Hope: Inferiority Complex and Separate Ingredients Essay

I’ve always found that misconceptions can affect attitude. Sometimes we get too wrapped up in life’s details. The separate ingredients of culture and lifestyle captivate us so throughly that we lose our perspective on life itself. We scurry like mice through a hedge maze–the real beauty of life lies just beyond the bushes, and what is that beauty? Simplicity is what it is. As T. Allen Culpepper, the author of The Myth of Inferiority explains in his article, hope quickly grows dim when the obstecales of life throw their knock-out punches ( Culpepper, 300) Simplicity is the secret key that unlocks the shackles of confusion, and inferiority. and Confusion and inferiority is what we visualize so much of life to be? In some cases, and without hope, life nearly becomes as difficult as a Chinese fire drill. People need a new outlook; the outlook of faith, simple childlike faith. We need to hold onto hope. We should not allow low performance standards sloppy work, plagiarism, misseddeadlines, chronic absence, and other academic sins because so many people claimto have hard lives (Culpepper. pg. 300). Hope grows dim very fast when the strange twists of life throw their knock-out punches. After being badly beaten by pain or grief or loss, who cares about hope anyway? Who is excited about beginning again? The answer is almost nobody. Like a boxer who has taken eleven rounds of pummeling that last fall. to the canvas feels good. It feels good enough to keep a dizzy man down. Fighting four more rounds loses its luster, but why does he want so badly to get up? The answer is he still hopes to win. As Culpepper states, to lower our standards is to accept the false assumption that students at community colleges are inferior (Culpepper pg. 301). We are too easily buffaloed by our emotions. We immediately give in to the whims of our feelings therfore we can quickly lose our sense of worth. Millions of people like to be frightened by horror movies or scary tales. They relish reading anything with the element of suspense. Fictional suspense can be entertaining and healthy. However, we must not listen to the fictional fears our emotions so often create for us. We have to keep a real strongold in this life.

Private Schools Capital Campaigns

Private Schools Capital Campaigns Many schools want to keep their tuitions as low as possible to attract the most diverse student and parent body possible, so raising their tuition costs is not always an option.  Private schools do not cover all of their operating expenses from tuition payments; in fact, at many schools, tuition payments alone only cover about 60-80% of operating expenses, and therefore schools must also use  fundraising efforts  to cover their daily expenses. But what about special needs? Schools also need to raise money for future expenses, and to increase their endowments. Private schools typically have an Annual Fund, which is a set amount of money that the school raises each year to cover the costs of educating their students that are not met by tuition and fees. But what happens when theres an extenuating need for renovation of facilities or purchase of expensive equipment? Those needs are typically met by what is called a Capital Campaign, a fundraising effort designed to cover the massive expense of renovating their current buildings, constructing new buildings, greatly enhancing financial aid budgets and adding to their endowments. But what makes a Capital Campaign successful? Lets look at what one school did to lead one of the most successful Capital Campaigns in private schools. The Westminster Schools’ Capital Campaign The Westminster Schools, a co-ed Christian school in Atlanta, Georgia, for students in pre-first through twelfth grade, led one of the most successful private school capital campaigns in recent years. Westminster is one of only a few private schools that have managed to raise over $100 million as part of a capital campaign; the school has the largest endowment of any non-boarding school in the nation. Westminster Schools enrolls over 1,800 students on its 180-acre campus. About 26% of the students represent people of color, and 15% of students receive need-based financial aid. The school was founded in 1951 as a reorganization of the North Avenue Presbyterian School, a girls’ school. In 1953, the Washington Seminary, a girls’ school founded in 1878 that was the alma mater of Gone with the Wind author Margaret Mitchell, also merged with Westminster. Westminster Schools has long been a pioneer in Southeastern private schools, as it hosted a pilot program for advanced s tudies that eventually became Advanced Placement or AP coursework offered by the College Board, and it was also one of the first schools in the South to integrate in the 1960s. According to its press release, Westminster Schools launched a capital campaign in October of 2006 and completed it in January of 2011, having raised $101.4 million in the midst of a recession. The â€Å"Teaching for Tomorrow† campaign was an effort to secure the best teachers for the school in the years to come. More than 8,300 donors contributed to the capital campaign, among them current and past parents, alumni/ae, grandparents, friends, and local and national foundations. The President of the school, Bill Clarkson, credited the school’s focus on teaching with its success in raising funds. He believed that the campaign’s emphasis on excellence in teaching enabled the campaign to raise funds, even in difficult economic times. According to an article in the Atlanta Business Chronicle, $31.6 million from the Westminster Schools capital campaign will be dedicated to faculty hiring, $21.1 million to constructing a new junior high building, $8 million to continuing the school’s commitment to diversity, $2.3 million to promote global awareness, $10 million for community service programs, $18.8 million to foster annual giving, and $9.3 million in unrestricted endowment funding. The school’s current strategic plan calls for an increased focus on globalization, including teaching its students to thrive in an interconnected world; on technology, including teaching its students to understand how to deal with the increasing complexity of technology; and on educational research and conducting studies to determine whether teachers are using the most effective methods of instruction and whether the school’s current methods of assessment are truly helping students learn. As the school passes its 60th anniversary, the success of its capital campaign is helping it achieve its strategic goals. Article edited by  Stacy Jagodowski  -  stacyjago

