking anyone that law inforcement suspected Essay

2010 Arizona law about checking anyone that law inforcement suspected to be undocumeneted - Essay Example lenges manifested the act on its voidance of the civil and political rights as enshrined in the international convents and the constitution (Rough, 2010). A preliminary injunction was issued by a federal judge before the Act took full effect to allow the determination of the controversial issues in the said act. There were four provisions that were contentious in the said act. They included: In June 2012, the matter in this case, Arizona v United States, a ruling was made that upheld and affirmed the contentious provision requiring an immigration status check during lawful stops or arrests (Barnes, 2012).Markedly, the US Supreme Court stroke out the other contentious clauses and they were rendered void. Those clauses were found to be a breach of the supremacy clauses of the United States Constitution (Barnes, 2012). The United States Constitution is the supreme law, and any other law that is contrary to it is inapplicable. The striking out of some of the contentious clauses by the court brought relieve to critics of the act who viewed the Act as repugnant to moral equity and justice. Some persons were of the view that these laws would bring about the issue of racial profiling and furthermore, catalyze racial discrimination among citizens (Thompson, 2010). It is sober to note that this law sparked lots of protests in some of the states of the United States of America with critics calling for boycotts. Nevertheless, some opinion polls seemed to show that most citizens of the Arizona supported the act. They also showed that that they wanted the repealing of some of the sections that were considered to be strict and prompted discomposure of aliens who were immigrants (Thompson, 2010). The bill also took a political angle with support/criticism of the said law being subjected to party positions and not individual understanding of the realities surrounding this law. Most Democrats were opposing the bill and vehemently criticizing it while most Republicans supported

