Physician-Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia in the Modern World :: Physician Assisted Suicide

Euthanasia and the Modern World      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   A long time ago, culture was universal and permanent.   There was one set of beliefs, ideals, and norms, and these were the standard for all human beings in all places and all times.   We, however, live in the modern world.   Our ethics are not an inheritance of the past, completed and ready for universal application.   We are in the situation of having to form our own beliefs and meanings of life.   This struggle is now obvious in the contemporary discussions of euthanasia.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Of the controversial discussions involving euthanasia, the question of legalization is an often argued one.   Whether euthanasia ought to be illegal is different from the question of whether it is immoral.  Ã‚   Some people believe that even if euthanasia is immoral, it still should not be prohibited by law, since if a patient wants to die, that is strictly a personal affair, regardless of how foolish or immoral the desire might be. [Rachels, 56]   My position is almost identical.   I believe there are some instances in which euthanasia is immoral, but I believe it should unquestionably be legal.   In the following paragraphs, I will display the position of the opposition to the legality of euthanasia as well as the position of the supporters.   I shall attempt to prove that, yes, euthanasia should be legal. There is a strong opposition against the legalization of euthanasia.   The main argument against the legality of euthanasia is sometimes known as the slippery slope argument.   People argue that if euthanasia was legally permitted, it would lead to a general decline in the respect for human life.   It is professed that we would kill people in the beginning simply to put them out of extreme agony.   This is the ideal.   But the opposition states that the killing of people wouldn't stop here.   The killing could perhaps escalate to mass murder of innocent victims.   When would the killing stop?   This is what scares the opponent. The opponents argue that once something is accepted, we have no right to deny other similar practices.   This is when doctors and patients would start taking advantage of the new law. Therefore, the first step should not be taken.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   I disagree with this notion and believe that there would hardly be any

Smooth Talk

â€Å"Smooth Talk† is a film adapted from the short story â€Å"Where are you going? Where have you been?† by the author Joyce Carol Oates. The short story was first published on 1966 while the film was released on 1985. The protagonist â€Å"Connie† in the short story was a fifteen year old young lady who has two sides of herself; one side if for her home and the other is for outside her home or anywhere else aside from home. Connie’s sister named June is the opposite of her. While June is being praised by her mother which is also different from Connie, Connie on the other hand was a young girl who enjoys the company of her girl friends. Together with her girl friends, they enjoy watching movie or have a walk to shopping plaza. In the short story written by Joyce Carol Oates, Connie’s character was described as a young girl who is concern with the way she looks. Her character was centered in her physical appearances and gestures and not so much of her attitude and feelings. It was evident in the short story when Joyce Oates describes Connie’s â€Å"quick, nervous giggling habit of craning her neck to glance into mirrors or checking other people’s faces to make sure her own was all right† (Joyce Carol Oates. 1966). The vulnerability of Connie’s character was very present in the story when Arnold Friend’s enters the picture and forces her to come with her. Arnold Friend is described as a â€Å"suspicious stranger† whom she saw once and suddenly knows almost everything about her and her family. Connie at a very young age was susceptible to Arnold Friend who wanted her to simply go out and have a ride with him. Her character in the short story define a weak young girl who faces a man she doesn’t even know and mocks her up until she get loose of everything on her mind. Joyce Oates was precise about Connie’s vulnerability when she describes how Connie helplessly tries to let go of Arnold Friend but vulnerably ends up with his arms. Indeed, the short story was in fact a manifestation of how powerless Connie was in terms of her handling Arnold Friend’s attitude towards her. Connie could have had done something but with her vulnerability as a young girl she gives up something of herself. On the other hand, â€Å"Smooth Talk† visually presented the short story to film. Connie’s character was evidently showed in the film as a young fifteen year old girl who flirts around with boys and loves to cruise the shopping malls with her friends. Connie’s character was expanded in the film, adding up some new things that were not mentioned in the short story. Nonetheless, Connie’s being vain and flirt was still evidently in the film. Her suspicious stranger was more powerful in the film seducing her with his smooth-talking way. In the film, Arnold Friend’s character involves sexual desire for Connie and his character was full of aggressiveness to seduce Connie. Connie on the other hand, is a young girl who is silly and flirtatious with other guys but come one Sunday morning when she was left alone at home and was confronted with the suspicious stranger, Connie’s vulnerability was evidently showed. Her character as a young girl who has two sides of herself was helplessly alone and afraid, trying to overcome Arnold Friend’s seduces. While she was trying to figure out what to do and how to let loose of the stranger, the smooth-talking man tries to seduce her and consistently tries to win her. Part of the film was entirely focused on the situation on which Connie was confronted by the stranger just like in the short story. Though there were some minimal  changes in the film that wasn’t mentioned in the short story, â€Å"Smooth Talk† by Tom Cole gave justice to Joyce Oates’s â€Å"Where are you? Where have you been?†. Connie’s character in the short story was more innocent than her character in the film. Although it was the same, her character in the film portrayed by Laura Dern was â€Å"lavishly and lovingly textured†. (Joyce Carol Oates. 2007) Basically, the mere fact that a short story is being read while the film was being watched evidently showed that Connie’s character of vulnerability was formulated both in the short story and in the film. It was clearly defined and translated in the sort story how Connie’s weak character gave her the risk of giving herself up for Arnold Friend. While in the film, both Connie and Arnold’s characters were emerged consistently as described in the short story. The vulnerability of Connie in the film is just somewhat the same in the short story. But Connie’s being naà ¯ve of the things that happens around her was clearly specified in the short story. Nevertheless, â€Å"Smooth Talk† and â€Å"Where are you? Where are you going?† is both a masterpiece in there own rights and abilities. The two is not only about the reality of a teenager growing up in a harsh world outside her home but also it imparted to us the idea of some issues that runs inside a family or inside home that most of us take for granted. The adaptation was visually presented well from the short story and just the same, both gave the justice on its own. Connie’s character provides us the imagination of how innocent and free spirited she was as a young girl that in the end lose herself to a man she doesn’t even know but who knows her very well. There lies the mystery or the story by Joyce Carol Oates. Works Cited Oates, Joyce Carol. â€Å"Where are you going? Where have you been?.† Celestial Timepiece A Joyce Carol Oates Home Page. Joyce Carol Oates. 12 July 2007. University of san Francisco. 24 July 2007. http://jco.usfca.edu/works/wgoing/text.html. Brussat, Frederic and Mary Ann. â€Å"Film Review.† Spirituality and Practices Resource for Spiritual Journals. Frederic and Mary Ann Brussat. 2007. 24 July 2007. www.spiritualityandpractice.com.   