Send this Essays

Send this Essays Send this Essay Send this Essay As we mark the four-year anniversary of the American-led invasion of Iraq, we must consider all the evidence before us and come to an educated conclusion as to the best course of action for America to pursue.   I believe strongly that America must withdraw from Iraq.   This paper will outline the many factors that I believe lead to this conclusion.It is not overly pessimistic to focus on the reasons for going to war with Iraq, because understand the beginning of a story can better illuminate its most ideal conclusion.   The actual reason for invading Iraq, however, is something that historians will attempt to articulate for decades to come.   Different people have very different perceptions of why we invaded Iraq, but all of the reasons start at a common point: 9/11.We know, as a matter of widely-accepted fact, that Saddam Hussein and his government played absolutely no role in the 9/11 attacks.   We know this.   We also know, however, that if it w ere not for 9/11, we would not have invaded Iraq.   How do we account for this discrepancy? There was no causality; Iraq did not cause 9/11.   There was, however, some sort of correlation, which held that Iraq had something, something to do with the terrorist threat as it was manifested by al-Qaeda on 9/11.The Bush Administration attempted to illustrate this alleged correlation by saying that Saddam Hussein was a terrorist.   Since the people who attacked us were also terrorists, they were somehow related.   In terms of evidence that Saddam Hussein had been involved in specific acts of terrorism against the United States, however, there simply was none.There was also the fact that Saddam Hussein was a secular dictator who had spent most of his career torturing and killing religious radicals and Islamist terrorists of the sort that attacked America on 9/11.   America and Saddam Hussein had a common enemy in radical Islamists.   That is why America supported Saddam Hussein for many years.In addition, it was alleged that Saddam had stockpiled vast quantities of chemical and biological weapons (WMD) since 1998, when United Nations weapons inspectors had left Iraq.   Again, however, there was no hard evidence of these assertions, only rumors and an understandable lack of trust in Saddam Hussein’s word.The case for war held that after 9/11, we must overthrow Saddam Hussein before he gives his WMD to terrorists.   The flaw with this case was that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11, there was no evidence of his cooperating with Islamist terrorists targeting America, and there was no evidence that he had WMD.So, in terms of the threat that Iraq posed to the United States, the only case that existed rested on huge leaps of faith and logic.   The second component to the case for war was that Saddam must be overthrown due to his brutality to the Iraqi people and due to the lack of democracy in the Middle East.   It was assumed that a lack of dem ocracy caused terrorism.   Unlike the case for WMD or ties to 9/11, this case was very easy for the American government to make.   No reasonable person could deny that Saddam Hussein was one of the most murderous leaders of the late 20th century, a sadist and a thug who belonged in a prison rather than a presidential palace.This, in part, is how America got sucked into this war.   Even if one did not believe all of the president’s assertions about the threat that Saddam Hussein posed to the United States, the idea of overthrowing this mass murderer was very appealing to most Americans.   The problem was that there was very little attention paid to the job that America would have in Iraq after Saddam was overthrown.Broadly speaking, the reasons given for war were the destruction of WMD stockpiles, the crushing of alleged terrorist groups in Iraq, the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, and the democratization of Iraq.   With these goals in mind, we will assess how the Unite d States has fared at each one and what the best course of action going forward should be.As we discovered after invading Iraq, Saddam Hussein had actually destroyed his WMD stockpiles in 1991.   This should be a major cause of embarrassment and concern for America’s intelligence agencies, but it can also serve as a relief to us in some sense.   The WMD threat is gone.   Saddam destroyed that threat himself twelve years before we invaded to do it for him.   Mission accomplished.As for overthrowing Saddam Hussein, that also has been achieved.   Saddam Hussein has been overthrown, captured, and tried and executed by his countrymen.   By definition, whatever threat Saddam Hussein may have posed to the United States in now gone.   So, again, mission accomplished.   If our only goals in Iraq were the limited and pragmatic ones of removing Saddam and his weapons, we could have declared victory and withdrawn from Iraq years ago.   We have other goals, however.   Reference to the brief list above tells us that the two outstanding tasks in Iraq are democratizing the country and riding it of terrorists.We must weigh whether we should stay in Iraq against the possibilities of achieving these final two goals and the costs this will entail.   I believe that, for a variety of reasons, the costs involved in pursuit of these goals are far too great and uncertain to justify keeping the American military in Iraq.We know that the number of Islamist terrorists in Iraq has increased exponentially since the American invasion.   