Part of Your World Essay

Part of Your World Essay.

The song Part of Your World is from the movie The Little Mermaid and is sung by the main character, Ariel. This song embodies the ultimate goal of Ariel throughout the whole movie, which is to be a part of the world above the sea, land. As the song states, Ariel wishes to be “where the people are”. The title of this song comes straight from the lyrics themselves, in the chorus. In the song Ariel is singing to her friend, Flounder.

She is trying to convey to him why she thinks the world on land is better than under the sea.

She says “Flippin’ your fins, you don’t get too far, Legs are required for jumping, dancing,” this shows us some of what she would be able to do if she had legs instead of fins. She desires to be a human, not a mermaid. Another idea is that this song has a deeper meaning other than being a part of this world above the sea.

As much as she is trying to convince Flounder of the beauties of the land, the metaphor of the song is showing us that to follow your dreams can be exciting. There are many other things to experience other than what is right in front of us.

In this song there are many end rhymes; one specific example is this line “Isn’t it neat? Wouldn’t you think my collections complete? ” Neat and complete is an example of rhyming. Rhyming happens when there is a repetition of the concluding sounds. Neat and complete both sound like eat. End rhymes occur when the rhyming syllable is at the end of the line in the poem. This is a perfect example of end rhyme. Another poetic sound device in Part of Your World is repetition, which is found throughout this song.

For example “Up where they walk, up where they run, Up where they stay all day in the sun,” the term “up where they” is repeated several times. Repetition is also found in this line “I wanna be where the people are, I wanna see, wanna see them dancin’,” I wanna is used throughout creating a beautiful poetic sound. This song makes great use of alliteration. Alliterations happen when a beginning consonant is repeated like in this example “Flippin’ your fins, you don’t get too far. The repetitive use of the letter f creates a fun and exciting poetic sound device. Rhyming, specifically end rhyming, repetitions, and alliterations are three important poetic devices that are found in this song. These help the song flow along smoothly and make the song more interesting for the listener. Previously I mentioned the use of a metaphor. Metaphor is an example of a figure of speech or figurative device. Another example of this is a hyperbole.

Hyperbole is used in this song to better emphasize just how much Ariel would like to be a part of this new world she describes. “Bet’cha on land they understand, Bet they don’t reprimand their daughters” is a hyperbole; hyperbole is an over-exaggeration used to better emphasize a point. Metaphor and hyperbole are two figurative devices used in this song. Alan Menken and Howard Ashman, the writers of Part of Your World, use these various poetic and figurative devices beautifully in order to give you a better idea of Ariel’s desires and life goals.

Jodi Benson does a beautiful job, as well, of conveying Ariel’s longing to visit this land above. One might believe the goal of this song truly is to allow the listener to look more broadly at his or her own life and decide if all needs are met. The figurative language in this song, hyperbole and metaphor, greater emphasize her goals and the poetic devices used make the song more enticing to the ear. This song gives the listener a hope for a greater future.

Part of Your World Essay

Part-Time Job While Studying Essay

Part-Time Job While Studying Essay.

The modern world now provides students with the best condition for studying. Therefore, some people suppose that they need not to have a part-time job any more but try to focus on their study. On the other hand, the rest of them argue that a part-time job still plays an important role in forming the necessary experience for students. To the best of my knowledge, despite the current comfort in education, it is still essential that students should take part in a particular part-time job for many reasons.

To begin with, many peoples present the reasons for the unnecessity of having a part-time job among students.

The first point is that a part-time job can make students spend less time on their study, thereby harming their study result. Another reason is that the part-time job environment is often not professional and safe, which can put students at the risk of being defrauded. The final reason is that taking part in a part-time job will cause more pressure to students, consequently affecting badly their health.

However, in my opinion, such reasons above are still one-sided and not so persuasive. Coming back to the first point above, we can agree that the completive world now makes students become more sensible that they used to be.

In fact, most of the students know that their study in school must be the main means of providing them with a good future, not their part-time jobs. In the second reason presented above, the unsafe environment of part-time jobs, on one hand, maybe make students defrauded, on the other hand, give the students valuable experience about real life. Therefore, they will certain the more successful people in the future than the ones who do not participate in a part-time job. Finally, suffering from the part-time jobs for a certain time can help students find the best way of reconciling between their study and working.

Surely they will know how to draw an effective schedule for their lives. Finally, in favor of the people arguing the necessity of having a part-time job, I can give some reasons for my point of view. To begin with, a part-time job will give students more experience about life which they cannot earn at school such as the skills of communication, how to be a confident person. This can help them become more mature and easier to be successful in future. The second reason is that students can widen their relationship by participating in a part-time job.

In fact, the more friends they have, the more probably they will deal successfully with the obstacles in life. Last but not least, taking part in a part-time job can help students earn more to support their study. Consequently, they will be less dependent on their parents and believe more in their own ability. To sum up, it is quite essential that students should have a part-time job while studying. This will give them many valuable lessons which they cannot find in any academic school. In fact, we just study in school in the first twenty years of life, but we study in real life during the rest of our lifetime.

You may also be interested in the following: having relationship while studying, essay about part time job, example essay about part time job, having a relationship while studying, essay about having relationship while studying, part time job essay, articles about having relationship while studying

Part-Time Job While Studying Essay

Descartes vs Locke Essay

Descartes vs Locke Essay.

Socrates once said, “As for me, all I know is that I know nothing. ” Several philosophers contradicted Socrates’ outlook and believed that true knowledge was in fact attainable. This epistemological view however had several stances to it, as philosophers held different beliefs in regards to the derivation of true knowledge. Rationalists believed that the mind was the source of true knowledge, while in Empiricism, true knowledge derived from the senses. Rene Descartes, a rationalist, and John Locke, an empiricist, were prime examples of epistemologists who were seen to differentiate greatly within each of their philosophies.

However, although Descartes and Locke’s ideas did contrast in that sense, they both shared common concepts that helped mould the basis of their ideas. Descartes and Locke both agreed that there were things in life that exist that we can be certain of. For Descartes, human experiences did not provide sufficient proof of existence. He indicated that through his Dream Conjecture and his Evil-Demon Theory (Paquette 205).

