Themes in Othello Essay Example for Free

Themes in Othello Essay Themes in Othello is that of deception, developed mostly through Iago, who is an arch-deceiver throughout the play. Because he is angry that Othello has passed over him for a promotion, he vows revenge. Playing upon Othello’s jealousy, he deceives him into believing that Desdemona is having an affair with Cassio. He also deceives Roderigo, making him believe that Desdemona will tire of Othello and eventually be won by Roderigo. It is Iago’s repeated deceptions that move the plot of the play forward to the ultimate climax and tragedy. Another minor theme of Othello is love, and the play can be considered a romantic tragedy. The play is romantic because it celebrates the marriage of two minds as embodied in Othello and Desdemona. They marry in spite of the protests of Desdemona’s father, and she faithfully follows her husband wherever he is sent. Their romantic marriage, however, is ruined by the villainous machinations of Iago. Othello is eventually led to murder his beloved, turning the romantic play into a tragedy. A third minor theme of Othello revolves around appearance vs. reality. Iago has an honest face, which helps hide his deceitful soul. Othello appears to be strong and courageous, a leading general, but he is easily tricked into fearing that his wife is unfaithful. It appears that Desdemona has left her treasured handkerchief with Cassio; in reality, Emilia has taken it and Iago has planted in on Cassio. Because of Iago’s trickery, it appears to Othello that Desdemona is involved with Cassio; in truth, she is innocent, loving her husband dearly. Throughout the play, Iago is instrumental in making sure that reality is disguised by appearances, which he manipulates. MOOD The predominant mood of the whole play is somber and tragic. Iago works his evil almost from the opening scene, and each new deception that he plans brings greater misery. The tragic gloom that he causes is only occasionally relieved by comedy, provided by Roderigo and the Clown.

Human Nature in Shakespears Plays Essay Example for Free

Human Nature in Shakespears Plays Essay Topic- in Shakespeare’s plays how is his unusual detailed knowledge of nature as well as of human beings shown? Shakespeare was a man who deeply loved nature and the beauty of it. He was not just an author who experienced and enjoyed nature but also as someone who studied, understood and knew nature intimately. In this essay there will be discussions about how Shakespeare would often use examples from nature to describe the nature of human beings in his plays and how did he show a deep understanding and knowledge of human nature which he would put that deep knowledge in his plays and poems. Shakespeare’s greatest influences were the works of other great writers as well as from variety of books, and plays which he used as subject materials for his own plays. He got most of his ideas from existing written literature. All of his plays were based on British history, adjusted to suit the occasion. He also drew ideas from many things that he grew up with, like his love for nature gave him several ideas how to write some of his plays and poetry. Besides this, he got many ideas from his childhood as his father is known to have often told him ‘bedtime stories’. Shakespeare may have got inspirations from nature and some ideas of characterizations from real life experiences but his plots where never made from events that happened in his life. Two of his favorite writers were Geoffery Chaucer (1340- 1400) and Plutarch (46-120). Chaucer, who was the first poet ever to be buried at the â€Å"poet’s corner† in Westminster Abby was from a wealthy family where his father was as a deputy to King Edward the third’s butler. Chaucer’s poetry was in Middle English and he was known to be one of the finest poets in England. Shakespeare admired him and many of the sources of his plays came from Chaucer’s poems. Plutarch studied philosophy and he taught it as a teacher in Rome where he earned the admiration of the emperors Trajan and Hadrian. Plutarch’s work was translated by Sir Thomas North which had become very popular in Renaissance England. His translations were then used by Shakespeare himself as sources for many of his plays like Cleopatra, Julius Caesar, Coriolanus, Timon of Athens, etc. The way Shakespeare examined and admired nature was quite different from regular viewers. His way of seeing nature was deep and he would use it in many other forms as well. He would usually find ideas for his poems by what he saw and nature was the biggest part that inspired him how to write his poems and plays. For example in one of his plays named King Lear, the concept of nature is considered to be the groundwork of the whole play. From Kingship through to personal human relations, to the views of the empire, from the representation of human nature to the animal imagery, there was nature filling every line of King Lear. Nature is a socially constructed concept which is made in order to legitimize the existing social order. By drawing a brief sketch of the political and social beliefs of the Elizabethan and Jacobean ages, it will be at the same time outlining the arguments for believing that nature truly is the socially constructed concept. The Elizabethan and Jacobean age was a time of change and disorder. They were not known for their unity. Elizabeth had her subjects worry about who would succeed her as she was not married, therefore there was no heir to carry on with the throne. ‘Kings are justly called Gods for that they exercise a manner or resemblance of divine power on the earth. ’ This quote was taken from the speech of James I where he describes the divine rights of Kings. James I had succeeded Elizabeth I to be the first Stuart King. Although he had the Kingship, he still was not able to overcome the political and financial problems of the state. In order for the continuation of his reign, the unity and harmony of the state and nature was of great importance. He legitimized his power by naturalization. Therefore by ‘nature’ everyone has its place, and knows the duties and obligations to that place, and those who have power cannot be questioned which are the divine rights of Kings. The belief in the social order restricting from the natural order is an important concept to hold when probing the idea of nature being utilized to maintain the status quo. The interdependence of man and nature as a theme is explored in King Lear. Men are always represented in the relation to the divine hierarchy which is the physical world and the world of animals but they are never represented in isolation. It becomes easier to understand the actions of Lear with the almost constant references to nature, once the concept of correspondence between man’s nature and the natural world is understood in terms of legitimizing the social order. In King Lear, the tragedy shown in the play is when Lear tries attempting to overthrow the ‘natural’ social order by handing over his crown to his daughters. Once disorder is initiated by Lear’s revocation of his powers and rights as King, disaster in corresponding hierarchies follow. Lear’s abandonment of his power is in direct opposition to the concept of the Divine Right of Kings. According to the laws of nature, it was impossible for Lear to stop being a king, because that was his rightful position by divine ordination and in fact throughout the play he is still referred to as the King, even though he has divided his crown. Also Lear is unable to stop seeing himself as the King, which can be seen from his banishment of Kent, soon after he has relinquished his powers: Hear me, recreant, on thine allegiance, hear me: That thou hast sought to make us break our vows, Which we durst never yet, and with strained pride To come betwixt our sentence and our power, Which nor our nature, nor our place can bear, Our potency made good take thy reward. King Lear (1. 