In four years, the American military has not been able to destroy or significantly weaken these groups.   The most well-known Islamist terrorist group in Iraq is Al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia, which did not exist prior to the American invasion.The fact that the invasion of Iraq created far more terrorists than it destroyed is not a reason to leave Iraq.   However, the fact that the American military has not been able to defeat th ese groups in four years of warfare makes it appear very unlikely that the American military has the solution to this problem.While the Islamist terrorist groups and the remnants of Saddam Hussein’s regime have killed thousands of American soldiers, most violence in Iraq is carried out by Iraqis on other Iraqis.   In other words, the war in Iraq is not primarily a war between terrorists and Americans; it is primarily a civil war between Iraqis.   In order to form a rational policy, Americans must understand that they are not at the center of this conflict; they are merely a side component to an Iraqi civil war.The rise of terrorist groups is directly related to the failure of democracy in Iraq.   After Saddam’s dictatorship was crushed, Iraq was opened to a flood of people and ideas, many of whom were hostile to the United States and to the idea of a democratic Iraq.   Again, the resistance to a democratic Iraq is not primarily driven by anti-Americanism; it is primarily driven by local factors.Iraq, like all Arab countries, was historically dominated by Sunni Muslims.   Since Iraq is the only major Arab state with a Shi’ite Muslim majority, a democratic Iraq by definition means an Iraq dominated by Shi’ites.   Many powerful forces in the Arab world, including most of Iraq’s neighbors, reject the idea of a Shi’ite-dominated Arab state.   This resistance does not revolve around anti-Americanism; it revolves around a split between Sunni and Shi’ite Muslims that evolved a millennium before the United States existed.My goal here is to illustrate that the problems plaguing Iraq are local problems, with roots and causes stretching back centuries, that the United States neither created nor can hope to control.   Overthrowing a government and disarming a country are tasks that the American military can accomplish.   They did so swiftly and surely in 2003.   Changing the hearts and minds of millions o f Iraqis and convincing them to live peacefully together in a democratic state that is friendly to American interests is not a task for the American military; it is a task for the Iraqi people, or for nobody at all.Since our own military and political leaders have acknowledged that there is no military solution to the problem in Iraq, the American military presence there simply incurs escalating costs with little or no prospect of reward.   We will now examine those costs and see how they point to the logic of withdrawal.In terms of the human costs, we know with great precision what the toll has been on the American side.   Approximately 3,200 Americans have died, with about 24,000 wounded.   The Iraqi toll is harder to gauge and depends in large part on how the numbers are extrapolated.   There is no doubt, however, that the toll of Iraqi dead is at the very least ten times the American toll, and in all probability far, far greater.There are two considerations to bear in mi nd with these figures.   Firstly, while 3,200 military deaths is quite few compared to other American wars, it is far too many when one takes into account the most likely reward for these sacrifices.   In other words, when the point of the sacrifice is convoluted and ambiguous, the losses carry far more weight than they do when the goals are clear and the cause is just.Secondly, the scores of thousands of Iraqis who have been killed must weigh on the conscience of the United States.   While most of these Iraqis may have been killed by their own countrymen rather than the American military, the American military created the power vacuum that allowed violence to explode throughout Iraq.   Most of the Iraqi dead are not America’s enemies killed by America’s military; they are innocent people who the American military has for years been unable to protect.The financial cost has also been astronomical.   Unlike the Gulf War of 1990-91, American did not have many al lies when it invaded Iraq, so it has paid for the war itself.   To make matters worse, it has paid for the war with borrowed money, passing the bill on to future generations of Americans.   As the direct costs approach half a trillion dollars, one is awed by the fact that officials in the Defense Department speculated before the war that it would pay for itself via Iraqi oil sales.   Again, as with the human cost, the issue is not so much the figures as it is the gain.   What have we gained with our $500 billion investment?American reconstruction efforts have failed on a variety of levels.   One of the most important factors in winning the trust of an occupied population is to provide them with the everyday necessities and utilities needed to go about their lives.   Since the American invasion, oil output and electricity levels in urban centers are lower than they were under Saddam Hussein.   Unemployment is also rampant.   