Darwin and Social Darwinism Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Darwin and Social Darwinism - Essay Example Owing to the general environment and direction of knowledge in the era, Lamarck’s theoretical perspective surfaced as a dominant conjectural framework on the matter during the timeframe. Lamarck’s comprehension of life forms suggested that the species’ desire to adapt perfectly and successfully into the environment prompted the utilization of their body parts in a certain manner which would eventually impact their overall structures, depending upon how the body parts were used (Schlinger and Poling 75). The crux of this comprehension postulates that these structural changes are such that they can be transported to the progeny of the species as per Lamarck’s argument. This theoretical model which is termed as the inheritance of acquired characteristics establishes the foundation for that a need for adapting within the wider context of the environment aided the species’ journey towards perfection where a point of perfection was eventually attained and the transformation of life forms ceased to exist at that stage (Schlinger and Poling 75). However, the weakness of Lamarck’s suggestions lies in a lack or even scarcity of evidence whic h should be presented so that his findings can be marked with the stamp of validity. Indeed even regular observations of individuals and their offspring can shed light on the fact that the physical traits of an athlete cannot be passed upon to his/her child in the form of agility and dexterity if the offspring does not expend similar effort to attain the desired outcomes. Schlinger and Poling understand that Darwin’s theoretical premise was developed as a consequence his journey on H.M.S Beagle which allowed him to explore the vastness of life forms and creations that had previously remained unexplored (76). Thus, a strong point of disagreement between Darwin’s theory of natural selection and Lamarck’s stance on

Poem Analysis- Robert Fross; Robert Browning; Anne Bradstreet Essay Example for Free

Poem Analysis- Robert Fross; Robert Browning; Anne Bradstreet Essay Robert Frost, â€Å"Out,Out—â€Å" 1. In line 15, Frost describes the saw as being sinister. He infers that the saw has a mind of its own, by stating that the saw jumped out of the boy’s hand and cut the boy’s hand terribly. Frost also makes it seem as if the saw is in a way, like a friend. He does this by demonstrating that using the saw is an advantage for the boy because it is making his job ten times easier. Without the saw, the boy would spend hours cutting through the wood. 2. In Frost’s poem, the people that surround the boy must be his family. It could also very much be friends, or members of his community, along with the doctor and nurses working on his injury. The tone of the poem leads me to conclude that the â€Å"they† in the poem weren’t very surprised or moved by the boy’s injury, or death, because this might have happened before, or they just didn’t care for the boy. 3. Frost’s reference to Macbeth’ contributes to my understanding of â€Å"Out, Out-â€Å"that this poem’s theme is about death. From the reference to Shakespeare play, Macbeth, I can expect read about someone dying, an unexpected death. In my opinion, the theme of this poem is the cruel, emotionless, merciless relationships adults had with their children back then in America. Children weren’t given the opportunity to enjoy their childhood. They had many responsibilities and tasks to fulfill. 4. Robert Frost’s â€Å"Out, Out-‘† resembles the medieval folk ballad, â€Å"Sir Patrick Spence,† in its theme. Both poems are relaying a message about death. In Frost’s poem, the boy acknowledges the fact that he is going to die when he realizes he is losing a lot of blood. In â€Å"Sir Patrick Spence,† the sailor realizes he is coming face to face with death when he reads the letter the king has sent to him. Both of the protagonists in the poems are on the verge of dying a sudden, unexpected death. Robert Browning, â€Å"My Last Duchess,† 1. Throughout the entire poem, it is almost impossible allocate who the Duke is addressing. Towards the end of the poem, lines 49-52, it is disclosed that the Duke is speaking to a servant, or worker of a Count. This specific Count seems to have the Duke interest, because he wants to marry the Count’s daughter. The Duke appears to be hosting some sort of gathering in his home. I inferred this from lines 47 and 48. 