Thursday, July 9, 2020

Monsieur Meursault In Camuss book The Stranger - Free Essay Example

  Albert Camuss book The Stranger contains a very complex character, Monsieur Meursault. Meursault has complete indifference to the world around him. His attitude towards the lack of meaning in everything is easily relatable for many, until the effects of his indifference catches up to him and manifests itself. The common philosophy that many place Meursault in is nihilism. Meursaults distinct philosophical characteristics provide a view of nihilism and his inevitable acceptance of death gave him meaning to life, which is the fact that he lived. Meursaults complete indifference to his surroundings and his prioritization of his needs before emotion, places him closer to nihilism. In the beginning of The Stranger he shows absolutely no emotion towards the death of his mother as he doesnt display any emotion during the funeral except for annoyance towards [t]he glare on the white walls was making me drowsy(9) and the constant mentions of the women who was crying softly, steadily, in little sobs(10). His display of indifference follows him throughout the novel. After he comes back from the funeral, he begins people watching from his window, and comes to the realization that one more Sunday was over, that Maman was buried now, that I was going back to work, and that, really, nothing had changed(14). Although he experienced the death of his mother everything else is as if nothing happened and therefore Meursault conclude that the death of his mother does not matter. His physical needs are placed in priority compared to anything. Some would say that his relationship with Marie would be completely physical and non-emotional for him. The evidence for this is quite clear after he says to Marie that marriage to her didnt make any difference to [him] and that we could if she wanted to(41). She then asks him if he loves her in which answered the same way [he] had the last time(41). His complete indifference is very similar to those that follow the existential nihilist ways. Friederich Nietzsche is the philosopher that created nihilism in western cul ture. He believed that one should act as if they would if they had to reenact that day for eternity. So in laymans terms you should live your life they way you want to, and not allow for self-denial to overcome your freedom. Since Meursault completely allows his needs to overtake him some would say that he isnt a nihilist, but he does as he wants to and recognizes the choice that he has in his actions. He also completely reject morals, as does Nietzsche, as he finds nothing wrong with the murder of the Arab, or the letter that Raymond asked him to write to his girlfriend. In this way he is even more distant from society. My philosophy is a slight variation of existential nihilism, but I find that such things that have logical purpose, and that purpose is not found by the individual but by the collective whole. Meursault finds meaning when he begins to recognize the past. The analysis of Meursaults psyche forces him to confront his past actions. The main action that they focussed on was his lack of emotion during his mothers funeral. Meursault believes that the mention of this was co mpletely irrelevant to the case, but it does affect what he thinks about while imprisoned throughout the trial. He begins to remember physical things and the emotions that he is given with those things, such as the ice cream bells. These memories inevitably lead him to the epiphany that the meaning to his life is that he lived. When the trial is over and he is put on death row, Meursault recognizes that he will inevitably die, but he also recognizes that he should come to his own moral conclusion as it is apart of the process. He concludes that he doesnt have morals and that his life hadnt any meaning, but his death is meaningful due to the amount of people who had come to watch him die. He then embraces the hatred of the people, because it gives his death meaning. This is very similar to Nietzsches belief in which meaning can only be decided by the person, and any other meaning to life is considered meaningless to tat person. Meursault displays this when he attacks the chaplain. The chaplain attempts to push his religious beliefs on Meursault which is also an attempt to have Meursault find meaning. Although the chaplain is unsuccessful in helping Meursault find meaning and closure to his life, he is at the same time successful as well. The chaplains ignorance to Meursaults philosophy angers Meursault, but it forces him to come to the conclusion that although his life was meaningless, his death has meaning. My philosophy is somewhat different. I believe that there isnt any meaning to life or death of one person. In order to make ones life meaningful they must find a way to impact the society and not themselves. This can be achieved through creation, whether it be physical or not. In the end the morals of a person do not matter, but the ideas that the person had on life, and problems within society, are the things that matter in ones life. Although I do believe that the purpose of The Stranger from Albert Camuss view is not to define Meursault to a specific philosophy, society has made it its purpose. Therefore this is a book that not only forces its audience to confront a diffic ult and complex philosophy, and can even impact their own philosophy. For myself, this book did indeed modify my philosophy, but it wasnt any significant change. The reason for this books literary significance then becomes clear when one recognizes the impact it plays on a society. This complex character demonstrates the literary skill that Camus has, but it shows the world that you can have a character so complex that the world will focus on that character and compare it to themselves. In that way it has purpose but, like Meursault, that purpose is found towards the end of its journey.