This is not to argue that America should no t try to fix the electricity; it is to argue that, after four years, why should we expect that they will suddenly be able to?As it became clear that the WMD stockpiles did not exist and that Saddam Hussein was permanently out of power, the original justifications for the war seemed to be evaporating.   Many came to feel that the WMD argument had been deliberately distorted; they felt they had been lied to.   For many Americans, however, there remained one satisfaction that it seemed impossible to reverse.   Whatever the mistakes made, the new Iraq could not possible be a worse place to live for Iraqi people than Saddam’s Iraq.   As we examine the costs that the Iraqis are paying, however, we can no longer be assured even of this.As noted above, Iraqis have less electricity now than under Saddam.   They are exporting less oil.   Under Saddam Hussein, the government had a monopoly on violence, which it used to brutalize and terrorize its own people.   However, the re was some semblance of order; one could walk down the street in Baghdad and not fear being blown up or beheaded while they shopped for groceries.   Now, although the brutal government is gone, Iraq is the most dangerous place on earth for the people who must live there.If there were no WMD, if Saddam is dead, if we have not improved the living standards or security of normal Iraqis in four years, and if Iraq is now engulfed in a civil war between Sunni and Shi’ite Muslims, why is the American military still in Iraq?   The administration holds that the democratically elected Iraqi government must be defended against terrorists, but this is to vastly oversimplify the nature of the problem and America’s ability to influence events.The elected Iraqi government is dominated by Shi’ite Muslims but, as noted above, the minority Sunni Muslims largely refuse to accept their legitimacy.   To most Iraqis, the civil war is not about democracy versus terrorism.   I t is about Sunni versus Shi’ite domination.   By supporting the Iraqi government, the United States is effectively siding with the Shi’ites against the Sunni in Iraq’s civil war.There are several dangers to this course of action.   Firstly, the American military should not be used to intervene directly in foreign nations’ civil wars.   This was one of the lessons of Vietnam.   Secondly, by siding with the Shi’ites, the Americans anger many of its traditional Sunni allies.   Thirdly, we have every reason to believe that the Shi’ites of Iraq are far more loyal to Iran than to the United States.   This should not surprise us, but it should make us pause before supporting them blindly.The administration insists on referring to Iraq as the central front of the war on terror.   When doubt is cast on this assertion, officials point out that Osama bin Laden himself has made this claim.   This approach is damaging for several reasons.    Firstly, we should not allow Osama bin Laden to dictate the context of our actions and thereby create a paradigm whereby leaving Iraq means surrendering in the war on terror.   Secondly, it ignores the fact that the American invasion made Iraq a nexus of international terror groups.   Thirdly, it is incredibly dismissive and contemptuous towards the Iraqi people.If this war, called Operation Iraqi Freedom, is really about what’s best for the Iraqi people, then America has made a grave error.   Certain politicians may claim that it is better to fight the enemy in Baghdad than in New York, but what does this mean for Iraqis and other Arabs and Muslims, whose hearts and minds we must win in order to win this war?   The American invasion caused the implosion of the Iraqi state, the opening of its borders, and a flood of literally hundreds and hundreds of suicide bombers into Iraq.   If part of our â€Å"war on terror† involves creating a magnet for terrorist s in other peoples’ countries, is this really in our best interest?   Do we decrease terrorism by drawing the terrorists into the neighborhoods of people we claim to be â€Å"liberating†?   The American invasion and occupation has made Iraq a haven for terrorists; does this decrease or increase the chances that Iraqi-based terrorist will attack the United States?The American war in Iraq must be stopped on behalf of two constituencies: the American people and the Iraqi people.   Both have been the losers in this war.   America lost the trust of many long-time allies, the moral high ground in the war on terror, hundreds of billions of dollars, massive amounts of military equipment, thousands of men and women, and a great deal of prestige and respect.The Iraqi people undoubtedly gained something, in that they are now free from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein.   However, they have subsequently lost much more.   Their standard of living has not improved noticeably , their capital city is the most dangerous in the world, and their society is being torn apart by civil war.If this war is costing the American and Iraqi people so much with so little gain, it must be ended.   The aftermath of an American withdrawal would surely lead to more chaos and bloodshed in Iraq.   The only point is staying, however, is if America can positively guide the conflict to a resolution.   Unfortunately, we have four years worth of evidence that suggests that Iraq’s problems are far beyond the capabilities of America to fix.   Indeed, they may even be beyond the capabilities of Iraq itself.