2. Throughout the poem, the Duke emphasizes on his last Duchess, kindness and flirtatious attitude. In the Duke’s opinion, and observance, the Duchess was easily impressed, and fulfilled. Everything and anything made her happy. She would always say thank you to anyone, and everyone that would bring her things, or do things for her. The Duke interprets the Duchess’ kindness, and mannered behavior as flirtatious, which leads to his distrust in her. Based on the Dukes description, the Duchess, in my eyes was a well mannered woman. She wasn’t mean, or sought herself above anyone. Which is how he, the Duke wanted her to act. He wished she’d be a greedier or unfulfilled character. 3. In lines 34-41, the Duke explains why he never sought to confront his Duchess on her behavior. He states he didn’t have the eloquent skills to do so. He claims that he didn’t posses the speech to confront her. â€Å"Who’d stoop to blame/This sort of trifling? Even had you skill/ In speech-(which I have not)-to make your will/† This in my opinion is a lame excuse. I believe that he was simply afraid of confrontation. The Duke also states that if he had confronted the Duchess on her behavior, she would have made an excuse for her actions. 4. From this poem, I conclude that the Duke himself murdered, or gave orders to murder his Duchess. There is no clear evidence to support this, but I believe it is a clear interpretation. The poet should have included the Duchess’ fate in the poem. It would leave little room to assume her fate. 5. Robert Browning makes a direct connection between the Duke’s art collection, and the attitude towards his wife. The Duke has the portrait of his wife; his last Duchess displayed in his home, behind a curtain. A curtain, which only he can draw back, or remove. In other words, he, the Duke, controls the Duchess; or he wishes to control his Duchess. The Duke wouldn’t want anyone to see the portrait of his Duchess, with her blushed cheeks, unless he was there. The same can be inferred from the last few lines of the poem, line 54-55, â€Å"Notice Neptune, though,/Taming a sea-horse, thought a rarity,/ Which Claus of Innsbruck cast in bronze for me!† The Duke is implying, that he himself is Neptune, and his last Duchess is the sea-horse. No one could have imagined that a sea-horse could be tamed, but Neptune achieved it. Identical to the way that the last Duchess herself was tamed. Adrienne Rich, â€Å"Aunt Jennifer’s Tigers,† In her poem, â€Å"Aunt Jennifer’s Tigers,† Adrienne is describing the protagonist’s feelings towards her marriage. In lines 9-10, the protagonist feels that she is a prisoner of her marriage, and will only be set free when she dies. The protagonist uses the tigers as a symbol of who she wished she could be. In the first stanza of the poem, Adrienne describes the tigers as being un-fearful of the men. A trait she wishes she possessed. Sharon Olds, â€Å"Rite of Passage,† 1. The speaker describes the first-grade boys at her son’s birthday party as men. Their behavior is pure imitation of the men they have been around. Her description of them is ironic, because how can first-graders realistically be grown men? She also uses the concept of violence a lot in the poem. 2. In the last two lines of the poem, the author compares the first-graders to generals, and states that they are playing war. This is ironic, because she is inferring how (grown) men glorify war. The first-graders are innocent and naà ¯ve to the truth behind war. They don’t understand the sadness, and deaths behind it. To them, it is a reason to celebrate and rejoice. What is even more ironic, are the lines prior to the last two lines of the poem. The speaker quotes what the little boy has said. In line 22, â€Å"We could easily kill a two-year-old†. Little boys should not be speaking of death. But just like (grown) man boost up their ego by feeling superior to others and educing violence, these first-graders are doing the same. 3. From line 15-20, the mother describes her son as being innocent. She paints her son to be better than the other first-graders, because she seeks him out to be more mature than they are. Throughout the rest of the poem, due to the speaker’s description of her son, it can be inferred that the speaker’s on is the leader of the group. He is the mediator; the peace maker. Suji Kwock Kim, â€Å"Monologue for an Onion,† 1. The tone of this poem is mocking, and judgmental. It implies that humans live their lives chasing false hopes; searching for a truth that does not exist. The poet symbolizes this by using the analogy of shaving an onion to get to its heart; searching for a heart that does not exist. It depicts that humans are hopeless, and helpless. Humans are viewed as lost creatures. The speaker expresses hostility towards the human. It begins to mock humans by describing them as an idiot, thirsty (to find the truth), soulless, foolish, and destined to die. The speaker does this by comparing how a human cuts an onion over and over again, even though the onion makes the cutter cry relentlessly. 