Cultural diversity in professional comm Essay Example for Free

Cultural diversity in professional comm Essay While America fought World War II in Europe, riots broke out in the streets of Los Angeles targeting young Latinos. They strived for the same freedom enjoyed by whites, but were treated as poorly as African Americans of the era. In effect, they tried to disassociate themselves from this faction. Young Latino men referred to themselves as pachucos and sported oversize suits known as zoot suits. In the film Zoot Suit Riots, Joseph Tovares remarkably portrayed the difficult lives of Mexican Americans in the 1940s. Zoot Suit Riots is a powerful film that explores the complicated racial tensions, as well as the changing social and political scene leading up to the riots in the streets of Los Angeles in the summer of 1943. White Americans, police and service men targeted Latinos with their racist attitudes. Tovares argues that these Mexican American adolescents were victims, but they also stood up for themselves and fought back to gain the respect they felt they deserved. This generation of Americanized Latino children wanted to be recognized as American on their own terms. To distinguish themselves from their parents’ generation, they became zoot suitors, but learned that was not enough as racism was a widespread phenomenon across America. Tovares accurately portrays the lives of Mexican Americans victimized by highlighting the Sleepy Lagoon Case. To white Americans in Los Angeles, the murder was proof that Mexican American crime was spiraling out of control. Tovares, however, uses this as evidence to support that they were mistreated because the Mexican American suspects taken into custody all wore zoot suits. This reinforced the opinion white Americans had of Mexican Americans and their apprehension of men in zoot suits. He also interviewed both Mexican Americans and White Americans who lived during this event, even some participants in the riots. His use of oral history throughout the film is captivating as you hear the voice and emotional reaction of a person who actually experienced these riots. Tovares interviews Hank Leyyas sister, an important defendant in the case, who lived through the crime, the trail, the city, everything. She remembers it all and how much it affected her brother’s life. Her emotions when describing the riots helps the viewer understand how people were affected. Sailors of the time admitted in their interviews to attacking Mexican Americans and Mexican Americans admitted to reciprocating the behavior. Tovares’ film reflects on the racist abuse Mexican Americans received not only from White American citizens, but also from authority figures. Edward Escobar’s historical article, Zoot-Suiters and Cops, supports Tovares’ argument that zoot suitors were seen as dangers to society and this brought upon the attacks on them, but Escobar focuses more on the police aspect of the riots. Escobar argues, â€Å"Police, along with local civic leaders, believed that Mexican American youth, especially young males, were inclined toward violent crime. This belief merged with police officers’ frustration over their inability to crack down on the alleged lawbreakers and led to their allowing servicemen to beat and humiliate the zoot-suiters† (Escobar, 1996). Tovares agrees that police were problematic, but focuses more on the Sleepy Lagoon Case involving Mexican and White Americans who participated or lived during the riots. Escobar states that the LAPD consistently arrested Mexican Americans at a higher rate than the general population. During the war these numbers increased, especially arresting young Mexican Americans. However, Escobar argues that police officials misinterpreted their own statistics. Reported crime actually fell during 1942 and 1943, the years of the alleged crime wave. These â€Å"increases in arrests resulted more from changes in the law and in police practices than from changes in Mexican American behavior. Specifically, new immigration and draft laws for adults and curfew ordinances for juveniles, created new classes of laws that Mexican Americans violated, increasing the arrest statistics† (Escobar, 1996). The LAPD also employed selective enforcement in barrios than in white sections like the curfew ordinance as an example. This evidence strongly supports Escobar’s argument that the LAPD was more inclined towards the harsh treatment of Mexican Americans. Escobar focuses more on this than Tovares did throughout the film. While Tovares and Escobar both focus on the discrimination zoot suiters felt, Thomas Guglielmo shifts his focus to Mexican American racism was not only in Los Angeles but also in Texas in his historical article, Fighting for Caucasian Rights. Guglielmo argues that Mexican Americans who were born in the United States showed that they only cared about the United States but needed to be looked at again. They seemed active, focusing on being American, distant from Mexico but really these Mexican American’s due to the Good Neighbor policy still identified themselves with Mexico. Compared to Tovares, Guglielmo looks at American battles in Texas and legislative matter compared to the Los Angeles zoot suit riots. Guglielmo goes against Tovares perspective and says that there is more to Mexican American racism outside of Los Angeles. During the war more people of Mexican descent lived in Texas than any other state. These Mexican Americans that lived here are fighting for equality through legislation unlike the Mexican American’s in Los Angeles who are fighting for the same but by rebelling out through wearing zoot suits and adapting to that way of life. Both Toraves and Escobar perspective is on zoot suiters and police interaction where as Guglielmo focuses more on just Mexican Americans in Texas. Guglielmo argument is not as convincing to me because he focuses too much on legislation and Mexico compared to Toraves and Escobar focus on the discrimination Mexican Americans faced during the war that resulted in the riots. Toraves, Escobar and Guglielmo all highlight the struggle Mexican American’s faced fighting for equality, just presented it in different ways. Tovares strongly emphasized why the Mexican Americans wanted to break free. They were tired of being told what to do, where to go, what to wear. They created an image for themselves that separated them from everyone else. Escobar stated that the zoot suit phenomenon resulted primarily from the racism, discrimination, and extreme poverty that people of Mexican descent faced in the United States (Escobar, 1996). It did not necessarily give Mexican American’s more rights and equality’s that they fought for indirectly but brought national attention to their race that they needed to bring attention to fight for themselves. CITATION: Esobar. Zoot-suiters and Cops: Chicano Youth and the Los Angeles Police Department during World War II. 284-303. 1996 Guglielmo. Fighting for Caucasian Rights: Mexicans, Mexican Americans and the transnational struggle for Civil Rights in World War II Texas. 1212-1237. 2006 Tovares, Joseph, dir. Zoot Suit Riots. 2002. PBS Home Video. DVD-ROM.