Christopher Wren, the Man Who Rebuilt London

Christopher Wren, the Man Who Rebuilt London After the Great Fire of London in 1666, Sir Christopher Wren designed new churches and supervised the reconstruction of some of Londons most important buildings. His name is synonymous with London architecture. Background Born: October 20, 1632, at East Knoyle in Wiltshire, England Died: February 25, 1723, in London (age 91) Tombstone Epitaph (translated from Latin) in St. Pauls Cathedral, London: Underneath lies buried Christopher Wren, the builder of this church and city; who lived beyond the age of ninety years, not for himself, but for the public good. If you seek his memorial, look about you. Early Training Sickly as a child, Christopher Wren began his education at home with his father and a tutor. Later, he attended school outside of home. Westminster School: Wren may have done some studies here between 1641 and 1646.Oxford: Began astronomy studies in 1649. Received B.A. in 1651, M.A. in 1653 After graduation, Wren worked on astronomy research and became a Professor of Astronomy at Gresham College in London and later at Oxford. As an astronomer, the future architect developed exceptional skills working with models and diagrams, experimenting with creative ideas, and engaging in scientific reasoning. Wrens Early Buildings In the 17th century, architecture was considered a pursuit that could be practiced by any gentleman educated in the field of mathematics. Christopher Wren began designing buildings when his uncle, the Bishop of Ely, asked him to plan a new chapel for Pembroke College, Cambridge. 1663-1665: New chapel for Pembroke College, Cambridge1664-1668: Sheldonian Theatre, Oxford King Charles II commissioned Wren to repair St. Pauls Cathedral. In May 1666, Wren submitted plans for a classical design with a high dome. Before this work could proceed, the fire destroyed the Cathedral and much of London. When Wren Rebuilt London In September 1666, the Great Fire of London destroyed 13,200 houses, 87 churches, St. Pauls Cathedral, and most of Londons official buildings. Christopher Wren proposed an ambitious plan that would rebuild London with wide streets radiating from a central hub. Wrens plan failed, probably because property owners wanted to keep the same land they owned before the fire. However, Wren did design 51 new city churches and the new St Pauls Cathedral. In 1669, King Charles II hired Wren to oversee the reconstruction of all the royal works (government buildings). Notable Buildings 1670-1683: St. Mary Le Bow, at Cheapside, London, UK1671-1677: Monument to the Great Fire of London, with Robert Hooke1671-1681: St. Nicholas Cole Abbey, London1672-1687: St. Stephens Walbrook, London1674-1687: St. James, at Picadilly, London1675-1676: Royal Observatory, Greenwich, UK1675-1710: Saint Pauls Cathedral, London1677: Rebuilt St. Lawrence Jewry, London1680: St. Clement Danes, at Strand, London1682: Christ Church College Bell Tower, Oxford, UK1695: Royal Hospital Chelsea, with John Soane1696-1715: Greenwich Hospital, Greenwich, UK Architectural Style Classical: Christopher Wren was familiar with the 1st Century Roman architect