2. In line two, â€Å"I mean nothing† is projected to be interpreted on two ways, â€Å"intend†, and â€Å"signify. The poet is saying that the onion’s intentions aren’t to make the â€Å"cutter/human† cry. As the onion is cut, it forces the cutter’s eyes to fill up with tears. A reaction that is not intended, but occurs automatically. The poet also uses the phrase â€Å"I mean nothing† to symbolize that the onion feels like it is no one. It feels as if it has no value, or meaning of existence. 3. If someone said this to me, it would prove how close-minded and naà ¯ve they are. Poems generally convey a meaning far beyond what the poem explicitly reads. In poetry, you must read between the lines to understand the underlying significance of the poem. The poet is using the analogy of an onion’s (chemical) reaction to a human’s tear ducts to deploy how foolish human beings can be, and are. Continuing to cut through an onion, knowing that the onion will force us to cry is foolish. This simple action is identical to human life. Human’s cut through life searching for a truth they never attain. 4. I personally feel that the author is trying to give everyone a wake-up call in this poem. Suji Kwock Kim is trying to give her readers a few words of wisdom. She is exploring, and revealing a new approach on how one should view the world. Trying to encourage her readers to refrain from what an onion cutter is doing: cutting away at life causing them harm. Anne Bradstreet, â€Å"The Author to Her Book† Anne Bradstreet’s poem, â€Å"The Author to Her Book† is a complex narrative concerning the conflicting emotions and thoughts an author can have for a piece of literature he or she has written. Through metaphor and personification, Bradstreet examines the similarities between being a parent and being an author. The love, discouragement, and fear that all come into play when something is going to be revealed to the world at large are present in both a parent and a writer. Metaphor is used to relate authorship to parenthood in order to convey to the reader the complex emotions the narrator is feeling about sending a book he or she wrote out into the world. As the narrator points out, â€Å"Thou ill-formed offspring of my feeble brain†, drawing the parallel between the author and a parent and all of the complicated emotions that go with it (line 1). The narrator refers to the book-child as â€Å"My rambling brat†, revealing the negative side of the emotion (l ine 7). As a frustrated parent with a child who will not behave, so the narrator feels towards the book because it is not as perfect as he or she would want and the narrator sees this as a reflection upon the author, just as a parent would see a naughty child as a reflection on themselves. But later the narrator writes, â€Å"Yet being mine own †¦ affection would thy/Thy blemishes amend† demonstrating the conflicting emotions associated with love (lines 10-11). The metaphor of the book as a child reflects the conflicting emotions of the narrator as the book is seen as an extension of the narrator, just as a child is seen as a reflection of a parent. Personification of the book as a child creates empathy within the reader and makes it easier for the reader to relate to the anguish and love felt by the narrator. â€Å"I washed thy face† the narrator writes, speaking to the book, giving it life even as the book’s qualities as an inanimate object are examined (line 13). The narrator cares for the book’s presentation to the world just as a parent would care for the presentation of a child to the world. â€Å"I stretched thy joint to make thee even feet† the narrator writes, emphasizing the care needed for the book (line 15). The personification of the book and the metaphor of the book as a child work together to give the reader a full and complete understanding of the complex emotions felt by the narrator towards the book. The understanding needed and the guidance required to make the book the best possible so that it reflects well on the narrator is cast in light of parenthood and the ways in which a parents must care for and bring up a child. There is shame and the love that go along with an imperfect child, but it all is ultimately overshadowed by the pride felt in the final product.