1. 169-173) In this speech Lear not only uses the power of the King which he no longer holds to banish Kent, but he also, unknown to himself, explains why he cannot or should not divide his kingdom, for it goes against both his ‘nature’ and his ‘place’ to divide his ‘power’ from his ‘sentence,’ which is exactly what he does, thereby attempting to deny his nature and position. Aside from the natural position of Kings the natural social order can also be seen in terms of power relations between characters: King over subjects, fathers over daughters, husbands over wives. This naturalization can be seen as being represented by the character of Lear. He possesses his daughters, because he controls over them, therefore it is only ‘natural’ that they should proclaim their love for him. Cordelia’s refuses this which is therefore shocking to Lear and he calls her ‘a wretch whom nature is ashamed’. (1. 1. 213-214) The animal imagery that is shown in King Lear indicates the unnaturalness of a character‘s behavior in comparison to how they should behave if they observed the natural social order. This contradiction again underlines the distinction between nature and the ‘natural social order’. Shakespeare was good in phycology and describing the human character. He did not state many new ideas of human nature in his place as much as he did on the personalities and behaviors that all human beings have. There still are experts that claim that Shakespeare was the ‘inventor of human nature. However, these were Shakespearean experts and not the experts in psychology or human personality. It was not that Shakespeare new more things around him than other people but it was how he saw and examined things and people around him. In many of his plays and poems he showed deep knowledge of human nature. The way in which we experience fear, love, hatred, jealousy, despair, or anything else one can name. The way he wrote it and staged it would leave many artists in the dust and that the meaning of his work would stay with readers and viewers while everything around them changed. Shakespeare managed to grasp what it took to shape the essence of human nature in many of its aspects and drop it into text and drama in a way that would draw our ears, our eyes and our hearts. Unlike psychology, Shakespeare tries attempting to understand why people do what they do. He simply outshone most others, in many times and many places, at drawing portraits of the mystery of human behavior. Shakespeare used to combine nature and human nature together in many of his plays and poems. He used to describe human behavior by relating them with nature. In one of his plays known as Troilus and Cressida, he quotes the following: Let not virtue seek Remuneration for the thing it was; For beauty, wit, High birth, vigor of bone, desert in service, Love, friendship, charity are subjects all To envious and calumniating time One touch of nature makes the whole world kin, That all with one consent praise new-born gawds, Though they are made and moulded of things past, And give to dust that is a little gilt More laud than gilt oerdusted. (3. 3. 169–179) This quote was spoken by the character known as Ulysses where he says this to the great Greek warrior Achilles who did not participate in the Trojan War because he contained a broken pride and was in love with a Trojan. He did not understand why he was not liked by the other Greeks and Ulysses tried to get Achilles mind back into action by giving him an uncomplimentary lecture on human nature. In the seventh line of Ulysses’ quote, he speaks about the ‘touch of nature’ which means ‘natural traits’. These are vital characteristics that make us all in this world kin. The phrases nowadays used for our ‘touch of nature’ as warmth or generosity or any other romantic ideal is different from how Ulysses describes it. He sees unanimity in our gaudy originalities as our ‘touch of nature’ is a short memory. The past deeds of Achilles, like beauty, wit, love, and so on, are subject to the ravages of time. In other words, it is our nature to forget these types of faded glories because they do not seem important anymore as there are bigger things that should be remembered instead of wasting it on these small glories that will be slowly forgotten in the future. Shakespeare’s unusual yet deep ways of describing human nature through his characters in his plays were unique. From the way he wrote his plays and poems, it would almost feel like to the reader and viewer that he lived in another type of world and that he saw everything around him very differently from normal people. He was very good in describing what he felt through what he saw as well. In one of his well-known plays called Hamlet, one of Hamlet’s quotes he says as following: What a piece of work is a man, how noble in reason, how infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and admirable, in action how like an angel, in apprehension how like a god! The beauty of the world, the paragon of animals—and yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust? Man delights not me— nor woman neither, though by your smiling you seem to say so. (2. 2. 303–312). This passage exemplifies how Hamlet says that man is like an angel or god in apprehension. The ‘quintessence of dust’ states that from all God’s work, Man is one of the noblest. Despite all this nobility, Hamlet is not delighted by all this grace or beauty of man. This is one of the moments where his sincerity is genuinely in question as he explains this to two of the king’s followers or ‘parasites’ as he seems them as, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. He feels like there is nothing in Denmark for him and that it feels like a prison to him where he is stuck in following his uncle’s orders and wished that there was another choice for him to follow instead. Even though Man is described as the beauty of God’s works, from what he sees man as in his life gives him another image of human nature.