Vitruvius and the Renaissance thinker Giacomo da Vignola, who outlined Vitruviuss ideas in The Five Orders of Architecture. Wrens first buildings were inspired by the classical works of English architect Inigo Jones.Baroque: Early in his career, Wren traveled to Paris, studied French baroque architecture, and met the Italian Baroque architect Gianlorenzo Bernini. Christopher Wren used baroque ideas with classical restraint. His style influenced Georgian architecture in England and the American colonies. Scientific Achievements Christopher Wren was trained as a mathematician and scientist. His research, experiments, and inventions won the praise of the great scientists Sir Isaac Newton and Blaise Pascal. In addition to many important mathematical theories, Sir Christopher: built a transparent beehive to help study beesinvented a weather clock similar to the barometerinvented an instrument for writing in the darkdeveloped improvements in the telescope and the microscopeexperimented with injecting fluids into the veins of animals, laying the groundwork for successful blood transfusionconstructed a detailed model of the moon Awards and Achievements 1673: Knighted1680: Founded the Royal Society of London for Improving Natural Knowledge. Served as president from 1680 to 1682.1680, 1689 and 1690: Served as a Member of Parliament for Old Windsor Quotes Attributed to Sir Christopher Wren A time will come when men will stretch out their eyes. They should see planets like our Earth. Architecture has its political Use; public buildings being the ornament of a country; it establishes a nation, draws people and commerce; makes the people love their native country, which passion is the origin of all great actions in a Commonwealth...architecture aims at eternity. In things to be seen at once, much variety makes confusion, another vice of beauty. In things that are not seen at once, and have no respect one to another, great variety is commendable, provided this variety transgress not the rules of optics and geometry. Sources Architecture Buildings. Royal Hospital Chelsea, 2019. Barozzi da Vignola, Giacomo. Canon of the Five Orders of Architecture. Dover Architecture, 1st edition, Dover Publications, February 15, 2012. Christopher Wren 1632–1723. Oxford Reference, 2019. Geometry quotes. MacTutor History of Mathematics archive, School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of St Andrews, Scotland, February 2019. Geraghty, Anthony. The Architectural Drawings of Sir Christopher Wren at All Souls College, Oxford: A Complete Catalogue. Reinterpreting Classicism: Culture, Reaction Appropriation, Lund Humphries, December 28, 2007. Greenwich Hospital. Great Buildings, 2013. Jardine, Lisa. On a Grander Scale: The Outstanding Life of Sir Christopher Wren. Hardcover, 1 Edition, Harper, January 21, 2003. Schofield, John. St Pauls Cathedral: archaeology and history. 1st Edition, Oxbow Books; 1st edition, September 16, 2016. Tinniswood, Adrian. His Invention So Fertile: A Life of Christopher Wren by Adrian Tinniswood. Paperback, Pimlico, 1765. Whinney, Margaret. Wren. Paperback, Thames Hudson Ltd, May 1, 1998. Windows. St Lawrence Jewry.