FIFA Corruption Essays -- world cup, ethics committe, presidents

Fifa has made  £1,200,000,000 per year from sponsors, television and the World Cup. Fifa’s latest financial amount over the four years to the end of 2010 show the organisation has earned more than four billion. That's an increase of fifty-nine percent over the previous four year stretch which included the World Cup in Germany (BBC, pars. 1). Its broadcast rights and marketing which are leading the boom of course, and Fifa is riding the wave that's thrown the Premier League skywards too (BBC, pars. 2). Fifa has banked $631m to its reserves, which now stand at $1.2 billion (BBC, pars. 3). Fifa says of the money it raised, seventy percent was ploughed back into the game by staging tournaments and investing in projects. Fifa put $794m into football development, including its 'Goal' and 'Win in Africa' projects (BBC, pars. 4). More than $350m has been handed out to the member FAs, under what's called the Financial Assistance Programme (BBC, pars. 5) FIFA was first created in the year 1904 and since then they have a long history about how soccer became a worldwide sport. The history of FIFA begins after an international soccer match played between France and Belgium, taking place in Brussels, Belgium on 1 May, 1904. The French and Belgium soccer players decided that it would be a good idea to create a soccer association to make rules of soccer.So they created the Federation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) which is now one of the most famous football associations in the world. FIFA was founded in the rear of the headquarters of the Union Franà §aise de Sports Athlà ©tiques at the Rue Saint Honorà © 229 in Paris on 21 May 1904(CFH, pars. 1). The Fà ©dà ©ration Internationale de Football Association(FIFA) was named by the French d... ...History of Fifa† FIFA.com, Web. 18 Feb. 2014 Hughes, Rob. â€Å"One by One , Those Atop FIFA Are Falling† The New York Times, Web. 7 Feb. 2014 â€Å"History of FIFA-More associations follow† FIFA.com, Web. 18 Feb. 2014 Tannenwald, Jonathan. â€Å"FIFA's Sepp Blatter Qatar won 2022 World Cup bid with political influence† Philly Sports, Web. 7 Feb. 2014 â€Å"Fifa Origin† Essoccer.com, Web. 17 Feb. 2014 â€Å"Fifa History† Essocer.com, Web. 17 Feb. 2014

You Don’t Know Jack: An Analysis

Euthanasia has been a debatable issue since one's perception of this idea could depend on different factors such as religion, culture, and even personal life experiences. DRP. Jack Savoring witnessed how his mother suffered in agony with her disease, describing the pain as a toothache In all your bones. Just Imagine how painful that is. At that time, he cannot do anything to alleviate the pain his mother is going through. He felt lost. That's how he felt responsible in aiding those people who are terminally ill.For him, it's not about killing someone. It's understanding that Hess patients have gone through a lot, and listening to their wish to end the pain rather than continue living but you're actually dying. Another point Is that he's doing it free of charge. He used his own resources to â€Å"help† his patients. There is no personal gain to him, but it is rather an act of service. It may not be acceptable to many but he was doing It from the standpoint of a medical person, of a son who understood what It's Like for someone to live fighting off a disease.II. â€Å"Oh, the lingering of death. What a business. Keep death alive. Hospitals don't make money otherwise. Drug companies either. If you're rich and you have the money, you can pay to die. But the poor, they can only afford to suck It out and suffer. † This quote from the movie truthfully states that the medical industry is also a business. Most people are in it to save lives or improve health. But there are others who see it as a moneymaking opportunity. To be honest, hospitals and drug companies don't make money when no one Is sick.These businesses â€Å"keep death alive†. A patient may still be alive but only because he/she Is still In the process of fighting off death. But the reality is that this person is actually dying compared to cost of us (since all of us are in one way or another living and dying at the same time). Rich people can afford the operation, treatment, hospitaliz ing bills, and drugs so their way of dying bearable compared to those who can't. Ill. â€Å"To each person, their own way of death – with dignity. † At this age, I now look at suicide as something sad and depressing.We now know for a fact that some people commit suicide because of psychological depression thinking that this Is the only way out. We feel sad for them, and think on how could the people around them possibly changed their decision. I remember years back when we hear of someone omitting suicide, one of the many things that pop out of our heads is the question â€Å"Why? ‘ Followed by a questioning thought If this person will still go to heaven because he/she lived a good life, or if he/she will go to hell because to be straight forward, it's murder of one's self.Euthanasia gives the patient liberty to decide for his/her own life. We can try, but the truth is, none of us can fully comprehend someone else's thoughts. We will never understand how a perso n feels, or how much pain they're going through so who are we to Judge? 