Computer and its effects on human life

Computer and its effects on human life Introduction: When computers were first invented in the 1970s it had a big effect on peoples lives all around the world. Stop and imagine life without computers. Today living without a computer is almost impossible for most people in the world since they depend on it for their every day programs. People all around the world use the computer to connect with people thousands of miles away and computers has made the lives of todays growing society a lot easier. The amount of computer users has doubled in the past decade with more people trying to get their hands on a computer to make things easier for them. With a click of button and in a matter of seconds you can transfer information from one place to the other side of the world right from the comfort of your room. Computers are the most modern and most important machines in the 20th century. Although computers have influenced people in a good way but there is a bad side to it too. Computers have a negative effect on the environment, society and people. First of all computers contain hazardous elements like lead and mercury which is very toxic and can damage the environment. When computers are not disposed properly or if not recycled then it can ruin the environment with its harmful chemicals. Computers consume a lot of energy which can pollute the environment (atmosphere). Not only computers have a negative impact on the environment it also has a negative impact on humans too (as well). The computer can damage the human brain due to using the computer continuously and it can cause pain in the body like the hands, back legs etc. if not used properly and due to repetitive motion, computers make the society very inactive since people get addicted to it and using it too much leads them to miss out in their daily activities such as exercise. Short History: The personal computer was invented by Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak which was called apple I computer in 1976. Since the 1970s computer designs and programs have changed a lot and new models and better designs were built in the coming years. Throughout the late 1970s and the early 1980s computers were developed for personal household use for personal productivity, programming and games. Some larger and expensive systems were for use in an office and small businesses. Later on business computers acquired graphics and sound system and home computers and game system users used the same processors and operating systems as office workers. After the apple I computer Steve Woniak and his friend Steve Jobs created the Apple II computer which was a complete computer. The Apple II computer had color graphics, a full QWERTY keyboard and internal slots for expansion. In the 1980s many other computers were built with improved models such as the TRS-80. Personal computers were not a threat to the environment in the 70s and 80s since only limited amount of them were produced. Computers were expensive back then that only rich individuals, some businesses, companies and corporations could afford them. As more companies came into the computer business competition between other companies caused most of the computer prices to go down. With computers cheaper people could not wait to get their hands on one of them. Later in the 1990s computers started to become a threat to the environment since there was a big demand for it and people were trying to get the brand new computer designs. In the 90s old computers were being thrown away without proper disposal and the toxic chemicals in the computers which were mostly lead and mercury harmed the environment including safe drinking waters. This is still continuing today with more and more computers are being trashed away with landfills of them all around the world. Subject description: Computer disposal has had a big impact on the environment and the society. 75% of obsolete computers are just lying around. A study by the National Safety Council has found that nearly 75% of computers purchased by corporations, companies and individuals are lying around in some attic, garage or store room. Those computers are being disposed but not recycled. Many people are not aware of the hazards of computer disposal in land fills. In the production of computers harmful chemicals are used such as lead and mercury. Materials like plastic are also used in the production of computers. Just like coal lead is also mined from the earth and for that habitats and trees has to be destroyed in order to dig the ground and mine lead. The result is deforestation and many animal habitats will be destroyed and companies would not bother to try to fix it back. Mercury is also consumed from the earth and is very hazardous. The plastics that are used in making computer monitors contain dangerous flame retardants that can be very toxic when released into the environment. When old computers are thrown away into landfills without proper disposal than the chemicals in the computers and the lead and mercury can enter the waters in the environment and make it very toxic, it does not only pollute water but also kills living creatures in the water. When determining the problem of pollution caused by computers and their production it is evident that all computer hardware is responsible for the problem and causes of pollution during production. Pieces of hardware such as keyboards, monitors, mice are all made out of plastic which is usually not recyclable. Other chemicals found in these tools are also harmful and can damage the environment. As the result of the assembly of the pieces inside the computer such as chips and wafers a lot of toxic materials are given off causing more harm to the environment. The creation of computers causes harm to the environment because old computers are often disposed only to be replaced by larger computers which consume more energy causing more pollution. As the demand for larger monitors and more memory chips grow due to the developments in media, the level of toxins and pollution will increase too and cause even more harm to the environment. These toxins and pollution is caused when more monitors and chips are being produced and manufactured. The average 24 kg desktop computer with a monitor requires at least 10 times its weight in fossil fuels and chemicals to manufacture. Researchers found that manufacturing one computer and 17- inch CRT monitor uses at least 240 kg of fossil fuels, 22 kg of chemicals and 1,500 kg of water which is a total of 1.8 tonnes of material. A variety of environmental impacts associated with computer production processes are huge amount of energy used in the production and operation of computers. Long-term health effects on workers, families and neighboring communities due to chemical exposure and emissions from production stages such as microchip fabrication. Health impacts due to exposure to hazardous materials contained in computer products, such as brominated flame retardants and lead. The main risk of exposure comes from computers that have been dumped in landfills or from environmentally unsafe recycling processes in developing countries. The process of safely getting rid of your old computer is recycling. Recycling of computer parts are done in systematic order by recyclers. After the extrusion of elements such as copper, tin, aluminum, and zinc, precious elements like gold and silver are also taken out of the computer parts. The remaining computer and electronic components are then shredded into small parts and is thrown away safely. Individual components such as glass from cathode ray tubes are sold to foundries to be used as flexing agents. The harmful gases generated through this process is mostly trapped and contained. Many manufacturers of computer parts also offer programs to buy obsolete computers for recycling. It is the safest way to always recycle your obsolete computer by giving it to a computer recycling program. This way these old computers are not left in land fills and will not harm or damage the environment. Future trends and Environmental/ social Impacts: Sales of personal computers have skyrocketed in the past two decades. The 300,000 computer sales in the U.S in the 1980s increased by 500% the next year and doubled again in the year after that. Today, despite the high-tech meltdown of the