Why Is Divorce Acceptable in Society Essay - 777 Words

Mary Kirkland Professor Tate-Owens English 1020 23 February 2010 Why is Divorce Acceptable in Society? Divorce is something that has become more common in today’s civilization. It’s happening all over the world but mostly in the United States of America. Most marriages that have fail in the last 5 years have not succeeded have resulted in divorce. In earlier periods in life divorce was considered shocking and terrible, whereas in today’s world it’s accepted. Divorce has become acceptable in society for numerous reasons and will continue to be accepted. Though, many think divorce is frowned upon, it’s more acceptable in society because the images portrayed by the media, the morals of marriage have changed and because it’s no firm†¦show more content†¦In today’s society marriage is all about the perfect dress, the size of the ring and how much money can you spend to have the most platinum wedding. The vows at the altar are just routine to society, it’s suppose to be read by the pastor and recited by the bride and groom. The wedding vows are not taken serious and neither is the marriage. People in society lose sight of the morals of marriage which is why they get divorced and society accepts it. Divorce is acceptable in society because society has changed its meanings and morals of marriage. Equally important, divorce is becoming acceptable in our society because it’s allowed and isn’t frowned upon. Divorce has always been legal but it has become an escape route for some. In today’s society people feel if their marriage isn’t working out for them, divorced is the first resort. People don’t try to work out their marriages anymore; they feel if this person can’t do what they need them too someone else will. People in society continue to jump in and out of marriages because it isn’t a divorce requirement. They are allowed to get married and/or divorced as many times as they would like too because they can. If there wer e requirements to getting divorce society would not have as many divorces as it does. The fact that people can get as many divorces as they want due to the fact of the marriage not benefitting themShow MoreRelatedThe Reasons for Changes in the Patterns of Marriage, Cohabitation and Divorce in the last 30 Years845 Words   |  4 PagesChanges in the Patterns of Marriage, Cohabitation and Divorce in the last 30 Years Over the last 30 years there has been a significant change in the pattern for marriage, co-habitation and divorce. There are many reasons for these changes that have taken place. For example, since 1971, when a divorce act was introduced, divorce has been more acceptable in todays society. This has slowly increased the figures of divorce at a steady rate. A downfall in religion has also Read MoreBis303 Week 7 Casestudy - Marriage and Family Essay748 Words   |  3 Pages1. What factors bind marriages and families together? How have these factors changed, and how has the divorce rate been affected? As stated in our text, various factors can bind married couples together, such as economic interdependencies, legal, social and moral constraints, relationship, and amongst other things. In the recent years some of these factors have diminished their strengths. The modern generation sees marriage in a different perspective altogether. Individuals today feel they areRead MoreSociological Perspectives On Social Issues957 Words   |  4 Pagesnegative occurs within someones life they tend to look for a cause, a reason as to why this has happened. They do this by looking at the different aspects of their personal life, however they don’t take into consideration the fact that sociological issues within that society may have also attributed to that problem taking place. C. Wright Mills (2010) believed that â€Å"neither the life of an individual nor the history of a society could be understood without understanding both†, and with this in mind he cameRead MoreThe Relation Be tween Premarital Cohabitation And Divorce Rates1133 Words   |  5 PagesCohabitation and Divorce Rates Shalene Gerritsen University of Nebraska Introduction to Sociological Research November 18, 2014 Many couples find themselves cohabiting today because it is cheaper and more convenient while others take it as a step forward in their committed relationships. Regardless of reason cohabiting has become a union of choice. In recent years cohabitation has transformed from an act of deviance to a norm in many societies. We will be focusingRead MoreDiscuss Changing Family Structures in the Uk and Give Examples of Sociological Theories That Provide Explanations as to Why and How Families Have Changed.1123 Words   |  5 Pagesthe UK and give examples of sociological theories that provide explanations as to why and how families have changed. This essay will discuss the various family structures in society. It will give theoretical explanation as to why and how families have changed. The essay will also bring statistical, historical and political evidence to back up the reason for these changes. During the pre-industrial society the ‘extended family’ was the most common family structure. This family structureRead MoreAnthropology 101834 Words   |  4 Pagescouple vows to stay married and faithful to their partner. Within monogamy there is serial monogamy. A serial monogamist has many partners but, is only married to one at a time. One continues to remarry after previous marriages have failed ending in a divorce. There is also monogamy arranged marriages. Partners in the marriage are chosen by