Victorian Writing :: essays research papers

How can I describe my emotions at this catastrophe, or how delineate the wretch whom with such infinite pains and care I had endeavoured to form? His limbs were in proportion, and I had selected his features as beautiful. Beautiful! -- Great God! His yellow skin scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath; his hair was of a lustrous black, and flowing; his teeth of a pearly whiteness; but these luxuriances only formed a more horrid contrast with his watery eyes, that seemed almost of the same colour as the dun white sockets in which they were set, his shrivelled complexion and straight black lips. As my eyes fixated on my creation, lightning flashed among the clouds and was followed by drumming thunder. Rain started to pound down on the roof above me, like stones falling from the sky, the sound becoming progressively deafening by the minute. The surrounding trees howled terrifyingly, swaying from side to side, with the immense winds almost uprooting them. Debris, pushed up by the winds, crashed through the house’s windows. Glass flew apart with piercing sounds, flying towards me, and with swift strokes, they sliced the flesh on my face. Blood oozed out of the cuts profusely and my face became gory with red. The weather became more ferocious and the chilly winds blew through the wrecked windows, down my spine. The teeth in my mouth started chattering from the chills and fear. The going-on outside the house was overwhelming, numbing my senses and movement. â€Å"Oh Lord!† I said. â€Å"What have I done wrong?† Lightning unrelentingly flashed and thunder still roared after. This time, it was even more earsplitting. I have incurred God’s wrath, our environment and surroundings are his domain, expressing his fury. I continued to look up at the sky above, questioning God. Every remark thrown at him caused the storm to intensify. Nevertheless, I did not hold back as the potent emotions within me spurred me let it all out. Suddenly, there was a strident crash behind me, which could be heard among all the noises outside the house. I turned my head and the floor was covered in broken porcelain chips. My ancestral urn had fallen onto the floor. The floral velvet carpet that once lay colourful and vibrate, was now stained with fine gray ash and the blood dripping off my scared face. Persistent chilling winds blew through the window, and the ash flew with the gust and the room immediately became hazy.

Defining Humanities Essay

Humanities is the study of language, philosophy, communication, environment, history, religion, sociology, arts, culture, education and ethics. The word humanities originally comes from the Latin word, â€Å"humanus. † The word humanus means â€Å"human. † To be â€Å"human† is to possess the qualities and attributes of man. Being human also has the feelings and dispositions proper to man. However, humanities as the study of the different cultural aspects analyzes man’s weaknesses in life and how each can be improved. Culture includes speech, knowledge, beliefs, arts, technologies, ideals, and rules. To be cultured means to be refined and well versed in arts, philosophy, and the languages. It is also to be learned about great men and leaders in the past. Culture should regulate the type of behavior considered appropriate to an individual. Its teaching is essential for one to obtain the proper knowledge in his efforts to achieve the status of being a cultured man. On the other hand, understanding man and his affairs rather than just a body of accepted facts and theories is a purpose for humanities. It has various meanings in different historical periods, but it is only the same. This sums up to remind everyone about humanity. Humanities dealt with philosophy and theology in the 12th, 13th centuries and Renaissance period. This was the study of disciplines among languages, fine arts, music, and philosophy. Recognizing literature defined humanities in the past. There were different types of performing arts such as music, dance, theatre, philosophy, and religion. Humanities supported various categories of literature. Each and every one of these types were study academically. in the early centuries. Humanities is still an ongoing study of today and the future.