Wednesday, May 6, 2020

Pocahontas - Cultural Anthropology Essay - 1009 Words

Writing Assignment #1: The Cultural Construction of the Idea of Progress Film chosen: Pocahontas One of Walt Disney’s most famous films, Pocahontas, takes place in the 1600s, as the British discover parts of the â€Å"New World† that are inhabited by native Americans. In this film, we are able to contrast the primitive lifestyle and culture of the Native Americans to that of the British, and are able to see how the ideas of â€Å"progress† or social evolution play a role in the ethnocentric bias held by the Westerners during this time, causing the primitive stereotypes to be built. Disney uses the structure of the characters themselves- what they wear, how they speak, what they eat, what they believe in, etc.; and the plot line of the film, to†¦show more content†¦The initial reaction to seeing the culture and way of life amongst the Indians is to see them as â€Å"uncivilized† and â€Å"savage†, just as John Smith was saying on the boat. However throughout the film Disney begins to challenge this belief and sh ows us that the westerner’s way of life may not be the best way of life for everyone. Up until this point, John Smith and the rest of the English men had been discovering new places and finding Native American’s that had been living for many years on these foreign lands. The Europeans always saw these natives as uncivilized, barbaric savages, who needed to be taken over and â€Å"westernized†. John Smith makes a comment to Pocahontas about how they could make the Indians life better, and build them roads and tall buildings, and teach them how to â€Å"make the most of their land†. This is a perfect example of the ethnocentric bias mentality of the Europeans. They never once considered that someone else’s way of living and culture could actually be a successful. They thought that their way was the best way, and anything else was just an underdeveloped, barbaric lifestyle that needed to progress into the westernized lifestyle. After John Smith makes this comment about â€Å"bettering the Indian’s life styles† Pocahontas is deeply offended and proceeds to sing the popular song, The Colors of the Wind. In this song Pocahontas calls John Smith out on his ethnocentric stance and showsShow MoreRelatedEssay on Racism in Disney Films2220 Words   |  9 Pagesthe process; have perpetuated an institutionally racist society based on harsh stereotypes. Minorities are often underrepresented, and even completely left out, of many Disney films such as Dumbo (1941), The Lion King (1994), Aladdin (1992), and Pocahontas (1995). As students enter the doors of schools, they bring with them the notion that white characters and people are superior to blacks or other minorities because that is how they are depicted in Disney films. However, is the â€Å"magical world of