parents’ and is based off of the social standing of the families, rather than certain personality traits one chooses to marry (Dettwyler, 2011). That marriage is forRead MoreCollege Sociology : The American Family1480 Words   |  6 Pagesone economic and cultural setting doesn’t work for a family in another. This study is relevant because most people don’t understand that families are just doing what they have to do to survive the new ways of so ciety. Some of the problems families have had to face are violence and divorce. The structure of family has also undergone some changes. Two-career families, single-parent families, and blended families are on the rise while nuclear families are starting to become rare. Most people thinkRead MoreThe Issue Of Divorce Over The Years903 Words   |  4 PagesDefinitional Argument Essay According to the CDC and the Census Bureau, a lot more of marriages have been ending in divorce over the years. Why have the rates for divorce changed so much throughout the years? Over the years, everything from hairstyles to phones has changed, including marriage. Marriage is the legally recognized union of a man and a woman as partners in a personal relationship and should be one of the biggest decisions in someone’s life. Although nowadays, it seems as ifRead MoreDo Not Stigmatize Same-Sex Marriages as Inferior by Not Legalizing These Unions1222 Words   |  5 Pages In today’s society, it is hard to define what is known as a â€Å"traditional marriage†. Considering the popularity of marriages that are arranged on the basis of polygamy, communal child rearing, and even the use of mistresses, homosexual marriage should not be considered â€Å"unnatural†. For many people, it is hard to understand how any individual can love someone of their sam e gender. Nonetheless despite the percentage of the population that is muddled by the act, same sex marriage should be legalizedRead MoreHow the Western Concept of Marriage has Changed Essay990 Words   |  4 Pagesphysical health† (â€Å"Marriage and Divorce,† 2014). For children, growing up in happy homes help with their mental, physical, educational, and social well-being. Unfortunately, about 50 percent of married couples in the United States divorce. The rate is even higher for subsequent marriages (â€Å"Marriage and Divorce,† 2014). The social institution influence (structural) differs from the individual influence (life choices) in divorce by the scope of perception on why divorce occurs (Amato, Previti, (2003)

Abigail and the girls deny everything Essay Example For Students

Abigail and the girls deny everything Essay Abigail and the girls deny everything. Part od their denial is accusation. By shifting the blame onto someone else, they believe that they will not be held accountable for their own sins. Abigail manipulates her way through the play, and even after Mary Warren confessed that the whole story was a pretense, Abigail continues manipulating the court room and the people within it with antics of a wind, a cold wind and Oh Heavenly Father, take away this shadow. In the end she is adamant to convince the court that they were only involved with witchcraft because of Mary Warren, hoping profusely to save her own name. Denial in Salem is considered a terrible sin. The narrow mindedness of the court possesses an unwritten law that if your name is brought out within the court, without any questioning, you are presumed guily. Innocence is not taken into consideration, and only until the victim confesses,, is the court convinced they were right. There is no hearing for the victim, and if they are innocent, they have the choice of denial, and being hung or confessing an being thrown into jail. Danforth, the deputy governor, is so caught up in his own beliefs and importance that he wont listen to anything that he doesnt want to hear. He is manipulated by Abigail, bu her innocent young girl front by incredulously questioning Proctor this child would murder his wife? It is beyond his narrow comprehension that someone could be telling the truth. John Proctor stood up for his pride and principles. It is obvious that he would rather die with a good name within Salem than live and know that he had broken his own principles and lost his pride. He believed that among his own community he would be lavelled untrustworthy and states God does not need my name nailed upon the church! God sees my name, God know how black my sins are. From these comments, we know that John Proctor is an honest and trusting man who would do anything to save the name of himself, his family and his friends even if it would conclude in his own death I have given you my soul, leave me my nameà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦. Maybe Proctors strong will to protest caused the whole tragedy to continue on for a longer period of time. Maybe if he hadnt engaged in adultry, he wouldnt have felt nearly as guilty that he had to go and stand before the court for his wife. It could be said that he stood up for her to prove that he still loved her and maybe to regain some her trust back. The Proctors werent the only couple with the tragedy coming between them. Thomas Putnam too was caught in secretly trying to obtain the land and fight Giless accusation of Putnam killing his neighbours to get their land. Goody Putnam is maliciously accusing Tituba of murdering all her babies. These babies at the time, were announced still born,  but now that Tituba is in the public eye because of being linked with Abigail and the starting of the tragedy, she is blamed. Wild accusations are flying around Salem linking people to anything abnormal that has gone wrong. The absurd naming of innocent people becomes an ongoing threat to all within Salem. Francis Nurse is shocked that his wife, Rebecca a pillar of the Salem community has been named before the court by Abigail and the girls. In fact, the entire community is astounded when they hear the news of Rebecca Nurse being named. The act of people naming others, and then those others naming more people still, definantly had a impact on the tragedy, dragging the whole thing out, much longer than it needed to be. .