Descartes stated that we cannot be certain if reality is a dream or not, thus questioning our existence (Paquette 205).

In his Evil-Demon Theory, Descartes claimed that for all he knew, an evil demon could be putting thoughts into his head, making him think that reality was true when it was in fact false (Paquette 205). Ultimately, all this thinking resulted in Descartes coming to the conclusion that the one thing we could be sure of existing is the mind (Newman 2010). This can be seen through his most famous quote, “I think therefore I am (Kaplan 2008). ” Descartes claimed that since he was able to doubt and think using his mind, his mind must exist (Paquette 205). Similarly, Locke was also sure of existence.

He believed that every object was made up of primary qualities as well as secondary qualities (Paquette 212). Secondary qualities rely on how a person senses the object subjectively, and is experienced differently depending on the individual (Paquette 212). Examples of secondary qualities include colour, taste, and sound (Paquette 212). Primary qualities, however, are objective and include aspects such as an object’s height and weight (Paquette 212). Through this, Locke claimed that the existence of objects can be made certain due to the primary qualities it possesses (Paquette 212).

Similar to Descartes, Locke believed in a sense of existence. However, in his view, the facts from the primary qualities proved the object exists because the object exists within itself (Paquette 212). Descartes and Locke also believed in some sense of the external world. Descartes claimed that there is in fact an external world, however it does not exist outside people’s minds (Paquette 206). Since Descartes was a rationalist, he believed that the only method to acquire true knowledge was solely through the mind (Moore 2002). Through the process of doubting existence, Descartes realized that the mind exists (Paquette 205).

He went further into thought and concluded that since he, an imperfect person, has knowledge of perfection, something perfect has to exist to have put that knowledge in his mind. From there he claimed the existence of God (Newman 2010). Descartes then stated that a perfect god would not deceive his people, indicating that the material world exists (Newman 2010). Therefore through this thinking process, Descartes came to the conclusion that the real world is of the mind, and the external world is everything else that falls into the material world made by god (Newman 2010). Like Descartes, Locke also believed in an external world.

As an empiricist, Locke relied heavily on the senses to provide true knowledge (Moore 2002). He shared Aristotle’s belief that the mind is a blank slate, also known as tabula rasa, at birth (Paquette 211). Our sense experiences thereafter provide us with knowledge to fill in those slates (Paquette 211). In Locke’s “Representative Theory of Perception,” also known as Epistemological Dualism, he stated that material objects exist and are separate entities from human beings (Paquette 227). However, he also believed that objects exist in the mind as psychological entities (Paquette 227).

Locke concluded that people can taste, smell, touch, and see the external world which, in turn, becomes impressions in our minds (Paquette 227). Descartes and Locke are thus seen to be similar in the sense that they both believed in an external world. Descartes and Locke both had a process for understanding knowledge as well. As a rationalist, Descartes believed in innate ideas; that all humans were born with some knowledge (Paquette 206). This differentiates from the empirical view that the mind is a blank slate at birth (Paquette 211).

Descartes also used intuition and deduction to establish truth (Kaplan 2008). He believed that intuition is direct knowledge which can be known without ever sensing or experiencing it (Paquette 206). Deduction however, is where you start with a premise, or a statement you believe to be true, and then determine more truths based on that origin (Paquette 206). As shown, Descartes focused on the thinker and the thinking process when determining true knowledge (Paquette 206). Rather than a thinking process, Locke believed that understanding knowledge came from a process based on our senses (Paquette 211).

He believed that when the external world triggers any of our five senses, those experiences turn into sensations (Paquette 211). Those sensations then turn into impressions in our mind, thus adding knowledge onto the slate in our mind which was once blank (Paquette 211). He claimed that our mind reflects on the impressions we received from our sensations (Paquette 211). Locke then stated that those reflections turn into an idea which can be either simple, or made up of a bundle of simple ideas called complex ideas (Paquette 211).

Like Descartes, Locke is seen to use a process for finding knowledge as well. There are many aspects to Rene Descartes and John Locke’s philosophies that are clearly distinct from one another. However, it is essentially incorrect to claim that rationalist Descartes and empiricist Locke bear no similarities. The two epistemologists are seen to share a similar base within each of their philosophical ideas. Through the many differences between Descartes and Locke, their basic concepts of existence, the external world, and the process for obtaining knowledge are quite similar to each other.

This connexion illustrates that although the ideologies people possess on life vary to a great extent, there can always be some sense of a common ground that brings us all together. Works Cited Kaplan, R. Philosophy – In our time. BBC – Homepage. BBC News. , 2008. Web. 12 Nov. 2011. ……<http://www. bbc. co. uk/radio4/history/ Moore, B. Philosophy | Glossary. Online Learning Centre. McGraw-Hill Higher Education, ……2002. Web. 12 Nov. 2011. <http://highered. mcgraw-……hill. com/sites/076742011x/student_view0/chapter6/glossary. html>. >…………. Newman, L. Descartes’ epistemology.

Descartes vs Locke Essay

Wal-Mart’s Unethical Behavior Essay

Wal-Mart’s Unethical Behavior Essay.

For the past few decades Wal-Mart has been criticized and accused for being involved with all sorts of unethical behavior. Many various groups of people have come after Wal-Mart protesting against their company’s policies and business practices. Labor, community, environmental, and religious groups are some of the most known types of groups that have tried to personally attack Wal-Mart for their lack of social responsibility. Just some of the many areas that have raised concern by people would be the corporation’s foreign product sourcing, environmental practices, the use of public subsidies, and the treatment of employees and product suppliers.

Wal-Mart continues to deny any allegations of wrongdoings and unethical behavior (Fishman).

Many stories have surfaced that would label Wal-Mart as being an unethical company. Some stories are big, some are small, and some are probably completely made up. However, there is a lot of evidence that shows how unethical Wal-Mart has been in many different types of circumstances. Prior to 2007 it was estimated that 87,000 Wal-Mart employees were cheated out of $34 million because the Wal-Mart executives failed to pay workers overtime.