Dorothy Parker Essay

Dorothy Parker was an extraordinary woman. Extraordinary in her writings and extraordinary in what she achieved with her writings. Her books of poems and her short stories were bestsellers and her columns in The New Yorker were extremely popular. She was one of the only women and a central figure of the Algonquin Hotel Round Table, where all the great literary geniuses of her time would eat their lunch. Newspaper columnists qouted her and two Broadway plays were written about her. Briefly,she was one of the most talked about woman of her time. What is striking is that her fame came from her writings. So much fame for a woman’s writings is unusual nowadays but let aside in her time. And besides that she was not a minor writer but her literary output in the end was quite small: two volumes of short stories and three of poetry. The last decade of the nineteenth century and the first two decades of the twentieth was a time of large scale political movements and social changes among women. A new generation of women writers emerged with Dorothy Parker as their most famous one. More oppurtunities for writers existed before the dominance of radio film and television. The newspapers and magazines flourished and only the area of New York City alone published 25 daily newspapers. The â€Å"New Women† as they were labeled were worried with winning women’s rights: the vote, education, economic freedom, acces to a career and a public voice. These women were educated and progressive and wanted a break with the conservative past. Women writers of the era did not see marrying and having children as their ultimate goal in life. They rejected the traditional women’s sphere and claimed a the territory of arts that had been a complete male territory before. Many feared to be thought of as â€Å"women writers†. Dorothy Parker said that her most fervent prayer had been â€Å"Please, God, don’t let me write like a woman†. Parker’s writings on the other hand were for the most part confined to women and to what is important to them. What made Parker so succesfull? What made that era crave her writings? In order to understand Parker’s succes we need to view her works in the context of the time they were written. Dorothy Parker was born in 1893. The most striking evidence of change of the role of women in society at that time was the emergence of the college educated and self supporting new woman. By 1870 there were eleven thousand women students enrolled in higher education (21 procent of all students) and a decade later there were forty thousand women students enrolled in higher education (32 procent of all students). After they graduated they had to choose between a traditional role of domesticity and young marriage or a career of paid work. On August 26, 1920 women officially earn the right to vote by the 19th Amendment. Although women did not become a strong political force right after that the Amendment did increase the power of women to effect change. Another important aspect of the changes in women’s postion in society these years was the first world war. Although the United States participated in the war for a relatively short time and did people not really have a clue about what was going on in Europe the war did change American culture significantly. More than four million American men were were mobilized and sent off to Europe. One of the outcomes of this was that women entered the workforce in increasing numbers. Working not in only jobs that were particulary feminine jobs like nursing but also in offices and factories, in stores and governmental agencies and more. Women found themselves working in previously male-dominated fields and they were earning higher wages than in the past. These changes gave women a new notion of indepedence and self-confidence. In 1920 23.6% of the workforce was female with 8.6 million females, ages 15 and up, working outside the home. In 1920, for the first time in American history more people (54.3 million) live in cities than rural areas (51.4). As people became to move into the cities their lifesty les changed. Cities have more activities like going to the theater and nightclubs. Women in the cities were more likely to work in restaurants or offices and other locations that took them away from home. All these factors together created an environment of freedom that women had never seen in the past. One of the most visble outcomes of this freedom was the emergence of the Flapper girl. The breakdown of the Victorian sexual norms was a gradual process but slowely the American society was ready for newer ideas about sexual norms. The young working class woman had been known for her flamboyant dresses and love of nightlife and dancing. .They were relatively economically autonomous and freed either by work or school from intense familial supervision, and began to find a more individualistic culture for themselves. Women’s appearance changed to a slender and smaller silhouette no longer restricted by petticoats and corsets.When the war began women started to favor more practical, shirtwaist-style dresses. These dresses gave more freedom of movement and a greater exposure of skin. First they inched up to calf length then up to knee length. Flappers didn’t show their feminime curves, cut their hair short and wore dark eyeshadow. As the United States was becoming more and more urban, industrial production increased by 60 percent during this decade while population growth was 15%. Mass production requires mass consumption. Advertising became more important tempting people to purchase the latest fashions and newest cars and spend money on nightclubs and restaurants in the cities. For women this industrial production meant that they were more likey to have vacuum cleaners, washing machines, refrigarators and other household appliances that lightened their household work. This increased their leisure time. Advertisements targeted women in the 1920’s. Women seemed to have more economic power than before and seemed to be in charge of the households money. However these advertisements still reflected traditional thinking of the women’s role in society. These advertisements stressed domesticity and pleasing men over any message of independence. Dorothy Parker was born at the very start of this period of the â€Å"modern woman†. While men and women were now equal under the law, discrimination against women still persisted. Throughout the 1920’s and 1930’s women were still struggling against restrictions. For example, in several states women were denied to serve on juries till 1940. The economic advances for women, too, were minimal. There was still a strong sexual division of labor. Discrimiantion in family responsibilities, education, salaries and promotions remained plentiful. During the depression women lost the gains made in the career world during the 1920s. And a renewed emphasis on the woman at home crushed the recently gained hopes for equality. More and more a stereoype emerged