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322 , .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322 .postImageUrl , .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322 .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322 , .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322:hover , .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322:visited , .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322:active { border:0!important; } .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322 .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322 { 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; } .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322:active , .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322 .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322 .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322 .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322 .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; } .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322 .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322 .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .ub362fe4e89c77ccedbe04b5206fa4322:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: African American Writers EssayTo prove that all these people were actually guilty also played a part in lengthening the tragedy. Herrick, Cheever and Danforth, all so full of their own importance and strictness of the court the law binds meà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦.I cannot budge ask question after question to each victim until finally the defendant breaks down and confesses to save their own lives. Even Hale who feels for the victims towards the end, knows the strictness of the court, thought our hearts break, we cannot flinch, these are new times.

Homeschooling Argumentative Paper free essay sample

Many parents have often poundered on which type of educational setting would be best for their children. The most common way for children to receive their basic K-12 education is by attending a public school. However, there is one very different option, home schooling. The advantages of home schooling are starting to be realized by more and more parents every year, by the growing # of children being home schooled. So, are there advantages to home schooling? With today’s society, this seems to be growing truer all the time. Of course, there seems to be many more advantages to teaching children from home, versus sending them to a public school. The home schooling process seems to be much more efficient than that of public schools. Lawrence Hardy of American School board Journal asked Yvonne Bunn, a home schooling mom, to comment on her thoughs of how home schooling matched up with that of a public school, academically. We will write a custom essay sample on Homeschooling Argumentative Paper or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Ms. Bunn replied saying, â€Å"Acadmeically, homeschooling is like a tutorial, one-one relationship. That is every teacher’s dream. (18). She went on to comment about how she thinks home schooling is â€Å"quickest, most comprehensive way of covering a subject†. (18). Home schooling seems to be best way to speed up the learning process because of the lack of the students. Ms. Bunn told of how one of her daughters was able to complete the entire her Kindergarten curriculm before Xmas, and this was in just two hours of school a day. She described how this is possible by saying, â€Å"We accomplish the curriculum in two hours a day because we are not lining up, we are not dealing with troublemakers in the classroom† (18). Many people feel as if the sheltered environment of learning in the home will often hurt a child when he or she decides to hurt when he or she decides to leave home to purse a college education. However, this might not necessarily be true. Betty Hanson has recently sent her home schooling son off to college, and he is now doing very well in the college setting. She said she believed that â€Å"he is at an advantage cuz he learned to study independly and not reply on others so much, which is similar to how you learn in college†. Lawrence Hardy also discusses this issue. He indicates that they (home schooled children) â€Å"are naturals for post secondary work cuz of their experience with the kind of independent study that college requires† (19) There is another advantage to home schooling, although, this is an advantage that is often debated for moral reasons. Since most parents who home schooling don’t keep their student’s grades, when asked by a college to assign a grade for such things as dual-enrollment college classes, the parents often assign the highest grade possible. Rebecca Talluto, dean of educational services at Brevard Community College discusses this topic. She tells how when a home schooling student wants to part of dual-enrolled college classes, he or she do not go to principal or guidance counselor to get proper documents signed. â€Å"Instead they must submit a notarized affidavit that says they are at least sophomores. Their parent, in lieu of a HS guidance counselor and principal, sign a form from them stating that the students meets minimum†. GPA requirements. And this is where the problem shows up, when we explain this form to the parents, they usually reply that the parents, they usually reply on that they do not keep grades. Then they go ahead and sign the form, assigned their child a 4. 