1 OFF to use abundantly together with the freedom to decide on what to do it. It is human to choose pleasure, enjoyment, and happiness. But sometimes, life will not offer these choices. There will be pain, suffering and sadness.The movie mentioned a religious dogma that makes euthanasia unethical: â€Å"God almighty who wills us to suffer† This teaching goes against the objective of euthanasia to relive the patient pain and suffering making it morally wrong. On the contrary, God gave us the freedom to decide. It is in dying that we can union with him. The belief is that we should always let nature take it's own course V. Crime vs.. Civil Rights: â€Å"When a law is deemed immoral by you, you must disobey it. Medicine and Law are two of the most influential and powerful disciplines in the world.It is studied to help serve humanity but sometimes they clash for their arguments come from diverse objectives. Civil rights is about personal liberty-? patients have the discretion to seek suicide assistance making euthanasia a result of one's personal decision and freedom to decide for his life. But the law does not make it legal to kill someone even with the patient's consent. Dying is always easier to comprehend and acceptable if it's a natural death when no other human is held responsible.

Literary research

Nathan Furr finds many reasons for doing literary research.   He summarizes these to be â€Å"Experiencing the Other, learning compassion and service, gaining insight into ourselves, finding new ways of thinking, understanding and writing more clearly, and uncovering the joy of discovery and creation† (Furr, 3).   To these he also adds essentially, the power of literary research to combat misinformation.   Generally, Furr’s reasons are similar to my own; however, I would make some changes to his conclusions. Two of Furr’s claims with which I unequivocally agree are that literary research allows one the ability of â€Å"understanding and writing more clearly† as well as a major reason for literary research being â€Å"uncovering the joy of discovery and creation.† These two reasons are of key importance because the detective aspect of literary research is a large part of what makes it so appealing to me.   By extension, a pile of research serves little value even if the research was conducted merely out of my own curiosity because the compiling, organizing, and writing are all essential components in answering the initial question.   Without the writing forcing me to synthesize the facts I have discovered and draw coherent conclusions, the research itself as well as whatever conclusions I drew are more easily forgotten. The first reason Furr lists is â€Å"experiencing the Other.†Ã‚   While this does seem like a valuable reason, I would more likely phrase it as â€Å"expanding one’s world view.†Ã‚   At least for me, this broader category makes more sense.   In the example he gives about the man from Poland, I think not only do we get to see the world from his perspective, but through oral histories like this we gain a valuable insight into the time and place described.   Thinking of it as experiencing the Other feels uncomfortable to me in that it seems to separate the researcher from the research subject, and as I think Furr would agree, that distance is exactly what literary research often seeks to minimize. While Furr’s claim that literary research can aid in â€Å"finding new ways of thinking,† I had difficulty with his example of research for buying a computer.   At the end of this paragraph, he summarizes the process of research saying, â€Å"We start with a problem or question, being researching, follow leads, assemble materials, and then create a product† (Furr, 2).   I agree that this is how research is conducted; however, is that really finding a new way of thinking?   It seems more like gathering information to form a conclusion and it should thus be labeled something more like â€Å"providing information.† I think this is especially true because, aside from his example, literary research does not necessarily facilitate the discovery of new ways of thinking.   I think it is possible that one could research a topic and emerge with a legitimate conclusion or â€Å"product† but without any new way of thinking about the problem beyond having found a satisfactory conclusion.   Ideally, this would not be the case.   Anyone conducting literary research would discover a new way of seeing a problem, but I think it is too broad a generalization to assume that this is always true.   At any rate, I think if this is truly what Mr. Furr is asserting, it would fit better, for me, into the â€Å"expanding one’s world view† category. Furr also sees â€Å"gaining insight into ourselves† as another reason for doing literary research.   In describing this reason, Furr states that through literary research many people seek to essentially â€Å"unlocking what we have always known and affirming it to ourselves. (Furr, 2). This seems to be Furr’s most direct reference to researcher bias.   I found his lack of a full discussion of this topic to be a major shortcoming of his article.   