Analysis of Four Seasons Business Culture

Question: Discuss about the Analysis of Four Seasons Business Culture. Answer: Introduction: The European culture differs from the culture in North America and France. The ability to consistently offer exceptional services by Four Seasons increased the hotels revenues at an average of 22.6 percent annually since 1996 through 2000(Roger, David, Carin-Isabel, 2003). Exceptional services meant offering personalized, high-quality services that maximized Four Seasons Hotels and Resorts value over the time. Four Seasons had a unique management and team structure whereby compensation was based on service quality, employees attitudes, and property profit. The management of Four Seasons-operated with the principle that, " they should deliver high-quality services with most valuable standards to the customers and at a minimal cost to the Hotel itself. However, the firm felt comfortable of going global to international markets where different business cultures created a new experience. For one to become a manager in the global setting, world citizenship was essential (Moran, Abramson, Moran, 2014). The management required that discipline, compassion, and modesty was significant in knowing customers interest and maintaining professionalism in the international market. High prevailing firm sentiment established a strong association to the business. The success of Four Seasons resulted from longevity employee retention who had a strong allegiance to the Hotel(Roger, David, Carin-Isabel, 2003). The field and corporate staff valued the firm as they did to their families with strict obedience to rules, procedures, traditions, and work ethics. Four seasons approach to global growth committed more efforts to creating diversity and enhancing singularity. The processes needed to launch and open hotel was the same to the local procedures(Roger, David, Carin-Isabel, 2003). The operating standards of Four Seasons have been universal in that the management advocates for providing delicious meals, comfortable rooms, and providing a timely message to the clients. The key value of Four Seasons services is the choice to offer exceptional, personal services that distinguish the Hotel from other Restaurants. Customized services are just an element of success, but not the primary determinant. Hiring employees who are unique in character and skills just like the guests, this resulted to delivering anticipatory, enthusiastic, and intelligent services. Service culture was core as the firm put all beliefs into practice. Intellectual empathy while treating guests was highly emphasized, famously termed "The Golden Rule." This rule was highly acknowledged in all cities, towns, and villages all over the globe. The human resources of Four Seasons treated guests with close attention just the same way they would have wished to get dealt with by others. However, working in the international arena needed cultural adjustment by a manager to cope with that nation's business culture. This is because management of different cultural perceptions could be problematic for Four Seasons (Gunlu, Aksarayli, ?ahin Perin, 2010). For instance, North Americans operating in France. Valuing human relationships and interrelationships were key. Communication and conflict resolution was promoted in the hotel through horizontal communication approach. Employees, managers, and supervisors respected superiors and this cultivated sensitivity and success. Four Seasons aimed at providing friendly customer services with sensitivity and dedication to enhancing quality guests services. Understanding different country cultures on business especially in France made the firm excel and sustained competitiveness in the industry (Clerides, Nearchou, Pashardes, 2008). The Seven Four Season's customers service cultures comprised of a smile, eye contact, recognition, voice, informed, cleanliness, and caring for every guest. References Clerides, S., Nearchou, P., Pashardes, P. (2008). Intermediaries as quality assessors: Tour operators in the travel industry.International Journal of Industrial Organization,26(1), 372-392. Moran, R. T., Abramson, N. R., Moran, S. V. (2014).Managing cultural differences. Routledge. Gunlu, E., Aksarayli, M., ?ahin Perin, N. (2010). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment of hotel managers in Turkey.International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,22(5), 693-717. Roger, H., David, B., Carin-Isabel, K. (2003). Four Seasons Goes to Paris: 53 Properties, 24 Countries, I Philosophy". Paris: Harvard Business School.