0 GPA† (20) Unfair? Yes, but it is definitely an advantage for home schooled students. Due to this, homeschooling children have tended to excel on academic achievement tests; the gateways to academic success and educational opportunities in our world today. But another distinct counterargument against homeschooling is that the parents are not accredited teachers or capable of performing the duties of an accredited teacher. â€Å"Home School Legal Defense Association, HSLDA, in collaboration with Brian D. Ray of the National Home Education Research Institution, NHERI, refutes this argument in an article released in the Homeschool Progress Report of 2009. The figures showed homeschool students placed 34-39 percentile points higher than norm on Standardized test achievements† (Ray, Brian D. ) (About NHERI). The study also discovered that parents, whether teacher-cerified or not, had no effect on the test scores. A key factor in these statistics is the plain fact that the flexibility that homeschooling provides allows students to continue pursuing what they love, and if they need be, take their time working out concepts that they don’t quite understand. Just about every critic of the home schooling process will use the â€Å"lack of socialization† point when debating why home schooling is a bad choice. Yvonne Bunn was asked about whether she was worried about socialization. Ms Bunn had a very interesting reply, almost flip- flopping the question. She stated, â€Å"We had better be concerned with socialization, cuz socialization is one of the best reasons to home school. Just look at society today† (18). She went on to say that â€Å"home schooled children kids have lots of opportunities for socialization—from church groups, scouting, 4-H, community organizations, to name few† (18). Ms Bunn feels like her kids don’t necessarily need school in order to gain the basic, essential socialization skills needed for life. However, Bob Chase, president of the National Education Association, feel differently. He feels as if the socialization skills picked up from interaction with kids of your own age while in public schooling is essential. He says, â€Å"Public education represents a slice of reality that goes beyond participate in ballet classes, and church socials† (qtd. Hardy 15) Many parents feel as if they should be more concerned about what kind of socialization their kids is receiving, rather than how much. By knowing just what activities a child is involved in, for instance, a church youth group, there is a better understanding of just who they are interacting with, as well as a little control over whom they socialize with. In a public school setting there just isn’t this type of knowledge or control. Ms. Bunn agrees with this type of philosophy stating, â€Å"Parents should be concerned about the quality of social contracts, rather than quatity†. (qtd. in Hardy 18). Before really looking into the issue, most people turn their nose up at the idea of home schooling their kids because of the negative remarks often ade about this alternative to public schools and the common myths that developed over time such as, the loss of socialization an poor success in post-secondary schooling. However, if one takes the time to really sit and evalvate which choice would be better for their kids, receiving an education in a public school or at home, home schooling has a lot of strong adv antages that cannot be ignored. A small percentage of people who home school their kids give the practice up, and either start their kids in a public school for the first time or send them back to the public schooling system. The education that home schooled kids are receiving today is better than that of a public education, and is now starting to show up in society more and more. Richard Hardy discusses this by saying, â€Å"It is hard to argue with the advantages of one-one tutor, or parent involvement, and of a curriculm tailored to every child’s needs. Home schooled kids are winning spelling and geography bees and going on to top-notch colleges† (19). It’s obvious those are definite advantages to home schooled.

Public Scrutiny in Australian Politics

Public Scrutiny in Australian Politics parties really provide their leaders with overprotection. Those actions may be explained as the attempt to protect the candidate from personal attacks of media and the opponents. The cases are known to take place almost during every election campaign. At that time, dirty tricks are applied in order to discredit the opponent and get rid of him as the main rival in a race for power. The only aspect they did not take into consideration is that drastically careful protection might be estimated by electorate as the unwillingness to be open to them. It can also be viewed as the intention to hide true goals. Relationship between electorate and candidates is of great importance as people only choose winner and loser. Nowadays, Australian government expresses hope that future elections will ameliorate the situation and signify reliance of people and openness of candidates.