Some even admitted that they were trained by their superiors to not pay anyone overtime. This is a very immoral act because the workers are not getting paid what they deserve and this makes it harder for them to pay for their living expenses (Fishman).

Wal-Mart has had over 100 lawsuits concerning wage and hour violations. They have been charged with not giving workers federally mandated breaks and lunches. They have also required workers to take their missed breaks or overtime before the Friday’s end of the pay period, which is an illegal act. Wal-Mart has been accused for not paying full-time benefits for workers who work 40 hours or more per week. In 2005 in the state of California, Wal-Mart was forced to pay $172 million in damages. There has been several cases of where Wal-Mart has had to pay many millions of dollars for employee damages. The ethical issue in this case would be fairness. All employees should be granted what they deserve and what they were promised (Greenhouse).

Wal-Mart does not pay many of their employees enough money to support their family or even have health care. They pay 26-37% less than the national average for the same jobs in the retail industry. Wal-Mart pays poverty level wages and this is very unethical because they make such huge profits that can allow them to pay decent living wages. Wal-Mart profits more by using State Governments to fund health care for its employees which is not fair to their competitors or the society (Olsson).

Wal-Mart has the worst health packages when compared with their competitors. For example they cover only about 50% of their employees while the national average for major retailers is around 64%. Wal-Mart employees have to wait for 6 months to get health insurance compared to the national average of 3 months. They even charge extra for emergency room visits and ambulance usage. Also, employees with pre-existing conditions have to wait at least one year to receive any treatment. Instead of trying to give their employees the bare minimum, Wal-Mart should readjust their prices and salaries so that enough money would go towards things like basic health care (Fishman).

Thorough studies have been done as well as many court cases that prove that Wal-Mart discriminates against women by not paying them as much as their male counterparts. It is also much rarer for women to be promoted to upper management than it is a male. A 2003 study was done that showed that women received 37 cents an hour less than the men that held the same position. Female managers earn about $5,000 less than male managers.

Even though 72% of Wal-Mart’s workforce consists of women they still only make up 33% of all managers. Jon Lehman who is a former Wal-Mart store manager said that most of the superiors believed that women are useless at Wal-Mart. An African American woman asked a superior if she wasn’t promoted to management because she was a woman or because she was black and the superior replied that two out of two isn’t bad. Not only is this against the law, but it is very immoral as well as discriminatory (Norman).

Just one audit of one week’s worth of time clock records at one specific Wal-Mart showed that minors were working too late at night, during school hours, and were working too many hours a day. It also found more than 60,000 cases of minors not taking breaks and even more cases of minors working through meal times. This is unethical because minors should be focusing on school and not working too many hours at Wal-Mart. A Wal-Mart in CT was given huge violations for having minors working with machinery such as paper balers, chainsaws, and forklifts. Children are not at the age of consent to operate such machinery in any fashion. Horrific incidences were discovered in a Wal-Mart factory in Bangladesh where children were routinely beaten, forced to work overtime for little or no pay, and were told to lie about their age (Greenhouse).

In China, workers are treated more like slaves than people. They are treated as tools to get the work done as quickly and cheaply as possible. They are taught to lie to inspectors and auditors about the amount of time they work and the working conditions that they endure (Greenhouse). They were told that if they didn’t lie then they would lose their job. Wal-Mart pays only 18 cents for a product that is made in China that they charge $14.96 for in America.

It was reported that a Wal-Mart supplier factory employed minors as young as 12 working them for excessive overtime hours and for under minimum wage. They were also working with chemicals without any protective gear. All human beings should be treated with a certain level of respect regardless of age or ethnicity. Wal-Mart should improve their working conditions and remedy all situations of unethical behavior especially towards those who are under age and not supposed to be working in the first place (Fishman).

Wal-Mart claims to care about the environment, but they actually harm the environment. They lied about having an environmental person dedicated to these issues and they don’t actually have an environmentally friendly policy in place. Wal-Mart shows to have more of an avoidance towards their harming of the environment. They have been known to put chemicals into the environment that can cause birth defects as well as storing fertilizers in parking lots unprotected. Wal-Mart has seemed to continue to ignore the idea of better storage for certain products and necessary environmental policies. Over a few years span Wal-Mart has had to shell out millions of dollars to pay for Clean Water Act violations (Olsson).

Wal-Mart has received billions of dollars in subsidies to set up shop nationwide as well as some other countries. Wal-Mart is so profitable that it does not need to receive money from anyone. If Wal-Mart was a community conscious organization then they wouldn’t need any money from cities, states, or communities. They often set up their stores on the outskirts of town so they can receive free plumbing, however other companies and citizens have to pay for such utilities themselves when they’re in the same situation (Bianco).

Sam Walton was known for practicing corporate socialism. He sought out free land, long term leases at prices below market, getting workers trained at the government’s expense, and even pocketing sales taxes. He also had a $37 million ramp and roadway constructed for Wal-Mart’s corporate headquarters in Arizona which the State paid for (Fishman).

The government’s money that is going to Wal-Mart could be going towards things such as education and building our youth. They are a very selfish organization that strives to get bigger individually and have complete disregard for everyone else. There was a case in Denver where three schools ended up closing because there was not enough money to keep them open, however around that same time period Wal-Mart received $2 million. It is very unethical and not abiding by free market policies to give such a huge store like Wal-Mart such a competitive advantage when the mom and pop stores continue to go out of business (Bianco).

By being such an unethical company Wal-Mart is putting smaller, trustworthy businesses out of business. Since they pay very low wages and receive money from states and governments, they can charge such a cheap price which in return puts those smaller businesses that have to charge slightly more for the same products out of business. It is just plain wrong how Wal-Mart treats everyone that is involved with their organization and the competitors. They don’t care about the economy or the environment; they only care about how much money they can collect. It is estimated that Wal-Mart’s trade deficit with China eliminated 200,000 U.S. jobs between 2001 and 2006 (Olsson).