Wednesday, April 22, 2020

The Republic Book I Essay Example For Students

The Republic Book I Essay Most normal individuals in the modern world would assume that all books written, not published, by man are based on either a portion of the authors imagination, an event (biased or non-biased) in either history or during the life of the author, a straight-out autobiography, or a generalized biography of another person they once knew. However, this philosophical novel fits none of the descriptions above. The book is actually an in-depth recording of a philosophy contest between Platos teacher Socrates and several other great philosophers. What is significant about this contest is that, in it, Socrates describes his personal view of a perfect world, and why justice is so important in the process of creating a civilized world. We will write a custom essay on The Republic Book I specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now The novel was completed in 370 B.C., and it describes a strong debate between Socrates and five other speakers. The two main arguments that he illustrates in this novel are that a ruler cannot obtain more power than the state, and that a philosopher is best suited to rule a nation since he has the ability to maintain this balance. Also, Socrates claims that only the philosopher has traveled beyond the cave of worldly desires and temptations to discover what justice really is. Socrates first major argument is with Thrasymachus in Book I. The current debate lies on the pure definition of justice. Thrasymachus claims that there is only one principle of justice: the interest of the more dominant force. Socrates counters this argument by using the phrase the stronger. He claims that the ruler of a nation will not be aided, but harmed, by an unintentional command, in the long run. Socrates then builds his argument gradually by stating that the good and just man looks out for the interest o f the weaker, and not for himself. Thrasymachus tries to counter Socratess argument by vaguely proclaiming that injustice is more gainful than justice. However, Socrates bravely explains that the just man will live happily because he has a just soul, and the man with the unjust soul lives in poverty; therefore, injustice can never be greater than justice. At this point in the novel I saw Thrasymachuss flaw and also the reason why Socrates has silenced Thrasymachus. Injustice, in my opinion, may be better as a short-term plan for pleasure, but in the long run the unjust man will be condemned by just men of his evil deeds, thus leading to his downfall. This is a point Thrasymachus failed to see, and thus his argument was too unilateral. This is the reason I believe he lost, and his failure led me to believe that Thrasymachus is a knowledgeable man without wisdom(whereas Socrates had both). After Thrasymachuss defeat, Glaucon steps up to challenge Socrates. Glaucons first argument is that doing injustice and not being punished for it is much more pleasurable than suffering injustice at the hands of unjust rulers and practicing justice. Glaucons brother, Adeimantus, backs up his brothers speech by stating that an unjust man with a deceivably just reputation(which is almost always the trait of the perfectly unjust man) is also better than the just man. But Socrates counters these two strong speeches by proclaiming that, in an average city, justice is needed for the Senate to build the city, for citizens to trade and barter with foreigners, and for training and educating soldiers for battle. Socrates also states that justice comes from God and those who follow his example become just. Although these two arguments are striking contrasted content-wise, there is a connection between them. If a man is unjust, he will not only be condemned by men, but by God as well. And even t hough there may be no Supreme Being that controls the Earth and its neighboring planets, injustice will still cause harm, leading to more injustice and finally the destruction of the world. I am quite positive that Glaucon and Adeimantus are thinking in the same manner as Thrasymachus; they are thinking short-termed and are explaining their arguments in terms of the present. Of course, three unjust men in a world where just people rule could get away with almost any unjust act. But injustice leads to more injustice, as well as justice leads to more justice. Therefore, if the following is considered true, then unjust men leads to more unjust men, and then what would happen if unjust men ruled the world. There would be many intense conflicts, which would lead to violence and hatred, and finally, the destruction of mankind. So therefore in the end, unjust men would lose. .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b , .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b .postImageUrl , .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b , .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b:hover , .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b:visited , .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b:active { border:0!important; } .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b { display: block; transition: background-color 250ms; webkit-transition: background-color 250ms; width: 100%; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #95A5A6; } .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b:active , .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b .ctaButton { background-color: #7F8C8D!important; color: #2980B9; border: none; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: none; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 26px; moz-border-radius: 3px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: none; width: 80px; min-height: 80px; background: url(https://artscolumbia.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts/assets/images/simple-arrow.png)no-repeat; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; } .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u2a5eb72d6d90b9dec85be83c86c9288b:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: Individual Development Plan EssaySocrates continues with his argument by saying that persons of worth should be given the greatest respect and authority, which includes the Greek gods as well. Socrates also claims, using the arts of medicine, music, and gymnastics; that one who practices these arts constantly and repeatedly with disregard to his surroundings will soon become one with the art, and forget about what is really important in a mans life. This act will most definitely lead to injustice. Socrates polishes off the remainder of his argument by stating that the way of life of a man should be a guardian of the State; for they have courage and are never too lazy to pr otect the city from an enemy. The men who have plenty of possessions, however, become greedy and turn against their fellow citizens. During Socratess argument, in my opinion, Adeimantus looks to be stupefied by Socratess great wisdom and knowledge, and how Socrates takes simple points and develops them to defend his argument. However, Adeimantus(unlike the cowardly Thrasymachus) continued to participate in the debate, although saying little much than phrases agreeing with