that women during the 1920s were sexually active (the Flapper) but politically apathetic. Parker’s work points a sharp finger at that stereotype and defies is. She keenly points out the ongoing struggles for women to break free. Parker began her professional life in 1915 when she went to work as a caption writer for Vogue at a salary of ten dollar a week. By 1917 she transferred to Vanity Fair and worked for editor Frank Crowninshield until 1920. From 1919 to 1923 Parker wrote poems, sketches, essays and columnd for more than thirty-five different literary journals and magazines. Parker’s first poem â€Å"Any porch† pubished in Vanity Fair in september 1915 presents nine different female voices who discuss various topics as the vote for women, a game of bridge, someones new haircut and the war in France. In 1916 she wrote a series of â€Å"hate songs†, satiric descriptions of husbands and wives, actors and actresses, relatvies and so on. These â€Å"hate songs† made Parker very popular. She soon began to build a reputation as a sophisticated young writer with a witty message. In 1926 her first collection of poems was published. Parker soon played a distinctive voice calling for equality and social independence for women. This distinctive voice calling for equality and social independence for women was not out there in a way the feminist movements of that era were calling for it. This voice was hidden between the lines of her poems and stories. â€Å"The Waltz† was published in The New Yorker in september 1933. The story reflects the thoughts and conversation of a girl who is dancing a waltz with a man who dances very badly. He steps al over her feet and kicks her in the shin every so often. She keeps saying that she’s not tired, that it didn’t hurt when he kicked her and when she gets past all feeling, the orchestra finally comes to a stop. When it does, she tells him that she wishes he’d tell them to play the same thing. She said that she would simply adore to go on waltzing even though she hates it. The two voices in this short story reflect the contrast between a polite public voice and a witty and angry private voice. These two voices reflect a clear statement of the w oman’s outward conformity and inward rebellion. In this way the two voices in â€Å"The Waltz† are metaphoric for the woman’s powerlessness. Right from the start of the story it is clear that the woman does not want to dance with this man. She does not want to dance at all but definitely not with this man. But still she gets up and dances with him. Parker is trying to point out that there is not that many young women out there who say what they think. There is not really an alternative for the woman in this story, how can she be rude? She can’t be rude to a man who asks her to dance. Women after all were supposed to please men. Parker does not judge the woman in this story for not saying what she thinks. She is not trying to bring young women who act like that down. She just simply wrote down how things like this work in a woman’s head and letting the world know that woman do not always smile from the inside when they smile from the outside. In 1929 Parker published another short story with an hidden message about gender roles. In â€Å"Big Blonde† Parker tells the story of a talented woman, Hazel Morse. Men seem to like her and as Parker wrote â€Å"Men liked her, and she took it for granted that the liking of men was a desirable thing†. Hazel Morse wants men to like her and â€Å"she never pondered if she might not be occupied doing something else†. She had been working for a couple years untill she met her husband. They got married and in the beginning everything seems fine. As the story goes on it becomes clear that Hazel Morse’s life revolves around pleasing her husband while she is so bored and unhappy at home. She gets divoced and gets married again a couple times but in the end in all her marriages and in the rest of her life she is never occupied with anything else than a desire for men to like her. One other desire Hazel Morse has is a desire for nice furniture and clothing. With every men that comes in to her life Parker describes wheter he is rich or not and what he buys for Hazel Morse. All this stuff does not make her happy either. At the end of the story Hazal Morse tries to commit suicide. What Parker tried to point out here is that women like Hazal Morse are only occupied by a desire for men to like them. This constant desire in the end makes women unhappy because they do not ask themselves what they want for themselves. She also targeted the new american consuming culture in this story. Parker stated that nice clothes and nice furniture are not going to make women happy in the end. Again, just as in â€Å"The Waltz† Parker does not judge Hazal Morse for her actions. But she does make very clear that the life of women who never ponder if they might be occupied with something else than pleasing men is not going to end well. In her stories on gender relations Parker did not criticize women directly but she does have short stories and poems in where she criticized women directly. In one of her early poems (1916) called â€Å"Women: A Hate song† she writes in the first paragraph of the poem how much she hates domestic women. She thought they were â€Å"the worst†. In her poem she groupes them together, there are no individual housewives they are all just as worse. They claim to all be always happy in Parkers view and all they do is hurry home to provide dinner for her family. The rest of their days are filled with making dresses and trying out recipes. Parker, by saying that she hates â€Å"the domestic ones† the most of all made a clear statement about the traditional role of women in society. She hated it. She hated the idea of women staying at home their whole lifes to take care of their families. Interesting is that she did not only criticize housewives but she also became known fo r her condemnation of the flapper. In her poem, â€Å"The Flapper† written in 1922 she starts her poem of by saying that flappers are innocent. Then she continues to say that flappers are not â€Å"what grandma used to be†. Women wanted to break from the traditions from the generations before them but in the way Parker said it in this poem it is not meant as a compliment. She also says that flappers are â€Å"girlish†. By saying this it becomes clear that Parker did not take them serious. They were not serious and grown up women but they were all young girls. She then continues to say that there is no more harm in them â€Å"than in a submarine†. Which clearly means that Parker thought they were capable of doing damage to the whole society. She also writes that the flapper girl is not â€Å"in control† and that people only focus on their pranks. They are only noticed for their unruly behaviour and not for any good that they do. She ends this poem by saying that the Flapper girls are young and that the life the live is a rough one. This poem makes clear that Parker did not