Cover Note Essay

â€Å"The Relation of Science and Religion† is a transcript of a talk given by Dr. Feynman at the Caltech YMCA Lunch Forum on May 2, 1956. In this age of specialization men who thoroughly know one field are often incompetent to discuss another. The great problems of the relations between one and another aspect of human activity have for this reason been discussed less and less in public. When we look at the past great debates on these subjects we feel jealous of those times, for we should have liked the excitement of such argument. The old problems, such as the relation of science and religion, are still with us, and I believe present as difficult dilemmas as ever, but they are not often publicly discussed because of the limitations of specialization. But I have been interested in this problem for a long time and would like to discuss it. In view of my very evident lack of knowledge and understanding of religion (a lack which will grow more apparent as we proceed), I will organize the discussion in this way: I will suppose that not one man but a group of men are discussing the problem, that the group consists of specialists in many fields – the various sciences, the various religions and so on – and that we are going to discuss the problem from various sides, like a panel. Each is to give his point of view, which may be molded and modified by the later discussion. Further, I imagine that someone has been chosen by lot to be the first to present his views, and I am he so chosen. I would start by presenting the panel with a problem: A young man, brought up in a religious family, studies a science, and as a result he comes to doubt – and perhaps later to disbelieve in – his father’s God. Now, this is not an isolated example; it happens time and time again. Although I have no statistics on this, I believe that many scientists – in fact, I actually believe that more than half of the scientists – really disbelieve in their father’s God; that is, they don’t believe in a God in a conventional sense. Now, since the belief in a God is a central feature of religion, this problem that I have selected points up most strongly the problem of the relation of science and religion. Why does this young man come to disbelieve? The first answer we might hear is very simple: You see, he is taught by scientists, and (as I have just pointed out) they are all atheists at heart, so the evil is spread from one to another. But if you can entertain this view, I think you know less of science than I know of religion. Another answer may be that a little knowledge is dangerous; this young man has learned a little bit and thinks he knows it all, but soon he will grow out of this sophomoric sophistication and come to realize that the world is more complicated, and he will begin again to understand that there must be a God. I don’t think it is necessary that he come out of it. There are many scientists – men who hope to call themselves mature – who still don’t believe in God. In fact, as I would like to explain later, the answer is not that the young man thinks he knows it all – it is the exact opposite. A third answer you might get is that this young man really doesn’t understand science correctly. I do not believe that science can disprove the existence of God; I think that is impossible. And if it is impossible, is not a belief in science and in a God – an ordinary God of religion — a consistent possibility? Yes, it is consistent. Despite the fact that I said that more than half of the scientists don’t believe in God, many scientists do believe in both science and God, in a perfectly consistent way. But this consistency, although possible, is not easy to attain, and I would like to try to discuss two things: Why it is not easy to attain, and whether it is worth attempting to attain it. When I say â€Å"believe in God,† of course, it is always a puzzle – what is God? What I mean is the kind of personal God, characteristic of the western religions, to whom you pray and who has something to do with creating the universe and guiding you in morals. For the student, when he learns about science, there are two sources of difficulty in trying to weld science and religion together. The first source of difficulty is this – that it is imperative in science to doubt; it is absolutely necessary, for progress in science, to have uncertainty as a fundamental part of your inner nature. To make progress in understanding we must remain modest and allow that we do not know. Nothing is certain or proved beyond all doubt. You investigate for curiosity, because it is unknown, not because you know the answer. And as you develop more information in the sciences, it is not that you are finding out the truth, but that you are finding out that this or that is more or less likely. That is, if we investigate further, we find that the statements of science are not of what is true and what is not true, but statements of what is known to different degrees of certainty: â€Å"It is very much more likely that so and so is true than that it is not true;† or â€Å"such and such is almost certain but there is still a little bit of doubt;† or – at the other extreme – â€Å"well, we really don’t know. † Every one of the concepts of science is on a scale graduated somewhere between, but at neither end of, absolute falsity or absolute truth. It is necessary, I believe, to accept this idea, not only for science, but also for other things; it is of great value to acknowledge ignorance. It is a fact that when we make decisions in our life we don’t necessarily know that we are making them correctly; we only think that we are doing the best we can – and that is what we should do. Attitude of uncertainty I think that when we know that we actually do live in uncertainty, then we ought to admit it; it is of great value to realize that we do not know the answers to different questions. This attitude of mind – this attitude of uncertainty – is vital to the scientist, and it is this attitude of mind which the student must first acquire. It becomes a habit of thought. Once acquired, one cannot retreat from it any more. What happens, then, is that the young man begins to doubt everything because he cannot have it as absolute truth. So the question changes a little bit from â€Å"Is there a God? † to â€Å"How sure is it that there is a God? † This very subtle change is a great stroke and represents a parting of the ways between science and religion. I do not believe a real scientist can ever believe in the same way again. Although there are scientists who believe in God, I do not believe that they think of God in the same way as religious people do. If they are consistent with their science, I think that they say something like this to themselves: â€Å"I am almost certain there is a God. The doubt is very small. † That is quite different from saying, â€Å"I know that there is a God. † I do not believe that a scientist can ever obtain that view – that really religious understanding, that real knowledge that there is a God – that absolute certainty which religious people have. Of course this