Socratess arguments. In Book IV, Adeimantus proposes a question to Socrates, asking what Socrates would do if someone blamed him for the economic condition of the man. Socrates responds, first of all, that if a man lives by education, courage, and self-mastery, he should have no trouble making a decent living in the modern world. Justice finds its place in these three principles because they are the common traits of the State, which all mankinds should respect and follow. Socrates continues his argument by generally stating throughout a long river of metaphors, symbols, and great understanding, that just men appreciate other just men, but not men opposite of what he is. Unjust men, on the other hand, appreciate neither just men nor other unjust men. The only interest they care about is that of himself. At this point Thrasymachus, Adeimantus, and Glaucon believe that Socrates has gone overboard with his arguments. Socrates replies by saying that it takes great depth inside wisdom and understanding and man y comparisons relating to everyday life to understand what truth really is; the three speakers then resume their positions. Socrates goes on by saying that men who make the best rulers possess not only political understanding and military leadership, but also great wisdom and understanding; therefore these people are the ones who have a complete understanding of what justice is. These rulers could also be philosophers with military experience, or military leaders with a great sense of philosophy. It seemed to me in this point in the novel that Glaucon and the other two were tired of Socratess arguments because they were too long and besides the point. However, as Socrates had said earlier, justice is not merely explained in minutes. It is a subject that must be looked into very closely and with the greatest respect and gravity. Socrates then explains that not all who claim to be philosophers are actually philosophers. At this point in the novel, Socrates explains the difference between those that claim to be philosophers, and those that actually are philosophers. Men who only claim to be philosophers are only thinking of building a reputation. At first they seem to be wiser and more knowledgeable than others, but after they have gained the respect of the citizens, they become corrupt and rule the city unjustly. Real philosophers, however, find that it is in their best interest to govern wisely and make laws fair enough for the good of the people, not for the benefit of the ruler. Real philosophers also have wisdom and understanding, which gives them a better understanding of justice than corrupted rulers. In any case, I am beginning to agree with Glaucon and the others about how Socrates builds his arguments; now its a good thing for a philosopher to start with a simple idea, and then use it to form the bas is of the philosophers opinion. However, in my opinion, Socrates is overdoing the formations of his opinions. For example, in Book VI, Socrates goes on and on about good and evil philosophers; much of what he says is pretty much beside the point, in my opinion. .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc , .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc .postImageUrl , .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc , .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc:hover , .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc:visited , .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc:active { border:0!important; } .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc { display: block; transition: background-color 250ms; webkit-transition: background-color 250ms; width: 100%; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #95A5A6; } .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc:active , .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc .ctaButton { background-color: #7F8C8D!important; color: #2980B9; border: none; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: none; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 26px; moz-border-radius: 3px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: none; width: 80px; min-height: 80px; background: url(https://artscolumbia.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts/assets/images/simple-arrow.png)no-repeat; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; } .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u27fb9d7cb786518e491b0029bfaf19bc:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: Effects Of Media Essay ThesisSocrates, after the previous argument, goes on to say that there is a difference between what the eyes see and what the mind sees. According to Socrates, the eyes see both small and great, but in a confused manner.(Book VII, section 524) What this means is that the eyes alone cannot distinguish what is right from what is wrong since they contribute to many sins, such as lust, coveting, and several others. After this statement, Socrates claims that the mind was compelled to reverse the process, and look at small and great as separate and not confused. (Book VII, section 524). What this means is that the mind, with the aid of wisdom and knowledge , can sense right from wrong easily. After all of Socratess arguments about justice, Socrates concludes his entire debate by describing what he calls a perfect State. This perfect land was The type of government in this State is democracy(where people rule the land) because then the people can obtain plenty of freedom to achieve their own pleasures without being pushed around by a superior force. In democracy also is equality, since people rule the government, and there is no reason for a man to be treated as an inferior by a fellow citizen. What the State does not have is a tyrant, which Socrates goes into great detail about in Book IX. The tyrant, as Socrates describes, is unable to satisfy anyone but himself. Therefore he has few, if any, friends. The tyrant is also a ruthless ruler; he is hard-hearted and will not forgive anyone of doing wrong to him. Finally, Socrates points out that, in his perfect State, philosophers will always have the advantage over other types of rulers b ecause they have wisdom and knowledge, which gives them the ability to govern justly and wisely. In my opinion, Socratess perfect State sounded plenty like the scenario progressing in the debate. Socrates, since he is a great philosopher, had the advantage over everyone because he was wise and intelligent in his arguments; therefore he obviously knew more about justice than anyone else. So, in conclusion, Socrates won the debate on the definition of justice. The reason for this is because Socrates, as stated before, had the wisdom and knowledge to analyze, in the most descriptive way, what justice really is. Glaucon and the others lacked what Socrates had, and so they could not support their arguments as well as Socrates could. I really liked this novel a lot because I am a lover of philosophy and understanding. However, I must admit that some of Socratess arguments were redundant and besides the point. But other than this crucial flaw, the book showed great insight, and Socrates cr eated a vivid description about what justice means to the modern world. Bibliography:

Monday, March 16, 2020

Essay about AP English

Essay about AP English Essay about AP English In society there are choices that determine whether you fit in or stand out. Challenging the status quo is both morally or appropritely right. We are slaves to society. We follow the rules, and god forbid we ask the question why? What is the problem with challenging the staus quo? The problem is the judgement and shame we get for doing so. People act so shocked if you do something that is different. Standing up for your beliefs and what’s right. "We know through painful experience that we are not free." Even when society and the government tell us we are free we know the truth. Reality sinks in and slaps us in the face telling us its a lie. â€Å"Everyday they tell us we are a free people, fighting to defend freedom... It is not true that we are free. We are prisioners...† When we speak of freedom we come to the conclusion that it comes with a price. Challenging the status quo is not simple. If you want change or to do the right thing you have to stop following the rule s and be the change you seek. The problem with doing that is you are damned if you do damned if you don’t. You can go against society, yet deal with the judgement of others or You could do what society would want you to do, but always regret it. â€Å"I was a coward. I went to war.† It was morally and acceptably right to everyone that O’Brien go to a war he didn’t understand or agree with . The regret sinks in when he realizes that it wasnt worth the praise. He should’ve done what he knew was right and go to Canada. â€Å"Women have not a word to say in politics† The women who stated that was wrong what Woolf did was morally and acceptably right. She challenged all women telling them to speak up even when it was at a time where women had no rights â€Å"Rationality will not save us.† Only we can save ourselves. â€Å"You can’t

Saturday, February 29, 2020

Argumentive Essays - Trojans, Mythological Kings, Epic Cycle

The Trojan War I am almost sure that we all know the stories of Greek Mythology. Now for Troy and its war, we may only know the stories implied by novels and movies. Some tails and myths have only part of the story which might seem more exciting then what actually started the fight, and how it really ended. Achilles didn?t really die at the end of the war. He was said to conquer Troy after the war had ended. This war is very popular because it lasted a decade. Achilles was the son of Thetis and Peleus. His mother tried to protect him from a prophecy of early death by dipping him into the River Styx, which would make him invulnerable? However, she held him by the heel so his heel was unprotected. She sent him to hide in the court of the king of Scyros, where he was disguised as a girl and married the princess Deidamia. Odysseus disguised himself as a traveling merchant, and tempted Achilles into revealing himself using a beautiful sword. The Iliad is a story that deals with a small part of the Trojan War. The cause of this war is when Paris, the prince of Troy, sailed to Sparta, seduced and abducted Helen and returned to Troy. When Menelaos discovered that his wife was gone, he gathered a number of Greek generals together to go with him, conquer Troy, and retrieve his wife. However, the Iliad only covers a few months during the tenth year of the war. In this time, many important events took place that could have possibly altered the outcome of this historic event? Two beautiful women whom were enemies of the Achaeans are captured during one of the many raids the army had on Troy. One of the women, named Chrysies is the prize for Ahomemnon (the king and commander-in ?chief of the Achaeans). But Chrysies? father, Chrysies wants his daughter back. Cheresies, whom was the priest God of Apollo, is hoping to go to the Achaean camp and claim his daughter. Unfortunately, this plan did not work out. And because of this, Chrys ies prays to Apollo for help. Apollo did in fact help the old man by spreading a deadly plague through the Achaean army, killing hundreds of them. After days of this, the Achaean?s most honored soldier, Achilles calls a meeting to determine the cause of the plague. A soothsayer of the Achaeans determines that King Agamemnon?s arrogance caused the plague by not returning the woman whom was captured to be his war prize. After finding this out, the woman is returned but Agamemnon takes Briseis whom was the prize captured for Achilles. Achilles is angry and publicly insulted so therefore he refuses to fight for the Achaeans and withdrawals his troops. He then requests to his mother Thetis (a sea nymph) to influence Zeus to help the Trojans defeat the Achaeans. The leader of the Gods promises Thetis that he will help. Zeus sends a dream to Agamemnon that has him convinced he will defeat the Trojans in battle the next day. With the order from Agamemnon, the army prepares itself for attack . The Trojans and Achaeans draw towards each other and Paris challenges one of the Achaeans to a one on one fight. The challenger of this is Menelaos. The winner will win Helen and both sides will agree on a treaty of peace. During the duel, Menelaos wounds Paris and begins dragging him to the Achaean?s territory when suddenly, Aphrodite appears and rescues him. Agamemnon announces to his army that they have won and demands that Helen is given back to them. Goddesses Hera and Athena want a complete destruction of Troy and they ask Zeus if no truce were made. Zeus in turn gives in and grants them their wish. As a result, the fighting soon resumes. As a way to start the war anew, Athena searches for Pandaros, a Trojan leader and tells him to kill Menelaos. Being the type of person Pandaros is he follows through with her advice. But instead of killing Menelaos, he only wounds him. The Achaeans are shocked that the Trojans would do this being that the truce is