agree with the way the Fl apper girls were trying to break with the past. The way the Flapper girls were trying to challenge the norm was not the best or most productive in Parker’s eyes. â€Å"Men seldom make passes, at girls who wear glasses† is one of Parkers most famous quotes. The quote was not actually written as a quote but as a poem in 1926 under the title â€Å"News Item†. In one line Parker was able to describe that men were usually not charmed by the smart women in society. (Since glasses are associated with intelligence or education). The modern woman had achieved more equality in education but as Parker describes men did not seemed to like these educated women. The major themes in Parkers writings are a lack of communication between women and men, disintegration of relationships, motherhood, women’s emotional dependency upon men, the selfishness of the wealthy and the danger of empitness in women’s lives. Her audience was broad. She managed to write for men and women of different social classes. The purpose of a writer was in Parkers opinion â€Å"to say what he feels and sees†. â€Å"Those who write fantasies† she did not consider artists. This nation of â€Å"to say what he feels and sees† made her stories extremely recognizable. In one of her short stories â€Å"A telephone call† Parker describes a woman waiting for a man to call her. The man had promised to call her at 5 and at 7 he still has not called. Parker described what goes through the woman’s mind. Anyone who has ever waited on a wanted telephone call knows exactely what the woman in the story goes trough because Parker sets out t he woman’s thoughts in so much detail. Her writings are satiric, which makes them fun and easy to read but behind and between the lines there is a clear message. A lot of the times this message were convictions on the existing gender relations in society. From her writings it becomes clear that Parker was a feminist. Later in her life she was quoted saying â€Å"I’m a feminist and God knows I’m loyal to my sex, and you must remember that from my very early days, when this city was scarcely safe from buffaloes, I was in the struggle for equal rights for women.† She did however never join one of the organized feminists movements. The feminist movements of her time convicted the gender relations in a more serious and less humourous way. Her talent to convict these gender relations in a humourous way are undoubtly one of the reasons of her succes. The majority of the people was not interested in reading serious and bitter comments on the gender relations. In her â€Å"New Item† poem she could have said: â€Å"Men are sexist pigs who want to hold women in the kitchen were they belong.† Instead of that she wrote a brilliantly witty poem that everyone knows untill today. Dorothy Parker might have been a feminist secretely fighting for women’s rights, she did not wanted to be associated with any sort of woman. In her short story â€Å"Women: a hate song† she basically stated that she hates every sort of woman. From the housewives to the Flappers. Parker wanted women to take advantage of the rights they had attained and she did not feel like enough women were doing that. What she rejected most of all were the standards for female writing and thinking. One of her biographers Marion Maede wrote that Parker did not presented herself so much â€Å"as a bad girl† but as a â€Å"bad boy, a firecracker who was agressively proud of being tough, quirky, feisty.† Parker’s writings satisfied a craving for comments on this â€Å"modern women† and the new gender relations that were a part of that. Women in American society on the one hand were happy on the one hand with their new achievements of equality between men and women. On the other hand, they were dissapointed in the actual changes. Not only were the achievements in equality by law, in economic advances and education not what they had hoped for, they were also dissapointed in the new image of a stereotype women who was sexually liberated but in every way was the minor in relationships between woman and man. These dissapointments and discriminations of the modern women were not out on the surface. No one would have probably even been able to explain at that time what these dissapointments and discriminations exactly were. Dorothy Parker could see the friction underneath the surface of a sophistication-thirsty, consumer-obsessed American society. In her short stories and her poems she was able to point a sharp finger at all these dissapointments and discriminations. She was able to do that in a humourous satiric way. Not in bold statements, but in a subtile way behind and between the lines of her writings. Her greatest achievement was that her writings were attractive to read for women and men. Popular writing for both sexes would be a great achievement nowadays but even more in that era in which the tensions between gender relations were at its sharpest. All these things combined made Parker succesfull in making her readers observe modern culture in a different way, and they all loved reading it. Bunkers, Suzanne L. Dorothy Parker as Feminist and Social Critic (1987). Evans, Sara M. Born for liberty. A history of women in America (New York 1989). Keats, John. You might as well live. The life and times of Dorothy Parker (New York 1970). Keyser, Catherine. Girls who wear glasses. In A New Literaty History of America edited by Wernes Sollors and Griel Marcus (Harvard 2012). Parker, Dorothy. Complete Poems (1999). Parker, Dorothy. Here Lies. The Collected Stories of Dorothy Parker (New York 1933). Sagert, Kelly Boyer. Flappers: A Guide to an American Subculture (2010). ——————————————– [ 1 ]. John Keats, You might as well live. The life and times of Dorothy Parker (New York 1970) 9. [ 2 ]. Colleen Breese, introduction in Dororthy Parker Complete Poems (1999) xvi. [ 3 ]. Colleen Breese, introduction in Dororthy Parker Complete Poems (1999) xvi. [ 4 ]. Colleen Breese, introduction in Dororthy Parker Complete Poems (1999) xvi. [ 5 ]. Sara M. Evans, Born for liberty. A history of women in America (New York 1989) 147. [ 6 ]. Sagert, Kelly Boyer Flappers xiv. [ 7 ]. Sagert, Kelly Boyer Flappers xiv. [ 8 ]. Evans, Sara M Born for liberty 161. [ 9 ]. Evans, Sara M Born for liberty 161. [ 10 ]. Sagert, Kelly Boyer Flappers 15. [ 11 ]. Sagert, Kelly Boyer Flappers 20. [ 12 ]. Colleen Breese, introduction in Dororthy Parker Complete Poems (1999) xxv. [ 13 ]. Colleen Breese, introduction in Dororthy Parker Complete Poems (1999) xxvi. [ 14 ]. Colleen Breese, introduction in Dororthy Parker Complete Poems (1999) xxvi. [ 15 ]. Colleen Breese, introduction in Dororthy Parker Complete Poems (1999) xix. [ 16 ]. Colleen Breese, introduction in Dororthy Parker Complete Poems (1999) xix. [ 17 ]. Colleen Breese, introduction in Dororthy Parker Complete Poems (1999) xxvi. [ 18 ]. Catherine Keyser, Girls who wear glasses, in A New Literary History of America, edited by Werner Sollors and Griel Marcus (Harvard 2012).