If Wal-Mart was its own nation then it would be China’s eighth largest trading partner. Wal-Mart is able to have such cheap goods because the safety standards are lower in China which in return puts the American consumer at risk. This is very unethical because Wal-Mart is risking their consumer’s health by trying to maximize their own profits. By offering such low prices, Wal-Mart is putting other companies out of business that actually sell quality products that are safe to the consumer (Bianco).

Wal-Mart has hundreds of cameras and security guards inside their stores to protect their own merchandise, but it’s a completely different story when it comes to the type of security that is present in the parking lots or outside of the stores. There has been so many shootings, carjackings, and muggings in Wal-Mart parking lots that many local police departments have asked Wal-Mart to hire on site security guards to help protect against such behavior. However, for the most part Wal-Mart has failed to do so. Wal-Mart has known of these types of issues in their parking lots, but have continued to turn their heads in the opposite direction (Norman).

When Wal-Mart plans for new store locations, there are many activists and groups of people that oppose and try to protest the construction of the new store. Wal-Mart tends to ignore issues such as traffic congestion, potential environmental problems, public safety, and bad public relations. In 2004 Wal-Mart opened a store in Mexico just over a mile from the historic Teotihuacan archaeological site and the Pyramid of the moon. This caused a lot of protests with the locals because they thought this was a very disrespectful notion. By building a Wal-Mart in such a symbolic area it was seen by many as placing one of the main culprits of globalization in the heart of ancient Mexico (Fishman).

In 1998 Wal-Mart wanted to open a store in Nashville, Tennessee right on top of Native American burial grounds and where a Civil War battle took place. Protests took place, however Wal-Mart won the battle and ended up moving the graves so they could construct the new store. If this isn’t immoral and disrespectful then I don’t know what is. I would have to think that there would be other locations where they could have opened the store. It almost seems as if Wal-Mart likes to show their power in any way possible (Norman). Wal-Mart cannot justify all the wrong that they have done to many people and communities by simply offering and continuing to express their low prices. Money may make the world go around, but it won’t save the world. People’s actions is what will make this world a better place to live in. Sacrificing the environment and human rights is simply immoral and unethical just so one major monopolistic organization can continue to offer the lowest prices possible.

Wal-Mart needs to be held accountable for all of their actions regardless of the amount of money they produce. It is very difficult to monitor and control such a huge companies actions and to try and stop them from being completely unethical. The outcome of their unethical behavior has been many lawsuits and they just continue to surface. Wal-Mart has such a huge profit that these lawsuits do not stop them from being unethical (Bianco).

Hopefully Wal-Mart’s unethical behavior will eventually catch up with them. Wal-Mart superiors at the corporate level should understand that unethical behavior eventually turns around to bite you but they continue to ignore the issues. It will take many years to completely resolve the type of unethical behavior that is allowed but steps need to be taken to reach that sort of goal. A complete restructuring of the company and those in charge may be necessary to cleanse the unethical behavior. The right people and policies must be in place from top-down to every Wal-Mart store across the entire world. Once they realize all the issues and feel the need to correct them, then they can look forward to the future in a positive and ethical way that will benefit everybody involved.

References
Bianco, Anthony; Zellner, Wendy. Is Walmart Too Powerful? Business Week. 2003. Fishman, Charles. The Walmart You Don’t Know. Fast Company. 2003. Greenhouse, Steven. In-House Audit Says Walmart Violated Labor Laws. The New York Times. 2004. Norman, Al. The Case Against Wal-Mart. Raphel Marketing. ISBN 0-9711542-3-6. 2004. Olsson, Karen. Up Against Walmart. Mother Jones. 2003

Wal-Mart’s Unethical Behavior Essay

Egypt Art History Essay

Egypt Art History Essay.

The materials used to create these sculptures symbolized the pharaoh’s timelessness and eternal life, the body of the pharaohs symbolized the power given to them by God, and the formal design qualities showed the religious and political qualities in the statues. The statue of Khafre and Akhenaton reflects the political and religious climates of their time through the use of medium which symbolized the pharaoh’s eternal life and timelessness, and through formal qualities which symbolized the hidden religious meanings inside the sculpture.

The seated statue of Khafre reflects the political and religious climates of his time through the statue’s medium, function, formal qualities of design, and iconography. The statue is made of diorite, an extremely valuable, un-breakable stone, which symbolizes Khafre’s unwavering power as pharaoh. Khafre’s body shows that this was how a king was supposed to be portrayed, a perfect divine being that is flawless. The intertwined lotus and papyrus plants symbolize the unification of Egypt.

Horus the sky god is shown extending his protective wings to shelter the pharaoh’s head. The statue plays an important role in the afterlife, it served as a resting place for the pharaoh’s ka, his life force that accompanied him even in the afterlife.

The Statue of Akhenaton showed the political and religious climate that he ruled in through the use of formal qualities, and iconography. Akhenaton’s statue was made of sandstone, different than the un-breakable stone that Khafre’s statue was made of that symbolized his divine power as king. The use of sandstone here shows the abandonment of old kingdom practices. Akhenaton’s body is extremely different and shows him as an androgynous figure attempting to portray as Aton, the sexless sun disk. This statue symbolizes the change in religion, from a polytheistic based belief, to a monotheistic religion centered on the worship of Aten, or Aton, the sun god.

The statues of Khafre enthroned, and Akhenaton from the temple of Aton, reflect the political and religious climates of their time. The formal qualities of both statues represent their political stand and their religious views. Although they are very different, they are also very similar at the same time. Enthroned Khafre shows him as an idealized being with a perfect body that portrays him as a deity and shows his power as pharaoh. The statue of Akhenaton on the other hand, shows himself as a realistic being with curved hips and female like figures. Although he does not look like an idealized being like in the old kingdom, he is still portrayed as a deity trying to imitate the sexless sun God Aton. Akhenaton was able to be portrayed as a deity despite his realistic form due to his political power and his ability to change the country’s religion.