late 1990s, computer sales grow about 10 percent a year and more than 130 million computers are being sold each year around the world. By the end of 2002, one billion PCs had been sold worldwide. In 2001 125 million personal computers were shipped compared to 48,000 thousand in 1977. According to iSuppli the global personal computer shipments were 264 million units in 2007 which was 11.3 percent more than 2006. As of June 2008, the number of personal computers used worldwide hit the one billion mark while another billion is expected to be reached by 2014. About 180 million computers which are 16 percent of the existing installed base were expected to be replaced and 35 million obsolete computers to be dumped into landfills in 2008. Nearly 80% of the personal computers used today are mostly in developed countries with the U.S being one of them. With the computer sales increasing each year, the number of obsolete computers increase too, this causes more environmental damage. Most of the obsolete computers are dumped in landfills in developing countries and most of those computers come from developed countries. This increase of computers in landfills contributes to pollution in our environment and destroys habitats. The number of people worldwide owning a personal computer has been doubled since 2002 and that has a bad impact on humans. Most people try to make their job easier just by using a computer, thats a good thing but that also makes many individuals lazy. The continuous use of computers by individuals increases their chances of pain in the muscles and will have many pain problems in their adulthood. Most people are addicted to computers that they will likely miss their daily exercise and daily routines. As more new technologies are about to come in the near future, more and more computers will be replaced by them and therefore causing a massive destruction in the environment. Conclusion: Overall, a computer is one of the famous and great inventions in human history. This technology is likely to cause more harm to humans and the environment, it does not only make humans lazy but it also damages them mentally and physically. The way computers are being programmed to do a job, due to too much use of technology humans are being programmed as well without being aware of it. The harmful chemicals in the computers cause pollution in the environment and destroys it, third world countries are filled with trash that the western world has produced but can not keep them in their own country instead pays other poor countries to dispose it for them. There are positive impacts as well, such as saving time, increase in knowledge and multi tasking gets jobs done at once and make life easier. Living without a computer is nearly impossible for many people around the world. Today if the use of computers stopped than basically the earth stops. Almost everything today to communication to designing a new model of some sort is done by a computer. Life without a computer is nothing; people are too depended on them now, its time that they should start using their brains as well not just the computers and take action against unsafe disposals of obsolete computers.

America Needs Affordable Health Insurance :: Argumentative Persuasive Essays

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Health Insurance is one of the nations top problems, the cost is rising for premiums, and many businesses just cannot afford it. As Americans many of us have the luxury of health insurance, but far too many of us have to go without it. This is something that always seems to brought up at congressional debates, but little is done about it. â€Å"In 2013 there were 41 million people reported with out health insurance coverage, this is too many considering those people probably were sick at some point through out the year, and they couldn’t afford treatment.† We need to find someway to make sure that every citizen of the United States is able to have affordable healthcare for themselves, and their families.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Most people rely on their employers to provide them with health insurance, but with many health care is not available through the employers. Many small businesses can simply not afford the high cost of health care, or it may be available, but the employee needs to pay the entire premiums.   A lot of employers are utilizing part time employees, the part time employees are usually not qualified for benefits, like health insurance. This is very unfortunate for these part timer’s not only because they will not get benefits such as health insurance, but also they probably have a slim chance of going full time because of the health insurance dilemma. Business owner’s need to assess what is good for them financially, and having plenty of part time employees who do not require insurance is probably the most cost effective method to keep the Business up and running.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  An option for folks who have no money is Medicaid. Medicaid is designed for the very poor people. Unfortunately you must meet Medicaid guidelines in order to be eligible for it. â€Å"In order to be eligible you must make below the poverty level that the government allows, this is about $1,497 a month for a single person, also if you are a child who is under 19, if you are pregnant, if you are out of work for a long time, or if you are HIV positive, you may be eligible to apply.† These guidelines alone generally rule out many of Americans. â€Å"The U.S. Census reported young adults (18-to-24 years old) remained the least likely of any age group to have health insurance in 2001.† More than 28% of this group does not have coverage.

Compare the ways in which the authors of The Red Room, The Black Essay

Compare the ways in which the authors of The Red Room, The Black Cottage and The Signalman create fear, suspense and tension. GCSE PROSE STUDY COURSEWORK: Compare the ways in which the authors of "The Red Room", "The Black Cottage" and "The Signalman" create fear, suspense and tension. In this essay i will be analysing the way three accomplished authors create an atmosphere of tension, fear and suspense in their three short stories. Once i had read their stories i instantly noticed how comparable the stories were. They write about fear and suspense in ways only you can comprehend if you have experienced it yourself. The stories seem to be filled with the authors' own experience of fear, suspense and tension, they incorporate this into their story and give the reader the exact feeling of what they personally felt themselves. They make sure that the reader knows how the characters feel and makes the reader become fond of the characters. The reader can really empathize with the writers, because they write in a first person narrative. The stories contain vivid description seen through the eyes of the narrators. The stories were written in victorian times and have a certain gothic style to them. The victorians believed it was immoral to isolate yourself from hummanity and cut yourself off from compassion - there is evidence of this in all three stories. In "The Signalman"(Charles Dickens) the signalman isolates himself from the rest of the world, therefore making the reader feel alone and this plays tricks on his own mind: " "Did it ring your bell yestersay evening when i was here, and you went to the door?" " Twice." " Why see," said i, " how your imagination misleads you. My eyes were on t... ...that the maid could well be alot smarter than the attackers and could escape from the terrorfying situation she is in. "The Signalman", Alot of climax and suspense becomes apparant in this story because the character tries to find out whether the supernatural that haunts him is real: ""Will you come to the door with me and look for it now?" He bit his under lip as though he were somewhat unwilling, but arose." Dickens shows here, that the once arrogant and self admired narrator is frightened of what might be on the other side of the red room's door. This then creates an understanding for the reader that even the most arrogant person will be afraid, once in the presence of the red room. With these examples you can see how the writer creates fear, suspense and tension, and why these stories are so brilliantly appraised as excellent pieces of writing.