Weed Is Great Essays - Cannabis Smoking, Entheogens, Free Essays

Weed Is Great Essays - Cannabis Smoking, Entheogens, Free Essays Weed Is Great Marijuana Marijuana originated in the middle east (Taiwan, Korea). China plays an important part in Marijuana's history. Hoatho, the first chinese physician to use Cannabis for medical purposes as a painkiller and anesthetic for surgery. In the Ninth Century B.C., it was used as an incense by the Assyrians Herbal, a Chinese book of medicine from the second Century B.C., was first to describe it in print. It was used as an anesthetic 5,000 years ago in ancient china. Many (*) ancient cultures such as the persians, Greeks, East Indians, Romans, and the Assyrians for many things. These were what they used it for: the control of muscle spasms, reduction of pain, and for indegestion. Imagine that if they still practiced this, instead of taking an Alka Seltzer after you had mom's Chili or Tacos, you might be sitting in the living room on the LAY-Z Boy, smoking a joint or however they would take it. The folk medicine of Africa and Asia have used it as an herbal preparation. A mythical and legendary pharmacist and emperor Shen Nung thought using it as a seditive was all right. In 2,700 B.C. that same mythical emperor said it helped female weakness, gout, rheumatism, malaria, beri-beri (?), contipation, and absentmindedness. In 1979 (A.D.) Carlton E. Turner visited China and found marijuana was not in use in formal medical places. J. D. P. Graham of the Welsh National School of Medicine wrote, One not need take to seriously the anecdotal use of it's use for many purposes in China or by the Hindus in the pre-Christian Millennia ...and by the Arabs! In 1890 in England's Lancet said cannabis extract was good for neuralgia, fits, migraine and psychosomatic disorders but not for rheumatic conditions. It is not easy to tell the dosage because of the variations in potency and the irregularity in absorbtion. The time delay before the onset of the possible effects of marijuana lowered it's popularity as a medicine as did the introduction of a variety of new and better medicines like aspirin, morpheine (habit forming), chloral, barbituates tranquilizers, and when it got on the list of drugs thought by the world community to require legal restrictions. Our first President, George Washington, grew cannabis on his plantation. The cannabis he grew was more fibrous and is better known as hemp. Hemp was used to make rope, twine, paper and canvas (the word canvas comes from Cannabis) and was an important crop in the american colonies. In Jamestown, Virginia it was grown for it's fiber qualities in 1611. (Snyder, 1985) The U.S. Pharmacopeia had it listed as a useful medicine from the year 1870 to 1941. A Pharmacopeia is a book of directions and requirements for the preparations of medicines, generally published by an authority; a collection or stock of drugs. This tells us the U.S. Pharmacopeia was an authority on the use of drugs for medical purposes, and said that the use of marijuana for said purposes was helpful. The U.S. Pharmacopeia last listed cannabis (the dried flower tops of the pistillate plants of cannabis sativa) in 1936.(Lovinge,1985,p434) That years epitome of the pharmacopeia and the national formula described the drug for physicians thus:a narcotic poison, producing a mild delirium. Used in sedative mixtures but of doubtful value. Also employed to color corn remedies. The next pharmacopeia released in 1942 (I gather they were relaesed every six years) did not have cannabis sativa in it. The 1937 U.S. dispensatory said:Cannabis is used in medicine to relieve pain, encourage sleep, and to soothe restlessness. We have very little definite knowledge of the effects of therapeutic quantities, but in some persons it appears to produce a euphoria and will often relieve migrainic headaches. One of the great hindrances to the wider use of this drug is the great variability and the potency of different samples of Cannabis which renders it impossible to approximate the proper dose of any individual smaple except by clinical trial. Because of occasional unpleasant symptoms from unusually potent preparations, physicians have generally been overcaustious in the quantities administered. The only way of determining the dose of an individual preparation is to give it in ascending quantities until some effect is produced. (The Book suggested using a fluid extract - powdered cannabis in solution, 4/5 alcohol - three times a day, starting with two or three minims.)(Lovinge,1985,p434) Extracts, tinctures, and herbal packages of cannabis manufactured by many drug companies, was available in any pharmacy until 1941 when The two main professional directories of drugs in the United States dropped it.(Snnyder 1985,p38) It is still used as a medicine

The Voice of Rhetoric

The Voice of Rhetoric Free Online Research Papers The role of rhetoric in the greater scheme of thought is incalculable. Rhetoric, including language and discourse, has provided a stage for the development of thought. The interdisciplinary development and practice of rhetoric is intertwined with thought, as one facet cannot be deemed causal to the other. From its beginnings, rhetoric has expanded from fundamental claims of truth to discourse of theories of language and cultural ideology. Discussion on the limitations of language to reflect truth is the enduring debate concerning the role of rhetoric. This paper will focus on three thinkers who utilized and displayed the importance of rhetoric beyond its surfaced role in oratory and persuasion: Aristotle of the classical period, St. Augustine of the medieval period, and Karl Marx of the modern period. A survey of the cultural and historical context is important, for rhetoric is incited and is driven by motive. The origins of rhetoric are inherently fixed to the history and culture of ancient Greece, specifically to Greek drama. The theater emerges our of dance routines. Performed in Athenian Theater of Dionysus, the dances were in celebration of the Greek god Dionysus during the religious festival Dionysia. The performers, usually women, would perform the ritual dances while wearing masks in order to convey emotion. One of the performers would address the audience. At this point emotional expression in the monologue would be emphasized and delivered clearly and eloquently so as to appeal to the audience, and therefore persuade them to understand and empathize with the issues presented (Ley 4-6). The content of the theater was usually a philosophical discussion about issues and struggles that seem to be unsolvable, but nevertheless inherent in one’s life. The dialogue of the actors became more apparent in the plays. Monologues shined through as what was said became more important than what was played out. The focus of content changed to include major events of transformations of the Greek culture, like the Persian Wars, developing a more political appeal to the discourse of the plays. From this logographers emerged who standardized the narratives in terms of story line and meter, like Homer in his account of the Trojan War. Like a monologue of the theater, the logographer used the tools of the actor. He was convincing in presentation and followed the familiar tale with descriptive terms that followed the rhythm of the narrative. When this skill of presenting persuasively became needed, these logographers taught others the techniques of presentation. When democracy emerged, presenting issues persuasively became a highly successful skill. The ones who practiced and learned the skill of persuasion were usually the ones who could afford the education. These students of persuasion became known as rhetoricians. The Persian war incited the development of Greek democracy. The democratic political system allowed the city-states of Greece to unite and work as a political force. No longer was society determined by the whims of an individual monarch, the people now decided how society functioned. From this the peasants and the farmers gained more political power. Participants of the democratic process would vote on issues