Problem Set on Price Levels and Open Economy Macro Essay

Problem Set on Price Levels and Open Economy Macro - Essay Example 2. When national income rises due to increased payments, imports are likely to increase in value relative to exports and as a result, the external value of the currency will depreciate thus weakening real and nominal exchange rates in the long run. For example, the 1986 fall in the price of oil led to a depreciation of the sterling pound on the foreign-exchange market. On the other hand, a reduction in national income reduces import in value relative to exports the resultant effect being the appreciation of external value of currency thus strengthening real and nominal exchange rates in the long run. 3. Factors such as indirect taxes, subsidies and transport costs may change prices of goods in a country but not affect the exchange rates. If a country imposes tariff on imports from abroad, the price in the home market would rise but since less foreign currency would be spent on it, the long run exchange rate will tend to improve. The long run nominal exchange rate will also improve. 4. Short-term capital moves from one country to another as changes take place in the rate of interest being offered by each country.

History and architecture. Smolny Cathedral Essay

History and architecture. Smolny Cathedral - Essay Example The emperor Peter the Great had a weakness for western architecture. Hence he invited Rastelli’s father to Russia to construct the winter palace as well as the Tsarskoe Selo Palace. After his death, Rastelli took over as architect. The Smolny convent and cathedral is a land mark that Rastelli left unfinished due to insufficient funding before its completion. The construction of the Smolny Convent and Cathedral took place between 1748 and 1764. This was during the reign of the empress Elizabeth Petrovna. There is rich history of Russia during this time. The Smolny cathedral original purpose was housing Elizabeth. The marriage between her mother and the emperor Peter the great remained unrecognized publicly. Hence her opponents used this as an excuse to deny her right to the throne. After her right to the thrown was taken and given to Anna Leopodovna, Elizabeth opted to become a nun. Hence the construction of the Smolny Convent began. It was meant to house her during her monastery life. However, this was never meant to be. Anna Leopodovna favored Germans and allowed them to dominate the Russian politics and culture. Due to the dissatisfaction of the Russians (and especially the Russian royal guards) they decided to overthrow her in a coup. This provided a chance for Elizabeth to reign as empress. Therefore, Elizabeth threw away the idea to become a nun and decided to become an empress. A lot happened during her reign which was in juxtaposition with the construction of the Smonly Cathedral. The reign of Elizabeth as empress started as the construction of the Smolny started. However, Elizabeth passed on before the completion of the Smolny Cathedral. The empress, Catherine thought that it was a waste of funds and hence stopped its construction. It was only completed between 1832 and 1835 by Vasily Stavos. The Cathedral is a combination of baroque architecture and neo-classical architecture. This is due to the disparity of time in which it was started and completed. Rastelli built in Baroque, Vasily used neo-classical architecture fashionable during his time. During the construction of the Smolny Cathedral, the empress Elizabeth encouraged the development of education and arts. Her plan was to dedicate part of the Smolny cathedral to girl’s education. Elizabeth developed enlightenment by introducing the first academy of sciences, St Petersburg, in 1747. It was during her reign that the first university in Russia was founded in 1757. In 1756 and 1758 the first public theater and the first fine arts academy were opened. Numerous schools were opened across Russia and Elizabeth ensured all children of all social classes’ accessed education. Since Anna had previously encouraged the use of German in studying, Elizabeth changed the system to French. This was especially because she had studied French. Elizabeth implemented pro-Russian policies. She encouraged the participation of Russians in politics and the economy. Elizabeth hated bloodshed. No blood was shed during the coup when she overthrew Anna. She promised that bloodshed would be minimal during her reign. Hence she never executed anyone during her time as empress. However, she led Russia through two wars. Elizabeth sent out 100 thousand army men against Prussia. This was as a result of joining forces with Austria as the rest of the world went to war. Elizabeth felt the Russian empi re was threatened by the British and Russian alliance. Hence she joined forces with Austria to defeat Frederick the second. This achievement was celebrated because Frederick was considered an extremely skilled European warrior. Prussia failed to surrender completely in the next two years. However, Fredrick was ready to surrender in 1762.