True, research in it most basic form involves uncovering information, but the world—in literary and historical senses as well as many others—is a very complex web of thoughts, experiences, and interpretations. I would argue that there is no one Truth, and the belief in such a thing is naà ¯ve.   The most obvious case would be the Bible.   Many different people seek to use the Bible to support very different claims.   Often passages sighted are contradictory and can easily support conflicting contentions.   The literary researcher does uncover information, but what is uncovered is only part of the story.   Which part is uncovered is largely reliant upon the sources one utilizes. The selection of source is also a product of bias.   For example, I would not use a Hindi newspaper, nor would I look to an un-translated Mayan text.   These two can be seen as extremes because of linguistic inaccessibility, but in doing research we generally gravitate toward sources with which we are comfortable whether books, popular media, scholarly articles, newspapers, oral histories, or any number of available source material. Beyond comfort with sources, I think Furr’s assertion falters in that it does not explicitly take into account that researchers find what they seek.   This affirming of one’s own beliefs is key to researcher bias because, for example, people who want to claim that the Holocaust never happened, will do so regardless of any information others try to point out to them.   Further, they will conduct their own research and doubtless find material that supports their conclusion, however false that conclusion may seem to be. Furr discusses the power of misinformation, but fails to consider the fact that many people do research and come up with unpopular conclusions that fly in the face of nearly all other findings.   Simply because we know it happened, when looking at the issue of the Holocaust we can claim that people denying it existence are spreading misinformation, but with more complex issues, and issues for which there are not survivors, it becomes clear that one person’s misinformation can be another’s highly researched cutting-edge discovery.   It all depends on where you look and what you are hoping to find. Another of Furr’s reasons for literary research—learning compassion and service—seems a bit optimistic to me.   Of course, we would like to believe that knowledge conquers darkness, but again compassion is a highly subjective issue.   Many people research literature, science, and history either explicitly in search of or resulting in reasons to assert their own superiority and use to oppress others.   One example would be people who researched, and still do research, on the biological inferiority of minorities to perpetuate and legitimize racist practices.   Finding compassion in such research is difficult if not impossible. In terms of service though, I enjoyed Furr’s claim that research is an ethical action.   While again this statement seems a bit simplistic, I think the argument he quotes from Altick and Fenstermaker that literary research can serve to extend â€Å"the traditional boundaries of scholarly and critical interest† is a valid one (Furr, 2).   While I do find Furr’s claims to be optimistic, I agree that in the best-case scenarios they are both true and of extreme value, but it is important to highlight some possibilities for which his arguments do not seem to account. I do agree that there are many important reasons both personal and social to undertake literary research.   Perhaps the strongest impetus for doing research is curiosity, â€Å"is that so?   I’ll look it up.†Ã‚   On an individual level when someone makes a seemingly unrealistic claim, literary research is an important tool in satisfying curiosity and quelling argument. Investigating misinformation is also very valuable on a larger social level.   This calls to mind the Program on International Policy Attitudes 2003 study that surveyed Americans to determine their rate of misperception about three issues surrounding the Gulf War and found that 80% Fox News viewers held at least one of the misperceptions (PIPA, 13).   To me, this illustrates the importance of literary research more than any other example. If one accepts information from one source uncritically, then they are completely at the mercy of that source’s biases.   While I believe it is true that a researcher is limited by their own biases, at least those biases are their own.   Exposure to sources with different biases is important in opening up new avenues of inquiry, but undertaking literary research is vital to locating other biases and interpreting information provided by those sources.   Literary research then is the key to knowing not only one’s own mind, but understanding the minds of others, and thus one of the most valuable tools anyone can employ in developing intellectually, personally, and socially. Works Cited Furr, Nathan. Literary Research: The Importance of Process and Product. Kull, Steven. â€Å"Misperceptions, the Media, and the War in Iraq.† Pipa.com. 2 Oct. 2003. Program on International Policy Attitudes. 22 Dec. 2006 .   