The statue of Khafre and Akhenaton both reflected their political and religious climates through the statue’s medium, formal qualities, and iconography. These statues although very different, are very similar in portraying how a king was portrayed in different times and yet still looked like a deity.

Egypt Art History Essay

Critical Reading and Response on the Article “Letting Go” Essay

Critical Reading and Response on the Article “Letting Go” Essay.

In the article “Letting Go” that was being published in The New Yorker, Atul Gawande addresses the issues regarding to the current medical care system that fails to meet the needs of the patients with terminal illness. Gawande points out that the patients want to spend more quality time with their family members and having some special last moments rather than struggling to stay alive when they know that the chances are thin. Knowing the time to let go was one of the crucial part of the art of dying which people nowadays has forgotten.

Gawande argues that choosing the hospice care would sometimes be a better choice for the terminally ill patients.

He uses statistics such that the patients that choose hospice lives longer or than other patients and they tend to suffer lesser to support his argument. Hospice care tends to go with less pain treatment and focuses on the needs of the patients. It increases the quality of life of the patients during the last moments of their live.

The patients’ family members are less likely to suffer from depression when they have chosen to go with the hospice care mainly because they have prepared themselves to face the death of the patient when time has come.

Gawande’s argument is that the medical care system nowadays fails to meet the needs of the patients. His argument is convincing because he appeals to the emotions of his reader through both his own and others experience and statistics.

Gawande reels in his readers’ attention and interest through some of the real life experience before he educates them. That makes it easier for the readers to absorb what Gawande is trying to deliver to his audience. In order to make it even more convincing, Gawande uses two extreme cases as a comparison to prove his point that hospice care would be the better choice for terminally ill patients.

He uses the story of the “lucky” guy-Dave Galloway who died “at home, at peace, and surrounded by family” contrast with the poor old lady-Lee Cox who was died due to cardiac arrest and followed by a series of actions to bring her back to live. “They pulled off her clothes and pumped her chest, put a tube in her airway and forced oxygen into her lungs, and tried to see if they could shock her heart back” (Gawande 133). Such contrast comparison and strong words that would impact the readers’ thoughts on how the process of death can vary through different circumstances. After that, he again embraces the benefits of choosing hospice care rather than going to hospital for intensive medical treatments.

Other than that, Gawande uses research statistics to support his argument. “A study led by the Harvard researcher Nicholas Christakis found out that sixty-three percent of doctors overestimated survival time and the average estimate was 530 percent too high” (Gawande 136). The statistics shows that how the medical system is failing to help the patients to get a grasp on how much time they still have in order to achieve the things that they want in live before their last breath. Since the research was carried out within the well-known institution-Harvard University, readers tend to believe the statistics more and agree upon Gawande’s view. By doing this, Gawande was trying to point out the flaw in our medical system so that his reader would be agreeing upon his argument.

Gawande also uses different statistics to support his argument. “Executives at Aetna, the insurance company, started a two-year study on letting a group of policyholders with a life expectancy of less than a year to receive hospice services without forgoing other treatments. The result is that the people that have chosen hospice service leaped from 26 percent to 70 percent” (Gawande 142). The result shows that people were visiting the hospital lesser after they were introduced to hospice care. Gawande was trying to use the statistics to tell the readers that there were a lot of people that was in the same situation as they are, and they have chosen hospice care over hospital treatment after trying it. That implies that the hospice care would benefit the patients more than the hospital would.

The overall structure of the Gawande’s article was well organized. He was able to convince his readers by giving a main idea of what he is trying to deliver through stories and then continue by some straight-forward points that he made. He then supports his arguments with examples to further enhance his point. The wording that he uses is simple yet it gives the readers some images that connect with their emotion. For example, “Sara would always arrive smiling, makeup on and bangs bobby-pinned out of her eyes. She’d find small things to laugh about, like the tubes that created strange protuberance under her dress” (Gawande 137). Gawande was trying to show that how sad it could be when a person is going through those surgery and treatment in order to get “fixed”. He would then use that emotion to bring up the point that is other solution to this problem which is the hospice care.

I do think that the current medical care system doesn’t meet the needs of the patients as there are some miscommunications between doctors and their patients. Doctors were always looking at the bright side of the illness of their patients which is good in some sense but at the same time, they have to prepare the patients for their worst case scenario. It is hard for the patients to accept the truth that their illness were beyond “repair” and doctors educate them to accept the truth so that they could go through a less torturing path for their spare life.

So, what I am trying to say is that we shouldn’t lose hope but at the same time we have to prepare our self for the worst outcome. If prolonging the patients’ life means that they have to suffer from surgeries and treatment that they need until the end of their life, why not just do things that are more meaningful? Despite all the flaws that we had in our current medical care system, hospice care seems to be the solution for the problem because it offers comfort and satisfaction in the ending life of the patients.

Critical Reading and Response on the Article “Letting Go” Essay

Earth Is Being Harmed by Human Activity Essay

Earth Is Being Harmed by Human Activity Essay.

Earth is being harmed by human activity.

Humans already made the earth being damaged and it is because of their own activity. In this essay I will describe how people can damaged the earth in more specific like in environment problems. Humans are responsible for taking what they believe is theirs and finding ways to destroy it. Human activity is a behavior or the way that people doing in this environment in a good or bad ways. There are two topics of my essay that will support my opinion to agree with the topic which is earth is being harmed by human activity.

There are pollution, and excessive logging. These three topics will contain specific example which are will connected with the human activity. “Pollution is the introduction of a contaminant into the environment”(2013). It is created mostly by human actions, but can also be a result of natural disaster. Pollutions have a huge effect on any living organism in an environment, making it virtually impossible to sustain life.

There are so many human activities that accidentally or not already made the earth became damaged. And one of them is pollution, pollution is one of the big problem that we face now.

There are three pollutions such as, air pollution, water pollution, and land pollution. Air pollution became the most famous issue in the world right now. “Air pollution is the accumulation of hazardous substance into the atmosphere that danger human life and other living matter”(2013). The simple example from human activity that accidentally we made or not of air pollution are when we drive car and the car will release the emission. One more is tobacco smoke, believe it or not smokers have a big role in air pollution.