Philosophy Final Essay Example for Free

Philosophy Final Essay Question One   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   In Plato’s work The Apology Socrates is on trial for three distinct things: Firstly, Socrates fell out of favor with the government (who were constantly berated for being ignorant by Socrates in a fashion) and so the sought to eradicate him by accusing him of not paying favors to the gods for whom the citizenry worshipped.   Secondly, Socrates was on trial for impiety.   Lastly, Socrates was on trial and sentenced to death for corruption of the young.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Socrates attempted to defend himself in front of the Senate by using his famous Socratic method as revealed in Plato’s pages of The Apology.   He bantered and lead the court officials around in a dialogue fashion, asking questions in order so that they would have to answer them themselves and thus prove Socrates’ point in a question answer dialogue.   The dialectic art of arriving at the was the system Socrates used.   In this regard he would arrive at the answer by questioning the belief of engaged speakers in a philosophic circle, or in this case, in a courtroom hearing. Although this idea of philosophy may come across as non-confrontational,             Socrates used this method to verbally jab at the speaker until they themselves found fault in their philosophy, and through a system of negative or positive responses came to recognize the truth: Thus, Socrates sought to find justice for himself by only asking questions, leaving the answers up to the officials.   This type of philosophy has been likened to a cross examination present in today’s court rooms, where the person under oath is asked a series of questions that are both destructive and humiliating, until they are forced to acknowledge the truth, much like the arguments around Socrates. The aim of such confrontational questioning was always about finding the ultimate truth, but in this court case it seems that Socrates failed because the case eventually lead to his demise. Socrates believed that this truth seeking was the main goal of philosophy, and philosophical discussions, and he believed that everyone involved with the account was in pursuit of this goal as well:   It was this optimism that lead to his downfall in a way. Socrates could be considered a martyr.   It was his stand against the government at the time which lead to the eventual destruction of the Thirty Tyrants, but when democracy came back into place, they then chastised Socrates because of his pull with the younger crowd.   The definition of a martyr is a person who dies for a cause.   Socrates’ cause was for truth and wisdom; that is what he taught the crowd which followed him about the city (and which attracted the disfavor of the democracy who felt Socrates had too much power and sway over the citizenry and feared an uprising) and in the end, those were the causes for which he died. In The Apology Plato writes of a scene where Crito offers Socrates the opportunity to escape from prison, but Socrates forbids it stating that it would go against democracy for which he stood and it would be a deceitful act which is the opposite of truth, for which he based his philosophy.   Thus, Socrates is offered with a form of escape which he denies, thereby choosing death willingly for his beliefs, the true definition of a martyr.  Ã‚  Ã‚   Socrates willingly or rather knowingly accepts his fate as governed by the ones whose democracy he upheld and it was through this act that Socrates was able to demonstrate philosophy in action. Question Two As to the existence of god, Descartes deems that this should be accounted for next to discovering what knowledge is. Descartes explanation of God and existence required an innate sense of the presence of God. He began by thinking that the cause of any idea is as real as the substance of said idea. Since his idea of a Supreme Being or god infinite, therefore the cause of this idea of infinity must also be never-ending and according to his belief, only the real god is boundless. Thus, the cause for the existence of god cannot be human beings because we are not infinite and we are mortal. There must be a cause of this Supreme Being’s existence which is outside the human race. Based on Meditation III, Descartes expressed â€Å"my idea of god cannot be either adventitious or factitious (since I could neither experience god directly nor discover the concept of perfection in myself), so it must be innately provided by god. Therefore, god exists.† It was Rene Descartes who delivered a â€Å"first systematic account of the mind/body relationship† (Descartes 1). Descartes’ dualism theory states that â€Å"mind is a nonphysical substance† (Descartes 1). Further, he differentiated mind from brain. He attributed consciousness and self-awareness to the mind while intelligence is contained in the brain. Descartes used his Meditations on First Philosophy to make certain what he is in doubt before regarding the existence of the mind and body. Because of this, he was able to take a hint that mind and body are two different things. He advocated that the â€Å"mind† is used for thinking, thus, it is immaterial and can exist even without the body. This immaterial and non-physical content of the mind then he called as the â€Å"soul.