process of doubt does not always start by attacking the question of the existence of God. Usually special tenets, such as the question of an afterlife, or details of the religious doctrine, such as details of Christ’s life, come under scrutiny first. It is more interesting, however, to go right into the central problem in a frank way, and to discuss the more extreme view which doubts the existence of God. Once the question has been removed from the absolute, and gets to sliding on the scale of uncertainty, it may end up in very different positions. In many cases it comes out very close to being certain. But on the other hand, for some, the net result of close scrutiny of the theory his father held of God may be the claim that it is almost certainly wrong. Belief in God – and the facts of science That brings us to the second difficulty our student has in trying to weld science and religion: Why does it often end up that the belief in God – at least, the God of the religious type – is considered to be very unreasonable, very unlikely? I think that the answer has to do with the scientific things – the facts or partial facts – that the man learns. For instance, the size of the universe is very impressive, with us on a tiny particle whirling around the sun, among a hundred thousand million suns in this galaxy, itself among a billion galaxies. Again, there is the close relation of biological man to the animals, and of one form of life to another. Man is a latecomer in a vast evolving drama; can the rest be but a scaffolding for his creation? Yet again, there are the atoms of which all appears to be constructed, following immutable laws. Nothing can escape it; the stars are made of the same stuff, and the animals are made of the same stuff, but in such complexity as to mysteriously appear alive – like man himself. It is a great adventure to contemplate the universe beyond man, to think of what it means without man – as it was for the great part of its long history, and as it is in the great majority of places. When this objective view is finally attained, and the mystery and majesty of matter are appreciated, to then turn the objective eye back on man viewed as matter, to see life as part of the universal mystery of greatest depth, is to sense an experience which is rarely described. It usually ends in laughter, delight in the futility of trying to understand. These scientific views end in awe and mystery, lost at the edge in uncertainty, but they appear to be so deep and so impressive that the theory that it is all arranged simply as a stage for God to watch man’s struggle for good and evil seems to be inadequate. So let us suppose that this is the case of our particular student, and the conviction grows so that he believes that individual prayer, for example, is not heard. (I am not trying to disprove the reality of God; I am trying to give you some idea of – some sympathy for – the reasons why many come to think that prayer is meaningless. ) Of course, as a result of this doubt, the pattern of doubting is turned next to ethical problems, because, in the religion which he learned, moral problems were connected with the word of God, and if the God doesn’t exist, what is his word? But rather surprisingly, I think, the moral problems ultimately come out relatively unscathed; at first perhaps the student may decide that a few little things were wrong, but he often reverses his opinion later, and ends with no fundamentally different moral view. There seems to be a kind of independence in these ideas. In the end, it is possible to doubt the divinity of Christ, and yet to believe firmly that it is a good thing to do unto your neighbor as you would have him do unto you. It is possible to have both these views at the same time; and I would say that I hope you will find that my atheistic scientific colleagues often carry themselves well in society. Communism and the scientific viewpoint I would like to remark, in passing, since the word â€Å"atheism† is so closely connected with â€Å"communism,† that the communist views are the antithesis of the scientific, in the sense that in communism the answers are given to all the questions – political questions as well as moral ones – without discussion and without doubt. The scientific viewpoint is the exact opposite of this; that is, all questions must be doubted and discussed; we must argue everything out – observe things, check them, and so change them. The democratic government is much closer to this idea, because there is discussion and a chance of modification. One doesn’t launch the ship in a definite direction. It is true that if you have a tyranny of ideas, so that you know exactly what has to be true, you act very decisively, and it looks good – for a while. But soon the ship is heading in the wrong direction, and no one can modify the direction any more. So the uncertainties of life in a democracy are, I think, much more consistent with science. Although science makes some impact on many religious ideas, it does not affect the moral content. Religion has many aspects; it answers all kinds of questions. First, for example, it answers questions about what things are, where they come from, what man is, what God is – the properties of God, and so on. Let me call this the metaphysical aspect of religion. It also tells us another thing – how to behave. Leave out of this the idea of how to behave in certain ceremonies, and what rites to perform; I mean it tells us how to behave in life in general, in a moral way. It gives answers to moral questions; it gives a moral and ethical code. Let me call this the ethical aspect of religion. Now, we know that, even with moral values granted, human beings are very weak; they must be reminded of the moral values in order that they may be able to follow their consciences. It is not simply a matter of having a right conscience; it is also a question of maintaining strength to do what you know is right. And it is necessary that religion give strength and comfort and the inspiration to follow these moral views. This is the inspirational aspect of religion. It gives inspiration not only for moral conduct – it gives inspiration for the arts and for all kinds of great thoughts and actions as well. Interconnections These three aspects of religion are interconnected, and it is generally felt, in view of this close integration of ideas, that to attack one feature of the system is to attack the whole structure. The three aspects are connected more or less as follows: The moral aspect, the moral code, is the word of God – which involves us in a metaphysical question. Then the inspiration comes because one is working the will of God; one is for God; partly one feels that one is with God. And this is a great inspiration because it brings one’s actions in contact with the universe at large. So these three things are very well interconnected. The difficulty is this: that science occasionally conflicts with the first of the three categories – the metaphysical aspect of religion. For instance, in the past there was an argument about whether the earth was the