Sapir-Worf Hypothesis: Linguistic Determinism and Linguistic Relativit

Sapir-Worf Hypothesis: Linguistic Determinism and Linguistic Relativity The romantic idealism of the late eighteenth century, as encountered in the views of Johann Herder (1744-1803) and Wilhelm von Humboldt (I 762-1835), placed great value on the diversity of the world’s languages and cultures. The tradition was taken up by the American linguist and anthropologist Edward Sapir (1884-1939) and his pupil Benjamin Lee Whorf (1897-1941), and resulted in a view about the relation between language and thought which was widely influential in the middle decades of this century. The â€Å"Sapir-Whorf hypothesis,† as it came to be called, combines two principles. The first is known as linguistic determinism: it states that language determines the way we think. The second follows from this, and is known as linguistic relativity: it states that the distinctions encoded in one language are not found in any other language. In a much- quoted paragraph, Whorf propounds the view as follows: We dissect nature along lines laid down by our native languages. The categories and types that we isolate from the world of phenomena we do not find there because they stare every observer in the face; on the contrary, the world is presented in a kaleidoscopic flux of impressions which has to be organized by our minds--and this means largely by the linguistic systems in our minds. We cut nature up, organize it into concepts, and ascribe significances as we do, largely because we are parties to an agreement to organize it in this way-an agreement that holds throughout our speech community and is codified in the patterns of our language. The agreement is, of course, an implicit and unstated one, but its terms are absolutely obligatory; we cannot talk at all ... ...version of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is generally accepted. Language may not determine the way we think, but it does influence the way we perceive and remember, and it affects the ease with which we perform mental tasks. Several experiments have shown that people recall things more easily if the things correspond to readily available words or phrases. And people certainly find it easier to make a conceptual distinction if it neatly corresponds to words available in their language. Some salvation for the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis can therefore be found in these studies, which are carried out within the developing field of psycholinguistics. Works Cited: Crystal, David. "Language and Thought." in Language: Readings in Language and Culture, Sixth Edition. Clark, Virgina P., Eschholtz, Pual A., Rosa, Alfred F., editors. St. Matin's Press. New York. 1998. p. 631-32 Sapir-Worf Hypothesis: Linguistic Determinism and Linguistic Relativit Sapir-Worf Hypothesis: Linguistic Determinism and Linguistic Relativity The romantic idealism of the late eighteenth century, as encountered in the views of Johann Herder (1744-1803) and Wilhelm von Humboldt (I 762-1835), placed great value on the diversity of the world’s languages and cultures. The tradition was taken up by the American linguist and anthropologist Edward Sapir (1884-1939) and his pupil Benjamin Lee Whorf (1897-1941), and resulted in a view about the relation between language and thought which was widely influential in the middle decades of this century. The â€Å"Sapir-Whorf hypothesis,† as it came to be called, combines two principles. The first is known as linguistic determinism: it states that language determines the way we think. The second follows from this, and is known as linguistic relativity: it states that the distinctions encoded in one language are not found in any other language. In a much- quoted paragraph, Whorf propounds the view as follows: We dissect nature along lines laid down by our native languages. The categories and types that we isolate from the world of phenomena we do not find there because they stare every observer in the face; on the contrary, the world is presented in a kaleidoscopic flux of impressions which has to be organized by our minds--and this means largely by the linguistic systems in our minds. We cut nature up, organize it into concepts, and ascribe significances as we do, largely because we are parties to an agreement to organize it in this way-an agreement that holds throughout our speech community and is codified in the patterns of our language. The agreement is, of course, an implicit and unstated one, but its terms are absolutely obligatory; we cannot talk at all ... ...version of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is generally accepted. Language may not determine the way we think, but it does influence the way we perceive and remember, and it affects the ease with which we perform mental tasks. Several experiments have shown that people recall things more easily if the things correspond to readily available words or phrases. And people certainly find it easier to make a conceptual distinction if it neatly corresponds to words available in their language. Some salvation for the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis can therefore be found in these studies, which are carried out within the developing field of psycholinguistics. Works Cited: Crystal, David. "Language and Thought." in Language: Readings in Language and Culture, Sixth Edition. Clark, Virgina P., Eschholtz, Pual A., Rosa, Alfred F., editors. St. Matin's Press. New York. 1998. p. 631-32

An Argumentative Essay Regarding the building of the Keystone pipeline

With an increasing global population and ever industrializing society's, environmental concern is rarely given priority over economic incentive. But what people fail to realize is that our environmental failures, and relative apathy about it set up a plethora of problems for future generations to deal with. One of the most important decisions president Obama will face in the next year will be whether or not to approve the building of the Keystone XL pipeline, a massively sized, and massively controversial oil pipeline that would stretch all the way from Alberta Canada, to American oil refineries along the Gulf Of Mexico.Despite the economic incentive present, the building of the Keystone XL pipeline should not happen because of the environmental risks posed, and the fact that it bolsters our dependence on fossil fuels. Oil pipelines are prone to environmentally devastating spills, and have never proved to be an effective long term solution for the transport of crude oil. A pipeline t he size of the Keystone XL would simply be a disaster waiting to happen.The proposed pipeline would stretch over 2,000 miles, and go directly above the Ogalalla Aquifer in the central United States. The Ogalalla aquifer is one of the largest, and most important in the entire United States, â€Å"About 27 percent of the irrigated land in the United States overlies this aquifer system, which yields about 30 percent of all ground water used for irrigation in the United States. The aquifer system supplies drinking water to 82 percent of the 2. 