presented by speakers to the polis. If the speaker wanted agreement by the polis, he had to be convincing and appealing; hence the need for rhetoric. The monologue, perfected in the theater, becomes a useful tool. Like the actors, the speaker used tools of rhetoric. One was expected to present oneself as one with the best intent for the people and appeal to the audience’s logic and emotion, in order to be persuasive. It is no surprise that the use of rhetoric, speaking persuasively, became synonymous with politicians. More specifically, these political rhetoricians were known as Sophists, who prided themselves in their knowledge of the world and their skill of persuasion. The Sophists were at the forefront of debate in the political sphere. They used their skill and knowledge against their opponents in an effort to persuade the audience to vote policy in favor of their display. If they were persuasive enough, their intent of the debate would become policy. Some, like philosophers Plato and Socrates, regarded the Sophists with disdain and claimed the Sophists were manipulative in their language and selfish in their intent. The clash between Plato and the Sophists, and rhetoric in general, is more a debate over the notion of truth. Plato valued philosophy and rationality and regarded rhetoric as covering up the truth. The Sophists, on the other hand, believed in a more humanistic principle where the world should be judged within the context of the human condition. Gorgias made full use of these principles, applying them to the style and utility of rhetoric. He was known for his Asiatic, poetic style and use of figures of speech. For Sophists like Gorgias, they regarded â€Å"the world in which man moves as nothing but a set of more or less emotional convictions† (Ijsseling 27). Gorgias and the Sophists exploited the persuasive nature of speech to move listeners through emotional appeal. Rationality had no room in their world of chaos. Language, like the world, was chaotic. The world was perceived by the Sophists as nothing more than a series of images and emotional convictions. Language was reflecting that chaos through its illusionary nature. In Gorgias’ Encomium to Helen, he argued the acts of the mythical heroin were due to this form persuasion; therefore, she was not to blame. In his construct of speech, he wants to show the deceptive nature of language and the power of language, which by its use justifies deception: â€Å" Speech is a powerful lord that with the smallest and most invisible body accomplishes most god-like works†¦I shall show how this is so† (35). He wants to display, through his rhetoric, that language does not lead to truth. The limitation of language is a recurring theme in the development of rhetoric. Aristotle’s philosophy is aimed at establishing universal truths. His approach differed from Plato, who believed that universal truth was separate from particular truths and discussion of the particular is focused upon its attempt to be like the universal. Instead, Aristotle observed universal truths in the particular. The particulars, according to Aristotle, had an essence of universal. By categorizing the particular in relation to the universal, Aristotle is putting a language to being. The relation of the particular to the universal, as well as the universal’s relationship to the particular, says something of the meaning to that truths; supporting one another to uphold the truth that gives them both meaning. Aristotle’s syllogism puts language to this philosophy of logic. The syllogism works logically by establishing a relationship between two premises, (a universal and a particular). Finding this relationship is finding knowledge that is reinforced by the universal and particular, all giving meaning to one another. Aristotle then applies the syllogism to practical knowledge, like ethics. The categorical syllogism changes from to dialectical syllogism in order to apply logic to the practical knowledge, something that is useful for man in his daily life. The dialectical syllogism addresses problems like how one should act and live, and what policies should be done by the state so we can live a good life. In its form, it remained logical like the categorical syllogism and retained the same sense of dialogue, with two premises and a conclusion; however, the premises and conclusion was left to interpretation. The first premise stated a universal truth or premise of how one should live, the second was a particular situation in relation to the universal premise. Because the subject matter dealt with abstract concepts of morals, the syllogism treats them like concrete, universal ideas to make them manageable for argument. Aristotle applied this same scientific methodology to rhetoric. Rhetorical syllogism, or enthymeme, argued from the particular to the conclusion and suppressing the universal. The universal premise is presupposed in the mind of the audience and there is no need to state it. By assuming the universal principle in one’s speech, the speaker creates credibility in the particular in showing agreement in the truth of that universal premise. The relationship between the two, in the persuaded conclusion, fit logically within these two truths and is better accepted as truth by the audience. Rhetoric is not classified as knowledge, but is subject to Aristotle’s classification. According to Aristotle, rhetoric is the counterpart to dialectic and a device to find knowledge. Oratory was synonymous with rhetoric; however, rhetoric entailed larger scope of disciplines beyond the act of speech delivery Rhetoric is defined in Aristotle’s The Art of Rhetoric as â€Å"the facility of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion† which is â€Å"fully persuaded when a thing has been demonstrated† (15). The art of rhetoric includes a theory of persuasive communication â€Å"in the context of a genuinely philosophical conception of rhetoric† (15). Aristotle is offering more to the technique of persuasion, beyond the emotional appeal practiced by the Sophist, by implementing an appeal to logos, as well as ethos and pathos. Aristotle insists that simple persuasion is not the function of rhetoric. As rational beings, more than emotion drives man. Rhetoric serves a particular function in the quest for knowledge, as seen in rhetorical logic in the form of enthymeme. The persuasive quality comes from its use of logos, pathos, and ethos. The extent of their use is determined by the need and context of the rhetoric. These needs are categorized by Aristotle as forensic, epideictic and deliberative, each serving a purpose considering the topic: (1) Deliberative: political speeches arguing for the policy of the future by providing information to support the greater good of the policy (2) Forensic: legal speeches, moving the audience to pass judgment (3) Epideictic: ceremonial and celebratory speeches that provide the audience with pleasure The extent to which the proofs and appeals, (logos, ethos, pathos), are implemented are dependent of which form of rhetoric is being used. The genre of rhetoric used becomes important in the further development of thought. To what extent rhetoric is used and for what purpose determines the affect and success rhetoric has in persuasion. The Medieval and Renaissance period provided no development of rhetoric by way of the political structure of society. Before these periods, during the decline of the Roman Republic and appearance of the Roman Empire, there was no widespread use and advancement. Democracy fostered the art of persuasion as people had to be enticed to agree upon a perspective. In this new environment, the art of persuasion was for some time limited to flattery and scholastic use. There was no sense of rhetoric by the medieval period. Christianity, by that time, had influenced every facet of educated society. Classical works of rhetoric and philosophy were demeaned as pagan literature, called â€Å"the food of the devil† and was no longer considered relevant. However, â€Å"most educated Christians were trained in rhetoric and †¦ acquainted with classical literature, the style and content