center of the universe – whether the earth moved around the sun or stayed still. The result of all this was a terrible strife and difficulty, but it was finally resolved – with religion retreating in this particular case. More recently there was a conflict over the question of whether man has animal ancestry. The result in many of these situations is a retreat of the religious metaphysical view, but nevertheless, there is no collapse of the religion. And further, there seems to be no appreciable or fundamental change in the moral view. After all, the earth moves around the sun – isn’t it best to torn the other cheek? Does it make any difference whether the earth is standing still or moving around the son? We can expect conflict again. Science is developing and new things will be found out which will he in disagreement with the presentday metaphysical theory of certain religions. In fact, even with all the past retreats of religion, there is still real conflict for particular individuals when they learn about the science and they have heard about the religion. The thing has not been integrated very well; there are real conflicts here – and yet morals are not affected. As a matter of fact, the conflict is doubly difficult in this metaphysical region. Firstly, the facts may be in conflict, but even if the facts were not in conflict, the attitude is different. The spirit of uncertainty in science is an attitude toward the metaphysical questions that is quite different from the certainty and faith that is demanded in religion. There is definitely a conflict, I believe – both in fact and in spirit – over the metaphysical aspects of religion. In my opinion, it is not possible for religion to find a set of metaphysical ideas which will be guaranteed not to get into conflicts with an everadvancing and alwayschanging science which is going into an unknown. We don’t know how to answer the questions; it is impossible to find an answer which someday will not be found to be wrong. The difficulty arises because science and religion are both trying to answer questions in the same realm here. Science and moral questions On the other hand, I don’t believe that a real conflict with science will arise in the ethical aspect, because I believe that moral questions are outside of the scientific realm. Let me give three or four arguments to show why I believe this. In the first place, there have been conflicts in the past between the scientific and the religious view about the metaphysical aspect and, nevertheless, the older moral views did not collapse, did not change. Second, there are good men who practice Christian ethics and who do not believe in the divinity of Christ. They find themselves in no inconsistency here. Thirdly, although I believe that from time to time scientific evidence is found which may be partially interpreted as giving some evidence of some particular aspect of the life of Christ, for example, or of other religious metaphysical ideas, it seems to me that there is no scientific evidence bearing on the golden rule. It seems to me that that is somehow different. Now, let’s see if I can make a little philosophical explanation as to why it is different – how science cannot affect the fundamental basis of morals. The typical human problem, and one whose answer religion aims to supply, is always of the following form: Should I do this? Should we do this? Should the government do this? To answer this question we can resolve it into two parts: First — If I do this, what will happen? – and second – Do I want that to happen? What would come of it of value – of good? Now a question of the form: If I do this, what will happen?is strictly scientific. As a matter of fact, science can be defined as a method for, and a body of information obtained by, trying to answer only questions which can be put into the form: If I do this, what will happen? The technique of it, fundamentally, is: Try it and see. Then you put together a large amount of information from such experiences. All scientists will agree that a question – any question, philosophical or other – which cannot be put into the form that can be tested by experiment (or, in simple terms, that cannot be put into the form: If I do this, what will happen?) is not a scientific question; it is outside the realm of science. I claim that whether you want something to happen or not – what value there is in the result, and how you judge the value of the result (which is the other end of the question: Should I do this? ) – must lie outside of science because it is not a question that you can answer only by knowing what happens; you still have to judge what happens – in a moral way. So, for this theoretical reason I think that there is a complete consistency between the moral view – or the ethical aspect of religion – and scientific information. Turning to the third aspect of religion – the inspirational aspect – brings me to the central question that I would like to present to this imaginary panel. The source of inspiration today – for strength and for comfort – in any religion is very closely knit with the metaphysical aspect; that is, the inspiration comes from working for God, for obeying his will, feeling one with God. Emotional ties to the moral code – based in this manner – begin to be severely weakened when doubt, even a small amount of doubt, is expressed as to the existence of God; so when the belief in God becomes uncertain, this particular method of obtaining inspiration fails. I don’t know the answer to this central problem – the problem of maintaining the real value of religion, as a source of strength and of courage to most men, while, at the same time, not requiring an absolute faith in the metaphysical aspects. The heritages of Western civilization Western civilization, it seems to me, stands by two great heritages. One is the scientific spirit of adventure – the adventure into the unknown, an unknown which must be recognized as being unknown in order to be explored; the demand that the unanswerable mysteries of the universe remain unanswered; the attitude that all is uncertain; to summarize it – the humility of the intellect. The other great heritage is Christian ethics – the basis of action on love, the brotherhood of all men, the value of the individual – the humility of the spirit. These two heritages are logically, thoroughly consistent. But logic is not all; one needs one’s heart to follow an idea. If people are going back to religion, what are they going back to? Is the modern church a place to give comfort to a man who doubts Godmore, one who disbelieves in God? Is the modern church a place to give comfort and encouragement to the value of such doubts? So far, have we not drawn strength and comfort to maintain the one or the other of these consistent heritages in a way which attacks the values of the other? Is this unavoidable? How can we draw inspiration to support these two pillars of western civilization so that they may stand together in full vigor, mutually unafraid? Is this not the central problem of our time? I put it up to the panel for discussion.