Astronomy fifth assignment Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 1

Astronomy fifth assignment - Essay Example This view is quite controversial and is known as "Snowball Earth." Summarize what this theory is and what is some of the evidence for and against this hypothesis. Snowball Earth describes hypothesis that many years the Earth was wholly or entirely covered with ice that stretched from the poles to tropics. The freezing happened in the pre-cambrian, over 60 years ago. It is thought that there occurred more of global glaciations. They differed in time and stretch but when a full on snow events, life could be attached on ice free refuges or at places where sunlight managed penetration through the ice allowing photosynthesis. The opponents of the theory contest the effect of the evidence for the glaciation, the geophysical feasibility of the ice and the difficulty in escaping the frozen condition. 5. Do some research on the warming in the arctic and the thawing of Arctic permafrost which releases Methane as part of the thawing process. Discuss whether or not you think we are now heading towards a climate

English Literature Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words - 3

English Literature - Essay Example It is plausible to assert that the main characters’ motivation for viewing in another entity, possibly the best or desired versions of themselves is a consequence of their unremarkable and rather ordinary lives which perhaps do not offer a sense of fulfillment or satisfaction thereby, leaving behind a yearning and longing for wanting more. Accordingly, it is evident that the characters’ psyche is characterized by the presence of doubt, uncertainty and a yet again that sense of discontentedness which is prompted by the onset of anxiety which translates into the emergence of psychological splits. Regardless of the protagonists’ intentions behind their alternative portrayals of the self and their respective identities it can be established that the existence of split identities for a single individual in this case The Narrator and Afonso is also fundamental to the boosting of their self-worth, for perhaps all their lives have been marked by inadequacy and unrequited personal and professional relationships where their mothers, fathers, girlfriends and bosses have been absent in the association or never thought too highly of the protagonists’ or their capabilities to maintain the relationship and let it thrive. However, the question arises that whose approval is more significant for maintaining and advancing the characters’ sense of self-worth? What binds the members of the fictional Fight Club in Palahniuk’s work is a sense of resentment, dissatisfaction and rage which is channeled negatively through activities of vandalism and destruction. However, these are only the personal traits and characteristics that are comparable between each and every member of the alliance. Another aspect of the main characters’ early life which is similar and therefore, reinforces the notion of The Narrator and Tyler Durden – the co-founder of Fight Club being the same person is that of their mutually shared contempt for their fathers. The

Political science Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words - 7

Political science - Essay Example ilarly, this paper will also explain the similarities and differences in their own justification for disobedience, and in the manner in which each perceives disobedience to be necessary or beneficial in the circumstances. Sophocles’ Antigone argues that the unwritten and natural law supersedes any form of human law (â€Å"Sophocles Antigone 442 BC†, 2005), which means that the only source or basis of legitimate law is the unwritten and natural law; Antigone believes that duties to the gods are more essential than obedience of the state and law. She argues that she does not fear condemnation from men, but punishment from the gods by failing to honour her obligations to them, which oblige her to bury the dead and not to insult the gods by denying the dead a proper burial. Like Sophocles’ Antigone, Plato’s Socrates believes in a higher standard as the ultimate source of legitimate law, which is the gods. After he had been found guilty of poisoning the minds of young ones, Socrates declared without modesty that his teachings were the gods’ bidding, and that the city of Athens had thrived because of his service to the gods (DAmato, 1976). However, unlike Sophoclesâ€℠¢ Antigone who exclusively believes in one base of legitimate law, Plato’s Socrates also believes that the Athenian judicial system, a tribunal that dispensed justice according to the laws, was also a legitimate basis of law that should be respected; however, Socrates argues that his teachings had made Athens a better state. Sophocles’ Antigone argues that human laws undermine the unwritten and natural law especially because they do not honour the gods and family morals. Antigone gives honour and a principled responsibility to the gods and family equal weight in her defence since she does not want to offend the gods and to attract severe penalties from them (â€Å"Sophocles Antigone 442 BC†, 2005). Like Sophocles’ Antigone, Plato’s Socrates believes that in as much as the Athenian judicial