It contains the most dangerous element of air pollution for health. Fact of cigarettes “Cigarette smoke produces 10 times more air pollutions than diesel car exhaust”(2004). Surely all of these problems started from human activity and make a big impact for all human being in the world. The other examples again from air pollution are acid rains, aerosol sprays, manufacturing building, paint fumes, etc. The second is water pollution, “ Water pollution is the introduction of chemical, biological and physical matter into large bodies of water that degrade the quality of life ” (2004).

A few facts of water pollution are “Over 73 different kinds of pesticides have been found in the groundwater that we eventually use to drink” (2004). And in my opinion, this issue is very clear to describe how big damaged that our earth got from human activity. We can’t blame anybody in this case but at least we should realize and try to think how to react and do after we know about this one. One simple example from me are try to use non-toxic material and avoid using pesticides that can run off into water systems.

And the last one is land pollution, which is maybe we don’t notice at all but have the big impact on us. One fact from land pollution is “We throw away enough trash every day to fill 63. 000 garbage trucks” (2004). If we realize earlier that how big impact that have we done in this earth maybe we can handle this one and decide a solution to save our earth from our activity. The second topic is excessive logging. Nowadays many people never think before they want to cut down the trees. They just cut the trees without thinking how big affect that will they get after they cut the trees to excessive or over.

Some people just think in an economical thinking like they will cut almost all of trees and not thinking how many trees they still keep for the future. Actually that is really really a bad thinking, we should think in an environmental way as well. We can’t live the life in the future if we don’t think about it from now. “Excessive logging is one of the big issues that we should think after pollution”(1991). Actually we just need a good paradigm to think about this problem and how can we solve this problem. One of many example that we can learn from this case is try to limit the demand and supply.

Maybe it will have another reaction in the economic, but we should think in environment way as well. For example, some company should limit their logging and maybe increase the cost of the wood so it will decrease the demand supply wood from the consumer. In my opinion this problem will make a complicated situation which is will make another problem but so far if we can handle it together and think about this one slowly, for sure we can solve this one clearly. And in the conclusion, The earth is being harmed or damaged by human activity is genuinely right for me. Many examples that I told and spread in this essay.

From the pollutions which is include Air pollution, water pollution, and land pollution. Three of them have their own impact in this world. For example air pollution release a bad effect from automobile emission, water pollution came from many pesticide and trash that everyone throw to the river or sea and made the sea became dirty and polluted. And land pollution also came from trash that we throw on the land and made our land contaminated and can’t reduce or recycle the things again, moreover land pollution became the first impact that we got because we stay on the land.

And actually we should solve this problem first before we solve the others. And because all of these pollutions came from human activity we should fight and find the solution before too late. Excessive logging also have a big role beside the pollutions, maybe trees still growing but we never think that human activity is too expose the resources and never think what will happen in the future if we are to expose or excessive logging. Because we made the problems first and definitely we should find the solution for our best future. “Human activity should be reduce, and limit the demand to make environment sustainably” (2002).

Earth Is Being Harmed by Human Activity Essay

Martha Graham Essay

Martha Graham Essay.

Discuss the influence Martha Graham had on the development of Modern Dance. Make detailed reference to her technique, choreography, and performing. Modern Dance is a style of dance that originated in the early 1920s as a rejection of Classical Ballet; it can be used to show raw emotion, political/social issues, and freedom. Martha Graham (11th May 1894 – April 1st 1991) was an American dancer who had a large impact on Modern Dance. The development of Modern Dance was largely impacted by Martha Graham, particularly by her influence on technique, choreography, and performance.

Martha Graham was the first person to develop a technique for Modern Dance; this had a huge a huge influence on the dance’s development. The technique Graham developed was the ‘contract and release’ technique. Contractions in Modern Dance show negativity and vulnerability. The contractions are shown by the body pulling in at the torso and the arms, legs, and head, being pulled toward the torso as if in an attempt to protect it and appear smaller.

The release shown in Modern Dance shows positivity and fearlessness.

It is shown when the arms and head are held out from the body and the torso is pushed out, this movement appears bigger than the contract movement. Martha Graham attended the ‘Denishawn School of Dancing and Related Arts’; the style of dance which Ruth St. Denis taught was very oriental based. The Denishawn School was the first dance school for Modern Dance. Attending the Denishawn School was a good start for Graham although she wanted to develop her own ideas and not only learn from others.

Attending Denishawn inspired Graham to develop her own technique and helped her to do so; this technique drastically influenced Modern Dance in the years of its development. Graham’s choreography was often inspired by cultural issues and largely featured abstract movement. Martha Graham often used abstract movement in her choreography to show emotions. Abstract movement was a technique which entailed boiling down emotions and movements to the purest and most raw form. She used abstract movement in her work piece ‘Lamentation’(1930).

This showed her portraying the feeling of grief; not the act of grieving but the feeling itself without any attachment or already known ideas of acts of grieving. During the 1920s America was dealing with the backslash of The First World War and was beginning to enter into an era of carelessness, parties, bootlegging, and The Great Depression. Classical Dance was becoming an ever-more popular form of entertainment however it was devoid of any real meaning or messages; it was this that brought about the rise of Modern Dance.

Martha Graham used Modern Dance as a medium for expressing her views on these social issues and took a lot of inspiration from these issues. One example of a dance based on social or cultural events is Appalachian Spring (1944). Appalachian Spring is a dance based on the celebration of the American pioneers after building a farmhouse, showing that they had successfully settled into America.

Conveying ideas about social and cultural issues was a new concept in dance as was abstract movement and these concepts greatly influenced Modern Dance. Martha Graham was original in the way that she would create the performances that she made. Graham was the first in Modern Dance to collaborate with other artists so as to include all art forms in her performances. She collaborated with Louis Horst, Isamu Noguchi, and Aaron Copland while creating her performances.