† And therefore, the mind is a substance distinct from the body, a substance whose essence is thought (Descartes 12). Based on this perspective, Cartesian dualism became a stronghold of future theories. It champions the idea of the â€Å"immaterial† mind and the â€Å"material† body. Even if these are two different entities, they interact to create actions and events reversibly involving mental and physical activities. Despite many non-European supporters of Cartesian dualism, this gave rise to the â€Å"problem of interactionism† wherein it averts the impossibility of interaction between an immaterial and material entity, the mind and body respectively. To defend these criticisms of Cartesian dualism, Descartes formulated an explanation through the pineal gland theory. This gland is located in the center of the brain between the left and right hemisphere, from which the â€Å"immaterial† mind and the â€Å"material† body purportedly interacts. However, this has remained a theory up to this time since Descartes failed to defend such idea of the causal interaction of the mind and body through the pineal gland. Question Three Kant’s deontology ethics involves the belief of actions being immoral despite the outcome.   Kant did not put faith in the consequences of people’s actions but the actions themselves; thus leaving the effect of a scenario out of the equation of morality.   This ethical stance was part of Kant’s philosophy and he believed that the absolutism of deontology was the correct course of action despite circumstances. For Mill on the other hand, his theory of utilitarianism was in stark contrast to Kant’s theory of deontology.   Utilitarianism speaks toward the action of a person directly results the outcome.   Thus, the truth is always the correct path in Kant’s philosophy while the outcome of a lie being the pathway to truth or justice is the course of Mill’s philosophy. In a situation where Kant and Mill were able to converse, there would be several issues on which they would agree, as well as many on which they would fervently argue. With Mill’s dedication to the understanding of natural sciences/economy, and his studies into the harm theory as it applies to humanity, he would be at odds with the strong religious conviction of Kant.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   For Kant, the existence of God was the principle motivating factor of his studies. His work dealt with the â€Å"constructing an adequate theoretical argument for the existence of God†. (Rossi) His early work was founded on, rather than the proof of God as a being to be worshipped, the idea that God was fundamentally provable through mathematics. Kant will argue that the concept of God properly functions only as a â€Å"regulative† — i.e., limiting —   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   principle in causal accounts of the spatio-temporal order of the world. Kants critical philosophy thus undercuts what rationalist metaphysics had offered as proofs for the   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   existence of God. On the other hand, the critical philosophy does more than simply dismantle the conceptual scaffolding on which previous philosophical accounts of the concept of God had been constructed. (Rossi) To this end, Kant spent his life in study of the pursuit of finding God in science and mathematics that man had developed.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   John Stuart Mill, on the other hand, felt that the harm principle was the ruling factors of world existence. John Stuart Mill’s argues in On Liberty that the use of the harm theory, or harm principle is that a state of government must ensure the quality of liberty just so long as the actions committed in the cause of liberty are not detrimental to the activists.   That is to say that the government may interfere in order to prevent harm.   The following paper will discuss Mill’s harm principle and its application to government in regards to restrictions and controls.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Mill argues for the doctrine of liberty.   Mill means to define the role of a person in society and as such the limited amount of coercion consistent in society that should affect that individual, â€Å"No society in which these liberties are not, on the whole, respected, is free, whatever may be its form of government; and none is completely free in which they do exist absolute and unqualified† (Mill).   Mill is stating that although these qualities are liberty come at a cost in no society would they be considered free because of the forms of government in which the world adheres. Question Four Nietzsche restricts the presence of God in his equation by saying that the concepts of good and evil have changed with the progression of history and that these two paradigms of human behavior and secular code will continue to evolve toward the demands of a changing society. Nietzsche, therefore, makes the argument that morals are constructs of the times in which we will and have evolved much as human beings have over the ages, but that this is not necessarily a good thing because it is meant as a manner of preventing others from having control over us. This is because people inherently wish to exercise power over others and morals are a way of leveling things off so that the strongest members of society do not dominate, as Nietzsche emphasizes, The pathos of nobility and distance, as mentioned, the lasting and domineering feeling, †¦something total and complete, of a higher ruling nature in relation to a lower nature, to an beneath—that is the origin of the opposition between good and bad. (The right of the master to give names extends so far that we could permit ourselves to grasp the origin of language itself as an expression of the power of the rulers: they say that is such and such, seal every object and event with a sound and, in so doing, take possession of it.) (Nietzsche) In the Genealogy of Morals, Friedrich Nietzsche presents his idea about the morality of human beings and why it is flawed: Nietzsche begins by discounting many of society’s assumptions on how they function in life, as he believes that we tend to view things as having inherent meanings But all purposes, all uses, are only signs that a will to power has become master over something †¦with less power and has stamped on it its own meaning of some function, and the