of which impressed many with its almost incomparable beauty† (Ijsseling 41). The devices and characteristic of rhetoric proved useful for the development and operation Christian ideology. St. Augustine was a distinguished rhetorician, known for his style and role in early Christianity. Also educated in the classics, Augustine saw â€Å"rhetorical technique in itself is neither good nor bad, but all depends on the use to which it is put†¦[and] regarded rhetoric as entirely neutral; it may be blessing or a curse, since only the aim determines its value† (Ijsseling 43). However, the style of Christian rhetoric â€Å"must be lucid, simple, objective, serious, and biblically inspired† (Ijsseling 43-44). The use of rhetorical devices fit with the persuasive oratory of preaching the Gospel, but for Augustine, there was a differentiation between expression of truth and truth itself. Above being an accomplished rhetorician, Augustine considered himself a philosopher and theologian. Medieval rhetoricians like Augustine believed truth was determined by religious sources. He believed â€Å"one does not learn from another but from an ‘inner teacher’ from whom one receives instruction through introspection† (Ijsseling 44). Augustine is speaking of prayer, an inner dialogue between Christ and individual, with no agents between the two. This belief implies two important factors future thought: (1) the emergence in the concept of the individual, who can have a personal relationship with the divine; and (2) an ideological validation of absolute truth, which could be discovered through this relationship with the divine, within which language has limitations. In the greater scheme of medieval scholasticism, rhetoric was considered part of the trivium, alongside grammar and dialectics, but differentiated from the quadrivum, which included music, astronomy, geometry, and arithmetic. Instead of emphasis in philosophy, theology was considered most important. Rhetorical strategies were applied to Christian thought, and continued with limited use in the scholastic field and in praise of Christ. Rhetoric was used in exercises of reason and argumentation, as Scripture was subject to interpretation and application. There was not much development of rhetorical theory as much as rhetorical practice. The liberal arts education structure continued on into the Renaissance period, as did the philosophy. But what did change during this transition was a renewed sense of humanism and renewed sense of rhetorical style. As the economic force of early capitalism emerged, power began to shift. There was a lot of money to be made in the exchange of goods. The economic force of early capitalism was emerging, distributing power away from the church and monarchs, and towards port cities and city-states where this exchange of goods and idea was taking place. The Renaissance was marked with a cultural reinvigoration of goods and ideas, occurring most specifically in Italy. At the forefront of this cultural change were the Italian Humanists, who proved to be the new rhetoricians of the age. The Humanists saw medieval philosophy as loosing ties with political and social life. The art of rhetoric and applied principles had been isolated, away from political practice. They wanted to apply philosophy and rhetoric to the world beyond the walls of monasteries, â€Å"turning quite consciously to classical rhetoric for aesthetic and practical reasons† (Ijsseling 54). Their objective concerned the world of common man and his culture, in relation to these absolute truths like those presented by theology. Rhetoric, especially in the form of poetry, held great value by the Humanists. The invigoration of rhetoric, however, became overshadowed by the rational thought, which provided a basis for scientific development. The practice of rhetoric was again reduced to academics and social niceties, limited to style and delivery. Used primarily in etiquette, rhetoric and oratory proved useful for mercantilism as capitalist needed to create diplomatic relationships in business. The advent of the printing press shifted rhetoric from oral presentation to text. Rhetoric was largely ignored as the persuasion was limited by the overpowering format of text. Ideas had to be arranged formally and in a logical manner to fit within this new presentation. Rational thought proved more powerful than all. The scientific method was applied logically and showed the world as operating mechanistically through natural laws. By discovering this knowledge, man could now control these laws for their own utility, prompting invention and discovery. Rational thought was too overpowering to be undermined by the persuasion of language. Rhetoric was expected to appeal to the facilities of the mind by the emergence of a new sense of the individual and an understanding of the self. The scientist of the age wanted a new language, an objective language that would truthfully reflect these new ideas. The complex, eloquent language of rhetoric was to be erased, and instead, replaced with a new, simple language that appealed to the reason of man. This new rhetoric left behind the notion of persuasive technique and insisted upon itself to reflect the truth. But was this truth the actual truth of the world, or a reflection of a particular world made out to be universal? A handful of thinkers of the Modern age undermined the universal assumption of the modern thought. The development and establishment of capitalism occurred simultaneously with rational thought of science, and the reformation of the church, which up to that point held power over the ethical nature of society. Making full use of textual rhetoric, thinkers like Karl Marx argued the bourgeois class was based upon these universal assumptions, and upheld absolute truths by way of an ideology. According to Marx, relative concepts were made into concrete concepts. Superstructures were created to authenticate these concepts, and functioned to sustain power of one class in of society another. In German Ideology, Marx specifically attached the bourgeois ideas of property and the individual. According to Marx, to understand property as universal is to misunderstand its particular historically characteristics, which he shows within his five stages of historical materialism. The development into the capitalist labor structure consisted of â€Å"many different forms of ownership† (Marx 178), resulting in the subjugation of one class of economic producers by another class of property owners. The bourgeois and proletariat class identity was based on each class’s relation to the means of production. The hegemonic structure of society was interpreted as the natural, universal, and absolute process. According to Marx, ideology was created, maintained, and justified this social order. The bourgeois were articulate enough to define this understanding and had time and capital to exercise these rights of the individual, a concept, which Marx believed, they created for themselves. Marx argued the notion of the individual was an abstract concept Marx said was made concrete. Having its roots in development of the Christian doctrine that stressed an individual’s relationship with Christ, the source of all truth. and even further back to Platonic thought, the idea of the individual was further included to be a rational being who is logical in thought. This was supported by the superstructures like law, which favor the individual, a concept of this ideology. The created culture formed the universal and guaranteed particular rights to the individual. These truths were further supported by science, which was based upon natural laws within which the universe functioned. But most importantly, the concept of the individual effected the psyche of person: those of the bourgeois class were able to exercise the rights of the individual by fulfilling standards that, Marx argues, they created and therefore being an individual who is successful and cultured. The bourgeois identified with this individual as it was reinforced in society. On the other hand, the proletariat, as Marx argues, could not identify with this standard