Death Penalty Essays (551 words) - Capital Punishment, Law, Penology

Death Penalty Essays (551 words) - Capital Punishment, Law, Penology Death Penalty The United states is the only western democracy that still practices capital punishment. There have been over 4050 executions since 1930. In 1994 alone, there were 257 executions in the United States. People who believe in capital punishment say that this dehumanizing process deters crime. This is false because the death penalty has been proven NOT to deter crime. In fact, during the 1980s, states practicing the death penalty averaged an annual rate of 7.5 criminal homicides per 100,000, while abolition states averaged a rate of 7.4 per 100,000. That means murder was actually MORE common in states that use the death penalty. Criminals irrationally perform crimes, therefore, life imprisonment ought to deter a rational person itself. Besides, no criminal commits a crime if he believes he will be caught. The death penalty is morally incorrect. Why do governments kill people to show other people that killing is wrong? Would society allow rape as the penalty for rape or the burning of arsonists homes as the penalty for arson. Every time we execute someone, we sink to the same level as the common killer. What is the difference between the state killing and an individual killing? The end result is the same....one more dead body, one more set of grieving parents, and one more cemetery slot. Every time we execute someone, we are desensitizing the value of human life. The death penalty is not now, nor has it ever been a more economical alternative to life imprisonment. A study by the New York State Defenders Association showed that the cost of a capital trial ALONE is more than double the cost of life imprisonment. They also concluded that a death penalty case costs approximately 42 percent more than a case resulting in a non-death sentence. Since 1976 the United States has spent 700 million dollars in it. Another reason to get rid of the death penalty is the possibility of error. Sometimes a person might be put to death who is innocent. At least 23 people have been executed who did not commit the crime they were accused of. And that is only those that we know of. When we execute an innocent person, the real killer is still on the streets, ready to victimize someone else. If the innocent person is executed then the case is closed forever. Or, at least until someone else gets killed by the real perpetrator. If the death penalty is not an effective way to deter crime, then what is? The only way is to prevent it from happening rather that enforce harsh punishment to scare off potential crimes. New York lowered crime rates by putting more police officers on the street, not by longer jail terms or death penalty. This was effective because if you think about it, if I was to rob a store, first I would look to see if any police officers were around. If I would see one riding around the block and another patrolling the streets, I would think twice about it. Also, the availability of handguns plays a major role in murder rates. It is a lot easier to kill someone by putting one bullet in their head rather than stabbing or strangling someone. If we decrease the availability of handguns then I guarantee there will be less murders. There are many ways to do it, but it is definitely time to, once and for all, EXECUTE the death penalty.