Phoneme Definition and Examples in English

Phoneme Definition and Examples in English In linguistics, a phoneme is the smallest sound unit in a language that is capable of conveying a distinct meaning, such as the s of sing and the r of ring. Adjective: phonemic. Phonemes are language-specific. In other words, phonemes that are functionally distinct in English (for example, /b/ and /p/) may not be so in another language.  (Phonemes are customarily written between slashes, thus /b/ and /p/.) Different languages have different phonemes. Etymology: From the Greek, sound Pronunciation: FO-neem Examples and Observations The central concept in phonology is the phoneme, which is a distinctive category of sounds that all the native speakers of a language or dialect perceive as more or less the same...[A]lthough the two [k] sounds in kicked are not identical- the first one is pronounced with more aspiration than the second- they are heard as two instances of [k] nonetheless...Since phonemes are categories rather than actual sounds, they are not tangible things; instead, they are abstract, theoretical types or groups that are only psychologically real. (In other words, we cannot hear phonemes, but we assume they exist because of how the sounds in languages pattern as they are used by speakers.) (Thomas E. Murray, The Structure of English:  Phonetics, Phonology, Morphology. Allyn and Bacon,  1995)Two points need to be stressed: (1) the most important property of a phoneme is that it contrasts with the other phonemes in the system, and hence (2) we can only speak of the phoneme of some particular speec h variety (a particular accent of a particular language). Languages differ in the number of phonemes they distinguish...but every valid word in every language necessarily consists of some permissible sequence of that languages phonemes. (R.L. Trask,  A Dictionary of Phonetics and Phonology. Routledge, 2004) An Alphabetical Analogy: Phonemes and Allophones The concepts of phoneme and allophone become clearer by analogy with the letters of the alphabet. We recognize that a symbol is a despite considerable variations in size, colour, and (to a certain extent) shape. The representation of the letter a is affected in handwriting by the preceding or following letters to which it is joined. Writers may form the letter idiosyncratically and may vary their writing according to whether they are tired or in a hurry or nervous. The variants in the visual representations are analogous to the allophones of a phoneme, and what is distinctive in contrast to other alphabetic letters is analogous to the phoneme. (Sidney Greenbaum, The Oxford English Grammar. Oxford University Press, 1996) Differences Between Members of a Phoneme We cannot rely on the spelling to tell us whether two sounds are members of different phonemes. For example...the words key and car begin with what we can regard as the same sound, despite the fact that one is spelled with the letter k and the other with c. But in this case, the two sounds are not exactly the same...If you whisper just the first consonants in these two words, you can probably hear the difference, and you may be able to feel that your tongue touches the roof of the mouth in a different place for each word. This example shows that there may be very subtle differences between members of a phoneme. The sounds at the beginning of key and car are slightly different, but it is not a difference that changes the meaning of a word in English. They are both members of the same phoneme. (Peter Ladefoged and Keith Johnson, A Course in Phonetics, 6th ed. Wadsworth, 2011)