of the individual because of their relation to the means of production, which determined their class distinction. The means of production entailed exploitation of the lower classes by a higher class, which was deemed appropriate because of the individual’s right to choose employment and enter into contracts. The particular form these rights took was corrupted for those outside the bourgeois class. In the labor contract, the individual has the right to sign over his labor in exchange for capital. The bourgeois then use this individual’s labor to produce products, of which he makes a profit by attaching a value, another abstract concept made concrete. The fact the capitalist makes a profit, says Marx, shows that the laborer’s wage does not equal the value of his labor. If the laborer were given the true value of his labor, then the bourgeois would make no profit because the value of the product should be equal to the value of the labor used to product the product. This is exploitation of the proletariat by the bourgeois, says Marx. The ideology that created and maintained the capitalist system is the center of Marx’s critique. Its justification, apology, was based on the universal idea of the system. The system, in fact, is not universal but created by one class of people in order to preserve wealth and identity. This web, according to Marx, depended upon itself. Marx predicted this system would eventually implode as a revolution occurs when the contradiction between the means of production and social forces of classes comes to its final stage: communism, the end of historical materialism when there is no private ownership of property and no class distinctions. In his rhetoric, Marx was attacking the philosophical, economical, political history of modern society, and therefore threatening its validity. He insisted the truths of society was based on fact were not true, but made to be true in order to uphold capitalism and instilling power in bourgeois class. The notion of ideology was a radical claim. But the development of thought speaks for itself. Beginning with Aristotle’s syllogism in the classical period, concepts were treated as universal so particular issues could be related to their truth. The particular justified the universal as much as the universal justified the particular, building meaning and knowledge upon one another. In this context, the syllogism can be interpreted as the blue print for ideology. The superstructures Marx defined in his critique work in the same fashion, by way of the dialectical syllogism. Practical truths like those of religion and law were founded upon these abstract, but deemed universal, truths of concepts like that of the individual. The rhetoric of these institution echoes the rhetorical logic of the enthymeme. The universals were already assumed and one could logically infer the conclusion. Proven by its use, the role of rhetoric in facilitating the discourse of thought is the key factor within the precipitating formation of ideology and the limitation of language. Left to interpretation, language can change the meaning and can be manipulated to be whatever the user chooses. Language cannot reflect a truth and a reality that is dependent upon the changing forces of thought, just as thought cannot be defined by language. Aristotle. The Art of Rhetoric. Trans. H.C. Dawson-Tancred. London: Penguin, 2004. Gorgias. â€Å"Helen.† Readings from Classical Rhetoric. Ed. Patricia P. Matsen. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University, 1990. Ijsseling, Samuel. Rhetoric and Philosophy in Conflict: A Historical Survey. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1976. Ley, Graham. A Short Introduction to the Ancient Greek Theater. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1991 Marx, Karl. â€Å"German Ideology.† Selected Writings. Ed. Lawrence H. Simon. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1994. Research Papers on The Voice of RhetoricAnalysis Of A Cosmetics AdvertisementCanaanite Influence on the Early Israelite ReligionAssess the importance of Nationalism 1815-1850 EuropeRelationship between Media Coverage and Social andWhere Wild and West MeetComparison: Letter from Birmingham and CritoQuebec and CanadaPETSTEL analysis of IndiaBringing Democracy to AfricaStandardized Testing

Gold and Silver Pennies Chemistry Project

Gold and Silver Pennies Chemistry Project All you need are a couple of common chemicals to turn your normal copper-colored pennies (or another mainly-copper object) from copper to silver and then to gold. No, the coins wont really be silver or gold. The actual metal involved is zinc. This project is easy to do. While I dont recommend it for very young kids, Id consider it appropriate for kids ages third grade and older, with adult supervision. Materials Needed for this Project clean pennies zinc metal (preferably powder) sodium hydroxide or sodium hydroxide solutiontweezers or tongscontainer of water source of heat/flame Note: Supposedly you can substitute galvanized nails for the zinc and Dranoâ„ ¢ for the sodium hydroxide, but I was unable to get this project to work using nails and drain cleaner. How to Make Silver Pennies Pour a spoonful of zinc (1-2 grams) into a small beaker or evaporating dish containing water.Add a small quantity of sodium hydroxide.Alternatively, you could add zinc to a 3M NaOH solution.Heat the mixture to near-boiling, then remove it from heat.Add clean pennies to the solution, spacing them so that they are not touching each other.Wait 5-10 minutes for them to turn silver, then use tongs to remove the pennies from the solution.Rinse the pennies in water, then set them on a towel to dry.You can examine the pennies once you have rinsed them. This chemical reaction plates the copper in the penny with zinc. This is called galvanization. The zinc reacts with the hot sodium hydroxide solution to form soluble sodium zincate, Na2ZnO2, which is converted to metallic zinc when it touches the surface of the penny. How to Make the Silver Pennies turn Gold Grasp a silver penny with tongs.Gently heat the penny in the outer (cool) part of a burner flame or with a lighter or candle (or even set it on a hotplate).Remove the penny from heat as soon as it changes color.Rinse the gold penny under water to cool it. Heating the penny fuses the zinc and copper to form an alloy called brass. Brass is a homogeneous metal that varies from 60-82% Cu and from 18-40% Zn. Brass has a relatively low melting point, so the coating can be destroyed by heating the penny for too long. Safety Information Please use proper safety precautions. Sodium hydroxide is caustic. I recommend conducting this project under a fume hood or outdoors. Wear gloves and protective eyewear to prevent getting splashed by the sodium hydroxide solution.

Assignment Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 31

Assignment - Essay Example ms, and partnerships and always strive to attract and retain the youth in their programs by instilling a sense of belonging, satisfaction and familiarity within the Greater Saint John. The organization’s purpose is the creation of a sense of belonging in the community by engaging the people and providing them with opportunities for growth (Heidemann, 2009). These statements make a lot of sense since from the organization’s list of events and achievements it has sought to accomplish these goals by relating positively with the government, community, and the sponsors (Davies, 2008). It has also started mentorship programs and organized lectures and speeches for the youths. They are Saint John Board of Trade, Enterprise Saint John, Teen Resource Center, Skate to Care, Saint John Christmas Exchange, and Saint John Dragon Boat Festival. There stakeholders currently not served are Ernst & Young, Irving, Cox & Palmer, Silver Sponsors, Mariner, Hilton Saint John, Bayview Credit Union and Brunswick Pipeline. They are currently not served because they are not community partners with FUSION SAINT JOHN but sponsors. However, they can be targeted by establishing appropriate engagement and communication channels geared towards the community’s