Louis Horst was a music accompanist and would play music while she performed, Isamu Noguchi was a sculptor and would sculpt Graham’s props and sets, and Aaron Copland was a composer and he would compose the music to go with Grahams dances. One of the things Graham did to highlight the differences between Modern Dance and classical dance was that she would choreograph a dance and then music would be written to accompany the dance as opposed to the order which takes place during classical dance where the music has already been written and a dance is choreographed to accompany the music.

Because of the ways that Martha Graham produced her performances this influenced Modern Dance through example. Modern Dance’s development has been hugely influenced by Martha Graham. She has influenced dance through her introduction of techniques, her new ways of choreographing dance, and through her ideas for new ways to produce performances.

Martha Graham Essay

Descartes’ First Trademark Argument Essay

Descartes’ First Trademark Argument Essay.

Descartes argues that our idea of God is innate, meaning it is something inside us from birth, something that has always been there and will always be there. He believed that everybody has an idea of God being a supremely perfect being, and comes to the conclusion in his argument, that God himself put this idea there, he even said that our idea of God is like “the mark of the craftsman stamped on his work” – us being the work, the mark being our knowledge of God himself.

For Descartes, the fact that everybody has this innate idea of a supremely perfect God is in itself, proof of his existence; and the fact that this is an a priori argument, makes this argument appealing for all rationalists, as it relies on knowledge, and not sense experience – which Descartes never trusted. The foundation for Descartes argument is the causal adequacy principle, this is the idea that something (for example, A cannot exist unless it is produced or caused by something else that contains formally or eminently everything that is found in A.

Formal reality refers to the basic properties that a thing possesses. However, this alone would cause problems for Descartes argument, because God obviously does not possess all of the properties, of all of the objects on earth, take for example a stone, its properties are hard, round, rough. God is not these things. The way Descartes gets round this is by saying that something say again, a stone, can be caused by something that contains the properties eminently. To contain something eminently, means for the cause to not necessarily have the same properties as the effect, but to have a greater property.

So God may not possess the qualities of a stone (say hardness) however he possesses a quality greater then this. In other words, the causal adequacy effects means the cause of something can be no less then the effect. Descartes then takes this principle, and believes he can apply it to ideas, in particular the idea of God as a maximally/supremely perfect being, the cause of this idea, must therefore must contain formally or eminently maximum perfection, so therefore the cause of the idea of God must itself be maximally perfect.

Descartes then uses deductive reasoning to decide where the idea came from, he first asked, could he be the source of the idea? However concludes that he can’t be, because he himself is not supremely perfect, and therefore he can’t be the cause of a supremely perfect being. He then considers if the idea of a supremely perfect being could have come through his senses, however he decides this isn’t possible, as he knows he has never seen (heard, smelt, tasted) a supremely perfect being.

He then asks if he could have imagined a supremely perfect being, again he concludes he couldn’t have, because his idea of God is too clear and distinct to have come from his imagination. He therefore deducts that the cause of the idea of a supremely perfect being, is actually an existing supremely perfect being who ‘placed’ this idea in his mind; so therefore, God exists.

There are however, a number of criticisms to this argument, firstly, many philosophers have raised doubts as to whether the causal adequacy principle is actually true to real life, as there are a number of examples in everyday situations where the cause at least appears to be less then the effect, for example, a match causing a roaring bonfire, or a whisper causing an avalanche. Further examples include chaos theory – the idea that a flutter of a butterfly’s wing can cause an earthquake.

If indeed causal adequacy principle isn’t true, Descartes’ whole argument is flawed, as if the cause can be less great then the effect, then Descartes indeed could have created him himself. The second criticism is David Hume’s argument, that you cannot know a cause a priori, but only by experience. He says you cannot determine the cause of something, simply by using reasoning, for example, if a window is broken, you know it must have been something big enough to produce enough force to break it by our past experiences, not by using a priori reasoning.

He concludes that you have to have to have observed the cause and the effect to truly know what happened, and therefore the cause must be in existence. The third criticism questions whether we can actually have an idea of a supremely perfect being, Thomas Aquinas doubts our imaginings of God, because he is too great, and that it is impossible for us to understand some of his qualities, particularly the idea of God being infinite, as it is beyond out understanding to understand what such qualities actually mean, and therefore we don’t have a genuine idea of God.

The forth criticism of Descartes’ argument is that the idea of God is incoherent, there are attributes which appear to be just plain contradictory, for example God is both immanent and transcendent. There is also doubt raised over Gods supposed omnipotence, can he make a rock so heavy that he can’t lift it? It seems either way his omnipotence will be compromised. There is also the problem of evil, if God is all good, omniscient and omnipotent, then why does he allow suffering in the world?

It would therefore seem that the idea of God is unclear, and if so it is likely the cause isn’t that great, and so would make sense that the cause could in fact have been Descartes himself. Another criticism is that the idea of God is not universal, as many other religions do not have an idea of one all powerful God, and therefore the idea of God cannot be innate, as if it was, it would be inside all of us.

Also, it is put that the idea of omnipotence cannot be divine, as it can be traced back to having historical routes as tribes fought over who had the greatest God, they would start with ‘our God is powerful’ until one tribes got to ‘our God is maximally powerful’ – and therefore cannot be beaten by the other tribe. Descartes would argue that the fact other religions don’t acknowledge one maximally perfect God does not mean the innate idea is not in us, it just means they have chose to ignore it, or haven’t been made aware of it.

He compares it to maths, in the way that we may not have used its truths and laws (i. e. that a triangles interior angles add up to 180) however they are still truths none the less. The last criticism is the empiricists account for the idea of God, that we have experienced attributes such as power, knowledge and goodness in people around them and simply extended them to the idea of God, therefore the cause is less great then the effect, and the idea is not innate.

One thing it has in it’s favor, is that it is an a priori argument, and therefore uses reasoning, something rationalist would find very appealing, it means that if the premise can be accepted that it can give 100% certainty. Overall, I feel Descartes’ argument has too many valid criticisms for it to be considered as a successful argument, and its foundation- casual adequacy principle, is itself flawed, leaving the whole argument to fail.