Frankenstein playing God Essays

Frankenstein playing God Essays Frankenstein playing God Paper Frankenstein playing God Paper Essay Topic: Frankenstein There are a number of reasons that support the opinion that the creature is a monster; his atrocious appearance unquestionably resembles that of an inhuman being, his fiendish murders are outrageous and disgraceful, and his genesis was simply an experiment of Frankensteins. However, as the reader continues through the novel they begin to realise that despite being cursed with a ghastly appearance, the creature has the personality of a human. He endures feelings of both utter compassion and uncontrollable fury. He can distinguish between good and evil. And his despicable acts can almost be excused as peoples iniquitous behaviour filled him with complete indignation as they failed to even share pleasantries with him. Therefore the creature is human in every way except for his grotesque appearance. In fact if the creature was privileged with a normal exterior then he would be no different from an infant entering the world; he has a thirst for knowledge, he desires a loved one, and he is dramatically influenced by his surroundings. Therefore, Mary Shelley creates the question: What possesses the creature to behave in such a despicable way? I believe the answer is the abysmal way in which humans behave towards him. If people didnt behave in such a hostile manner then there is no question in my mind that the creature would have behaved no differently to a typical human being. Throughout the novel the creature is consistently burdened by his hideous appearance. : At the creatures creation Frankenstein describes his exterior in detail: His yellow skin scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath; his hair was of a lustrous black, and flowing; his teeth of a pearly whiteness; but these luxuriances only formed a more horrid contrast with his watery eyes, that seemed almost of the same colour as the dun white sockets in which they were set, his shrivelled complexion and straight black lips. This clearly describes an abhorrent and monstrous exterior where even the few human qualities detract from his overall appearance. The muscles and arteries protruding through the yellow skin, the peculiar eyes and sockets, and the repulsive lips create a disturbing imagine, however its the human qualities of the white teeth and lustrous black hair that make his appearance sound so sickening, as if qualities that a human desire simply worsen his overall exterior then he must be the most inexcusably grotesque creature ever created. However, the above quote is not the only description we have of the creatures appearance. We learn how frightfully hideous the creature really is when he first views his reflection. At first I started back, unable to believe that it was indeed I who was reflected in the mirror; and when I became fully convinced that I was in reality the monster that I am, I was filled with the bitterest sensations of despondence and mortification. The creature is not upset or saddened by his appearance but mortified. He is so revolting that his reflection caused him to start back in fright. However as the creature detests his appearance this quote can be used as evidence supporting the point that he is a human, as all humans desire a more attractive exterior. Appearance is meaningless to a monster, as it does not long for a companion, whereas a human does. Therefore I believe this quote supports the point that he is a human. The best passage, however, in the novel to describe how foul the creature really looks is when the cottagers observe him; Who can describe their horror and consternation on beholding me? Agatha fainted; and Safie, unable to attend to her friend, rushed out of the cottage. This quotation illustrates how nauseating the creature is as he immediately alarms anyone who glimpses at him. This explains that he is not just ugly or unattractive but so alien that people cannot even sustain consciousness when they come into contact with him. This is a definitely a reason supporting the idea that the creature is a monster. However, although his exterior is monstrous, that does not make him a monster. We learn that the creature has the capability to distinguish between right and wrong; I did not strive to control myself. This illustrates that the creature has the ability to control his emotions which is a trait that a monster lacks. The language the creature used portrays a character showing remorse, as he does not use the casual word; didnt he used the words; did not. If he had said this in a casual way it would insinuate that the creature shows no remorse and thinks of the disgraceful act as a usual occurrence. However, as he spoke in a formal and powerful manner, he shows regret and remorse. In the creatures narrative we learn that the creature desires more than just the raw animal needs of warmth, food and water. Instead, he behaves similar to an infant learning about his surroundings. The creature describes the difficulty of walking, eating and speaking. He describes his thoughts when he comes into contact with fire; In my joy I thrust my hand into the live embers, but quickly drew it out again with a cry of pain. How strange, I thought, that the same cause should produce such opposite effects! This is vital evidence that the creature is human as he is not angered by the pain as a monster would, but is simply curious; How strange. Not only is the creature curious about his surroundings, but he gains a thirst for knowledge. He has a clear interest in the world. He wants to know why the cottagers are both content and miserable at times. He wants to know where hes placed on the social hierarchy. He wants to discover the history of earth. Therefore when the book Ruins of Empire came into his possession he studied it fervently, which excited a mixture of feelings. This is definitive evidence that the creatures personality is human, as not only does he have a keen interest in knowledge but the tales animated feelings of both compassion and fury as he empathized with the characters. A monster is selfish. It cannot understand feelings of compassion as it cannot empathize. It lives to eat, drink and sleep and has no other interests. The creature has acquired a passionate interest in knowledge and is capable of feelings of compassion. Therefore, despite having the appearance of a monster, he has the personality of a human being. The creatures narrative of himself is a complete contrast to Frankensteins narrative of the creature. Frankenstein tells the story of a vile monster thoughtlessly killing innocent people.