3 million people (1990 census) who live within the boundaries of the High Plains study area.† (Dennehy)The sheer size of the aquifer makes it so that the Keystone XL would have to go over it in order to reach it's destination, so what damage a spill would have is only magnified by the agricultural importance of the aquifer. There have been 24 oil pipeline spills in the US alone over the last decade, spilling over 680 thousand tonnes of oil. (List of Oil Spills). And even despite a recent spill in Arkansas, proponents of the pipeline still have failed to properly look into it's potential impact. â€Å"†¦the study is missing some critical elements, including an in-depth review of pipeline safety issues, added pollution in refinery communities and a special assessment of the impact on wildlife†¦. Keystone XL is rife with issues that exacerbate climate change and environmental injustices. † (Mogerman).Rather than be concerned with the issues presented by the pipeline, or the past precedent of failure many pipelines have had in the US, Keystone supporters seem to only be focused on the profit it's building would turn.And many wealthy supporters have turned to lobbying News programs into downplaying it's risks. â€Å"TV Outlets Mentioned Jobs Benefits Twice As Often As Spill Risks. Television outlets overlooked the threat of Keystone XL to the sensitive ecosystems along the pipeline route, mentioning the r isk of a spill in just 20 percent of coverage since Election Day, November 6, 2012. Meanwhile, 43 percent of television coverage promoted the jobs benefits of the pipeline.† (Fitsimmons)The media is the most effective way to get a message to the public, and wealthy oil corporations have proved they're willing to spend money to get a persuasive message across to the public, â€Å"Keystone pipeline supporters outspend it's opponents 35 to 1†¦ Some of this money going to news stations to encourage a positive view be portrayed. † (Israel) If the Keystone pipeline is built, a potential spill poses immense environmental risk to humans and wildlife alike, but supporters fail to acknowledge these risks and continue to push for it's production.America should be moving toward widespread usage of renewable energy, for the sake of its economy and environment; the building of the Keystone XL pipeline would only further our national dependence on non-sustainable sources of energ y.America, like many countries worldwide has been making a push toward sustainable energy on all fronts, and as public support of the shift becomes more and more apparent, â€Å"85% of Iowan's support wind farms, and this number is an accurate gauge of the approximate public attitude nationwide.† (Haugen) large energy companies, and other companies like car manufacturers become more and more likely to jump on the bandwagon and help the progress, â€Å"Green car madness has taken over. This year we have seen more electric and hybrid vehicle startups than ever before. † (Morrison) Nearly everyone recognizes the benefits of the shift, both in terms of how it would help our environment in the long term, but also the economic impact it would have, (reduced gas costs, lower electric and other utilities bills†¦ etc. ) But still, many large companies work to impede the progress in favor of  maintaining our dependence on fossil fuels.The American Petroleum institute has worked with many oil industry protection companies to stymie the renewable energy movement, even in some cases, â€Å"posing as environmentalist groups in order to attract the support of environmentalists while simultaneously pushing their anti-renewable agenda. † (Blankenhorn) Many of these companies striving against renewable energy also support the building of the Keystone pipeline, using the justification that the building of the pipeline would lower gas prices.But what they fail to acknowledge is the basic economic fallacy of this, â€Å"Fossil energy prices are not going to fall. The more you remove carbon-based resources from the ground, the more it costs to get more. † (Blankenhorn) The law of supply and demand dictates that as supply lessens, demand goes up, and as does price. So even if prices are lowered in the short term, the fact that crude oil is a non-renewable resource assures that the pipeline is in no way a permanent solution to gas prices so many peo ple worry about. Perhaps a more permanent solution to gas prices would to eliminate gas altogether.Rather than pumping money into a project like the pipeline that would simply increase our dependence on fossil fuels, more money should be put into the research and development of sustainable energy. With the US dollar that will go into building the Keystone pipeline, â€Å"Approximately 12. 2$ billion† (TransCanada), with that money alone, we could afford to put a whole home solar panel system on over 1. 8 million homes across the country (Wholesale Solar), or purchase a Nissan Leaf electric car (no gas emissions, 108 mpg) for over four hundred thousand people.(Gunther)Supporters of the Keystone Pipeline argue that the jobs created by the pipeline, and the money that would in turn be pumped into the economy validates its building. Approval of the pipeline would immediately add many job opportunities to the American workforce, â€Å"It's estimated that the Keystone XL project w ould help create at least 20,000 new American jobs in manufacturing and construction, said House Speaker John Boehner. † (Shierter) This immediate influx of jobs would benefit the national economy and reduce unemployment.Supporters also say that it's building would help reduce gas prices throughout the country, a pressing issue that effects a large number of people. â€Å".. they say the few pipelines that do connect Canada's oil production region to the US currently flow where refining capacity is limited. This means less gasoline for your tank. The result would mean more supply for US consumers, and therefore, lower gasoline prices. † (Sanati) With the pipeline carrying nearly 800,000 barrels of oil a day directly into U. S. Refineries, our foreign dependence would be significantly reduced, and the ‘everyday person' would see a drop in their gas prices.Supporters say that these economic incentives are enough enough to outweigh the environmental risks of building the pipeline. While the fact that the pipeline being built would immediately create 20,000+ jobs for American people is a fact, and can't be refuted, what supporters like John Boehner fail to acknowledge is the permanence of these jobs. The national energy panel came out with a report regarding the economic impact of building the pipeline, saying â€Å"†¦ once up and running, the operation of the pipeline would only support 35 permanent and 15 temporary jobs, mostly for inspections, maintenance and repairs.Based