entire history of a thing, an organ, a practice can by this process be seen as a continuing chain of signs of constantly new interpretations and adjustments, whose causes need not be connected to each other—they rather follow and take over from each other under merely contingent circumstances. (Nietzsche) Nietzsche uses punishment as an example in this case, as human beings tend to believe that punishment is an action that happens to a person as a result of that person doing something that he or she deserves to be punished, although counter to this Nietzsche also states that suffering is meaningless and therefore, punishment may also with Nietzche’s own philosophy be meaningless. He would argue that punishment is completely separate from this, however, as punishment is very often used as a way of showing off one’s power or in some cases, as an act of cruelty. This suggests that the punishment does not always fit the crime, as the clichà © is written, so those two things should not necessarily be associated with each other. It cannot be understood how these two things are the same thing, so it is necessary to keep them separate. Nietzsche then continues this argument to show how morality has arrived at the point that it is at right now. Nietzsche argues that all of existence, especially in human beings, is a struggle between different wills for the feeling of power. This means that society wishes to have some sort of control over their own lives and also over the lives of others. This is why competition and the nature of this in man is so prevalent in society, Rather, that occurs for the first time with the collapse of aristocratic value judgments, when this entire contrast between egoistic and unegoistic pressed itself ever more strongly into human awareness—it is, to use my own words, the instinct of the herd which, through this contrast, finally gets its word (and its words). And even so, it took a long time until this instinct in the masses became ruler, with the result that moral evaluation got downright hung up and bogged down on this opposition (as is the case, for example, in modern Europe: today the prejudice that takes moralistic, unegoistic, dà ©sintà ©ressà © [disinterested] as equally valuable ideas already governs, with the force of a fixed idea and a disease of the brain). (Nietzsche) It is all a competition to achieve this power, even if there is no physical reward for winning these competitions. Nietzsche shows the constant changing of the ideologies of good and bad by stating that in past generations, the concept of good was defined by the strongest people in society. In barbaric times, anything that the stronger members of society did was defined as good, while the weaker members of society were seen as bad. This is not something that we would agree upon today, but members of these past societies would not agree with the way we do things either. Therefore, Nietzsche believes that to give anything an absolute interpretation does not work because as the times change, so will this interpretation. It is wills which define this, so as wills change, so will the apparent truth. If it is truly desirable to have free will, therefore, a person must not believe in any absolutes, but rather view the world as a constantly changing place and let our wills define the things that are occurring around and in society. This includes looking at things from as many different perspectives as possible in order to decide contingently upon personal perspectives which viewpoint a person wishes to make. This can also be applied to morality as, since nothing is absolute, morals are constantly changing as well. Morality is not something that was passed down from God to human beings, but is rather something that has evolved and changed since the beginning of time and will continue to do so. The only thing that has not change in human beings is that they inherently have the desire to achieve more power over their fellow human beings, because of the existence of free wills. This means that the present morality that human beings possess has been born due to hatred for those things that are stronger in the presence of society. Nietzsche argues that a person will have fear of things that could possibly have power over them, so a person must have developed this moral code in order to protect themselves from the stronger members of society. Nietzsche believes that a person must embrace these animalistic instincts because a person is currently hurting themselves by repressing them. Work Cited Cooper, J.M.   Plato Complete Works.   Hackett Publishing Company.   1997. Descartes, Rene. n.d. â€Å"Meditations on First Philosophy.† 10 March 2008 http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/descartes/meditations/meditations.html Mill, John Stuart.   Utilitarianism.   Online.   10 March 2008:  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   http://ethics.sandiego.edu/utilitarianism.html Nietzsche, F.   Genealogy of Morals.   Online.   10 March 2008.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   http://books.google.com/books?id=OwGPCsLiBlwCdq=nietzsche+genealogy+of+mor  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   lspg=PP1ots=rTBJrGtorHsig=vLolmBFHWUdXa7z8_CxzfIlj18Ahl=enprev=h  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   tp://www.google.com/search?hl=enclient=firefox-arls=org.mozilla:en  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   US:officialhs=ymYpwst=1sa=Xoi=spellresnum=0ct=resultcd=1q=Nietz  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   che+genealogy+of+moralsspell=1oi=printct=titlecad=one-book-with-thumbnail Rossi, Phillip. â€Å"Kant’s Philosophy of religion†. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. June  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   2004. 10 March 2008. URL: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-religion/