Examples of Chemical Suspensions

Examples of Chemical Suspensions In chemistry, a suspension is a mixture in which the solute particles- whether liquid or solid- do not dissolve. Most of the suspensions you encounter in everyday life consist of solid particles in liquids, but suspensions can also form from two liquids or even from a solid or liquid in a gas. One key way to identify a suspension is that the components typically separate over time. Mixing or shaking needs to occur to form a suspension. Given time, suspensions usually separate on their own. Mercury Shaken in Oil Mercury is a metallic element that is liquid at standard temperature and pressure. Because of its liquid properties, the element can be mixed with oil to produce a suspension. The mercury particles will disperse throughout the oil when the solution is shaken, but the particles will never dissolve. If left to sit, the two liquids will eventually separate. Oil Shaken in Water Water molecules, because of their polarity, are highly attracted to each other. They exhibit a stickiness that can be seen by slowly moving two water droplets toward each other. Oil molecules, on the other hand, are non-polar, or hydrophobic, which prevents them from joining together with water molecules. Oil shaken in water will produce a suspension as the oil particles are momentarily scattered. Left undisturbed, however, the two elements will separate from each other. Dust in Air Dust in the air is an example of a solid-gas suspension. Dust- tiny particles that include pollen, hair, dead skin cells, and other materials- is lifted by wind and ventilation systems and scattered throughout the air, producing a suspension. Because the particles of dust are solid, however, they will eventually return to earth and form a fine layer of sediment on the solid surfaces below. Soot in Air Soot- which takes the form of black smoke- is made up of carbon particles released through the combustion of coal and other carbon-rich energy sources. When it is first released, soot forms a solid-gas suspension in the air. This can be seen in fireplaces, power plants, and vehicles. Like dust in the air, soot eventually settles, blackening chimneys and other surfaces.

Business Plane Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3500 words

Business Plane - Term Paper Example Consumers will be attracted through internet marketing because this medium is extremely popular among younger population. The overall business and general environment of the country is also very good. The country is hosting the FIFA world cup of 2022 and therefore government is expected to invest in infrastructure of the country. All this is going to help the business in future. The organizational plan of the company will be flat because of the nature of the business. Only a handful of people will be required to run the business because all the major operations like manufacturing and marketing will be outsourced. The business will aim to achieve $60,000 of monthly sales after six months of start of business. This business plan is about a clothing retail outlet in Qatar which will sell trendy garments and merchandise for the younger population of the country. The name of the clothing retail store will be ‘Y’. The name is chosen because it sounds stylish and is perfect for the younger generation. The store will mainly target young customers because they are usually interested in fashionable garments and merchandise. The store will be located in the central shopping mall of Doha which is also the capital of the country. The clothing retail industry is chosen because of its great potential for growth. The fashion industry of Qatar is growing rapidly and this offers a lot of opportunity for clothing retailers (Qatar Tribune, 2012). The living standard of the country is high and therefore people tend to spend on fashionable garments and merchandise. This is the main reason of choosing Qatar for the clothing retail business. The nature of the proposed business will be very similar to conventional clothing retailers. Manufacturing of all the inventory will be outsourced so that the focus of the business remains on its core activity that is selling of the clothing. The profit of the business will come from the price difference between the selling price and