on this estimate, routine operation of the proposed pipeline would have negligible socioeconomic impacts. † (Buford) What good in an influx of 20,000+ jobs if, once done with their initial job are no longer needed? The idea that the jobs created by the pipeline should be enough to make us want to build it is a short-sighted evasion of facts. Rather than thrust people into impermanent jobs related to the pipeline employers nationwide should be pushing people towa rd working in the field of renewable energy, â€Å"The field of renewable energy has expanded vastly over the last 10 years, creating over 2.3 permanent jobs worldwide.A number expected to continue increasing. † But America has yet to embrace this shift as other countries have â€Å"In the United States, federal policies have been weak and inconsistent over the years. Still, a study for the American Solar Energy Society found that the U. S. renewables sector employed close to 200,000 people directly in 2006 and another 246,000 indirectly. † (Bezdek) The potential is there for renewable energy to emerge as a power player in terms of national employment in the U.S, other countries show it's massive potential, â€Å"In 2006 Germany had some 259,000 direct and indirect jobs in the renewables sector.The number is expected to reach 400,000-500,000 by 2020 and then 710,000 by 2030. † (Buhler) Yet the U. S still seems wary to make a commitment to renewable energy, in ma ny ways do to powerful oil companies and other people with economic interests in oil working to impede a national shift. Rather than focus on the short term employment that would come from the Keystone Pipeline, the American government and energy companies should work on shifting from fossils fuels, to renewable energy.It would not only benefit the environment, but expand an already existing field of permanent jobs. The risks posed by building the Keystone XL pipeline outweigh it's economic potential by a large margin. It's building would only further delay us as a country from moving toward widespread renewable energy. As inhabitants of this Earth it is our responsibility to preserve and protect the Earth and it's natural resources for future generations, to build the Keystone pipeline would contradict that philosophy.Many people have stepped up for the cause and publicly opposed the pipeline, whether through petitions, letters to political figures, or actual demonstrations, this p ublic pressure is what convinces politicians to support a stance, and this will to protect is exactly what will end up preserving our Earth. â€Å"We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity, belonging to us. When we see land as a community to which we belong, then we may begin to use it with love and respect. † An Argumentative Essay Regarding the building of the Keystone pipeline With an increasing global population and ever industrializing society's, environmental concern is rarely given priority over economic incentive. But what people fail to realize is that our environmental failures, and relative apathy about it set up a plethora of problems for future generations to deal with. One of the most important decisions president Obama will face in the next year will be whether or not to approve the building of the Keystone XL pipeline, a massively sized, and massively controversial oil pipeline that would stretch all the way from Alberta Canada, to American oil refineries along the Gulf Of Mexico.Despite the economic incentive present, the building of the Keystone XL pipeline should not happen because of the environmental risks posed, and the fact that it bolsters our dependence on fossil fuels. Oil pipelines are prone to environmentally devastating spills, and have never proved to be an effective long term solution for the transport of crude oil. A pipeline t he size of the Keystone XL would simply be a disaster waiting to happen.The proposed pipeline would stretch over 2,000 miles, and go directly above the Ogalalla Aquifer in the central United States. The Ogalalla aquifer is one of the largest, and most important in the entire United States, â€Å"About 27 percent of the irrigated land in the United States overlies this aquifer system, which yields about 30 percent of all ground water used for irrigation in the United States. The aquifer system supplies drinking water to 82 percent of the 2. 3 million people (1990 census) who live within the boundaries of the High Plains study area.† (Dennehy)The sheer size of the aquifer makes it so that the Keystone XL would have to go over it in order to reach it's destination, so what damage a spill would have is only magnified by the agricultural importance of the aquifer. There have been 24 oil pipeline spills in the US alone over the last decade, spilling over 680 thousand tonnes of oil. (List of Oil Spills).And even despite a recent spill in Arkansas, proponents of the pipeline still have failed to properly look into it's potential impact. â€Å"†¦the study is missing some critical elements, including an in-depth review of pipeline safety issues, added pollution in refinery communities and a special assessment of the impact on wildlife†¦. Keystone XL is rife with issues that exacerbate climate change and environmental injustices. † (Mogerman). Rather than be concerned with the issues presented by the pipeline, or the past precedent of failure many pipelines have had in the US, Keystone supporters seem to only be focused on the profit it's building would turn.And many wealthy supporters have turned to lobbying News programs into downplaying it's risks. â€Å"TV Outlets Mentioned Jobs Benefits Twice As Often As Spill Risks. Television outlets overlooked the threat of Keystone XL to the sensitive ecosystems along the pipeline route, mentioning the r isk of a spill in just 20 percent of coverage since Election Day, November 6, 2012. Meanwhile, 43 percent of television coverage promoted the jobs benefits of the pipeline.† (Fitsimmons)The media is the most effective way to get a message to the public, and wealthy oil corporations have proved they're willing to spend money to get a persuasive message across to the public, â€Å"Keystone pipeline supporters outspend it's opponents 35 to 1†¦ Some of this money going to news stations to encourage a positive view be portrayed. † (Israel) If the Keystone pipeline is built, a potential spill poses immense environmental risk to humans and wildlife alike, but supporters fail to acknowledge these risks and continue to push for it's production.America should be moving toward widespread usage of renewable energy, for the sake of its economy and environment; the building of the Keystone XL pipeline would only further our national dependence on non-sustainable sources of energ y. America, like many countries worldwide has been making a push toward sustainable energy on all fronts, and as public support of the shift becomes more and more apparent, â€Å"85% of Iowan's support wind farms, and this number is an accurate gauge of the approximate public attitude nationwide.† (Haugen)Large energy companies, and other companies like car manufacturers become more and more likely to jump on the bandwagon and help the progress, â€Å"Green car madness has taken over. This year we have seen more electric and hybrid vehicle startups than ever before. † (Morrison) Nearly everyone recognizes the benefits of the shift, both in terms of how it would help our environment in the long term, but also the economic impact it would have, (reduced gas costs, lower electric and other utilities bills†¦ etc. )But still, many large companies work to impede the progress in favor of  maintaining our dependence on fossil fuels. The American Petroleum institute has worked with many oil industry protection companies to stymie the renewable energy movement, even in some cases, â€Å"posing as environmentalist groups in order to attract the support of environmentalists while simultaneously pushing their anti-renewable agenda. † (Blankenhorn) Many of these companies striving against renewable energy also support the building of the Keystone pipeline, using the justification that the building of the pipeline would lower gas prices.But what they fail to acknowledge is the basic economic fallacy of this, â€Å"Fossil energy prices are not going to fall. The more you remove carbon-based resources from the ground, the more it costs to get more. † (Blankenhorn) The law of supply and demand dictates that as supply lessens, demand goes up, and as does price. So even if prices are lowered in the short term, the fact that crude oil is a non-renewable resource assures that the pipeline is in no way a permanent solution to gas prices so many peo ple worry about. Perhaps a more permanent solution to gas prices would to eliminate gas altogether.Rather than pumping money into a project like the pipeline that would simply increase our dependence on fossil fuels, more money should be put into the research and development of sustainable energy. With the US dollar that will go into building the Keystone pipeline, â€Å"Approximately 12. 2$ billion† (TransCanada), with that money alone, we could afford to put a whole home solar panel system on over 1. 8 million homes across the country (Wholesale Solar), or purchase a Nissan Leaf electric car (no gas emissions, 108 mpg) for over four hundred thousand people.  (Gunther)Supporters of the Keystone Pipeline argue that the jobs created by the pipeline, and the money that would in turn be pumped into the economy validates its building. Approval of the pipeline would immediately add many job opportunities to the American workforce, â€Å"It's estimated that the Keystone XL proje ct would help create at least 20,000 new American jobs in manufacturing and construction, said House Speaker John Boehner. † (Shierter) This immediate influx of jobs would benefit the national economy and reduce unemployment.Supporters also say that it's building would help reduce gas prices throughout the country, a pressing issue that effects a large number of people. â€Å".. they say the few pipelines that do connect Canada's oil production region to the US currently flow where refining capacity is limited. This means less gasoline for your tank. The result would mean more supply for US consumers, and therefore, lower gasoline prices. † (Sanati) With the pipeline carrying nearly 800,000 barrels of oil a day directly into U. S. Refineries, our foreign dependence would be significantly reduced, and the ‘everyday person' would see a drop in their gas prices.Supporters say that these economic incentives are enough enough to outweigh the environmental risks of buil ding the pipeline. While the fact that the pipeline being built would immediately create 20,000+ jobs for American people is a fact, and can't be refuted, what supporters like John Boehner fail to acknowledge is the permanence of these jobs. The national energy panel came out with a report regarding the economic impact of building the pipeline, saying â€Å"†¦ once up and running, the operation of the pipeline would only support 35 permanent and 15 temporary jobs, mostly for inspections, maintenance and repairs.Based on this estimate, routine operation of the proposed pipeline would have negligible socioeconomic impacts. † (Buford) What good in an influx of 20,000+ jobs if, once done with their initial job are no longer needed? The idea that the jobs created by the pipeline should be enough to make us want to build it is a short-sighted evasion of facts. Rather than thrust people into impermanent jobs related to the pipeline employers nationwide should be pushing people toward working in the field of renewable energy, â€Å"The field of renewable energy has expanded vastly over the last 10 years, creating over 2.3 permanent jobs worldwide.A number expected to continue increasing. † But America has yet to embrace this shift as other countries have â€Å"In the United States, federal policies have been weak and inconsistent over the years. Still, a study for the American Solar Energy Society found that the U. S. renewables sector employed close to 200,000 people directly in 2006 and another 246,000 indirectly. † (Bezdek) The potential is there for renewable energy to emerge as a power player in terms of national employment in the U.S, other countries show it's massive potential, â€Å"In 2006 Germany had some 259,000 direct and indirect jobs in the renewables sector.The number is expected to reach 400,000-500,000 by 2020 and then 710,000 by 2030. † (Buhler) Yet the U. S still seems wary to make a commitment to renewable energy, i n many ways do to powerful oil companies and other people with economic interests in oil working to impede a national shift. Rather than focus on the short term employment that would come from the Keystone Pipeline, the American government and energy companies should work on shifting from fossils fuels, to renewable energy.It would not only benefit the environment, but expand an already existing field of permanent jobs. The risks posed by building the Keystone XL pipeline outweigh it's economic potential by a large margin. It's building would only further delay us as a country from moving toward widespread renewable energy. As inhabitants of this Earth it is our responsibility to preserve and protect the Earth and it's natural resources for future generations, to build the Keystone pipeline would contradict that philosophy.Many people have stepped up for the cause and publicly opposed the pipeline, whether through petitions, letters to political figures, or actual demonstrations, th is public pressure is what convinces politicians to support a stance, and this will to protect is exactly what will end up preserving our Earth. â€Å"We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity, belonging to us. When we see land as a community to which we belong, then we may begin to use it with love and respect. †