Descartes’ First Trademark Argument Essay

What Advantages Does Spinoza’s Substance Monism Have over Descartes’ Dualism? Essay

What Advantages Does Spinoza’s Substance Monism Have over Descartes’ Dualism? Essay.

Spinoza’s philosophy as espoused in the Ethics was a response to Descartes’ dualism. Through works such as the Ethics, Spinoza seeks to address the main flaws in Descartes’ philosophy. These flaws included but were by no means limited to, proof for the existence of God and the interaction between mind and body. This essay will highlight the advantages of Spinoza’s monism over Descartes’ dualism by looking at Spinoza’s response to these issues. First, in order to consider the advantages of Spinoza’s substance monism over Descartes’ dualism it is necessary to show how each philosopher demonstrates their substance dualism or substance monism.

Tim Crane defines monism and dualism as follows: “Monism denies that minds and their bodies are distinct substances. Monists assert that substances are all of one kind. They could say that all substances are mental; or they could say that all substances are bodily […] Dualists hold that minds and bodies are capable of independent existence. ” Although the concept of dualism can be traced back to Plato, it is generally recognised that modern versions of substance dualism have their origins in Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy, first published in 1641.

In the Sixth Meditation Descartes’ states that: It is true that I may have (or, to anticipate, that I certainly have) a body that is very closely joined to me. But nevertheless, on the one hand I have a clear and distinct idea of myself, in so far as I am simply a thinking, non-extended thing; and on the other hand I have a distinct idea of body, in so far as this is simply an extended, non-thinking thing. Descartes’ distinction here is between two types of substance, extended corporeal substance, res extensa and non-extended thinking substance, res cogitans.

If one is to include God in Descartes’ theory on substance, then it could be considered that his ‘dualism’ allows for three substances; or as has been pointed out, God is Descartes’ only substance and mind and body are secondary substances. Spinoza’s substance monism is in opposition with dualism. While Descartes considered that there were two types of substance, extended and non-extended, Spinoza held that there was only one particular substance, which he refers to as Nature, or God.

Spinoza’s method in the Ethics has been subject to varying interpretations, however, Della Rocca, in Representation and the Mind-Body Problem in Spinoza, considers that Spinoza sets out his argument for substance monism in five steps: In Nature there cannot be two or more substances of the same nature or attribute (1P5) Here Spinoza is ruling out the overlap of attributes between substances. The next step in setting out his substance monism is: It pertains to the nature of a substance to exist (1P7).

As, In Nature there cannot be two or more substances of the same nature or attribute (1P5), they cannot cause one another and must be self-caused. This is followed by: God, or a substance consisting of infinite attributes, each of which expresses eternal and infinite essence, necessarily exists. Dem. : If you deny this, conceive, if you can, that God does not exist. Therefore (by A7) his essence does not involve existence. But this (by P7) is absurd. Therefore God necessarily exists, q. e. d. (1P11 D1) God’s existence is demonstrated by the application of (1P7) to God.

As God is a substance it therefore pertains to God’s nature to exist and it cannot be otherwise. By God I understand a being absolutely infinite, that is, a substance consisting of an infinity of attributes, of which each one expresses an eternal and infinite essence. (1D6) Here Spinoza is demonstrating that being of infinite attributes it follows that God has all attributes. The culmination of Spinoza’s rationale for substance monism is (1P14) which states that: Except God, no substance can be or be conceived (1P14).

As Della Rocca explains: “Since by 1P5, attributes cannot be shared and since God has all of them, there can be no other substances besides God. ” For Spinoza, everything that can and does exist necessarily exists through God. While the above steps demonstrate Spinoza’s substance monism, they also show that the overarching factor in his philosophy is the argument for the existence of God and God’s attributes which necessarily follow. The advantage of Spinoza’s substance monism over Descartes’ substance dualism in terms of his metaphysics of God/Nature, is that Spinoza’s God is one that supports his entire system.

Where Descartes’ Meditations is built on doubt, Spinoza’s Ethics is built on certainty and on a series of definitions. His notion that God is the only substance, the core of his monism, hinges on his definition of God/Nature: By God I understand a being absolutely infinite, i. e. , a substance consisting of an infinity of attributes, of which one expresses an eternal and infinite essence (1def6) While Descartes sought, through the Meditations, to be certain of the truth of his own existence as a ‘thinking thing’ and then prove God’s existence, Spinoza turns Descartes’ argument on its axis.

For Spinoza the argument that God exists as the only substance, because as a supremely perfect being he must necessarily exist is the basis of the Ethics. Spinoza’s statement of God’s existence as the only substance gives his argument a strong foundation from which to build the rest of his philosophy. The axiomatic format of the Ethics enables Spinoza to set out his philosophy in a more direct manner than Descartes.

While Descartes does not set out to prove God’s existence until the Third Meditation, Spinoza never brings God’s existence to doubt instead setting out a number of definitions and axioms which are taken by Spinoza to be true. The rest of his philosophy goes on to show exactly how these are true by being self-referential. Spinoza’s argument for the existence of God/Nature therefore is the key to his monism as everything that exists does so through a God whose existence is never doubted (since to do so would be ‘absurd’). Spinoza’s God/Nature is one which is impersonal, opposed to Descartes’ interpretation.

On proving the existence of God, in the Third Meditation, Descartes states that: By the word ‘God’ I understand a substance that is infinite, <eternal, immutable,> independent, supremely intelligent, supremely powerful, and which created both myself and everything else (if anything else there be). As Edwin Curley says: “Spinoza’s denial of personality to God, his insistence that God has no intellect, no will, no purposes and no emotions, has made his God seem rather remote, a God only a philosopher could love. This is not the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

” That God is abstract fits in with Spinoza’s pantheistic explanation of God as Nature. As shown above, Spinoza’s argument for substance monism is made clear by when he states that apart from God, ‘no substance can be or, consequently, be conceived’ (1P14). This statement places Spinoza’s philosophy at odds with Descartes’ substance dualism, which holds that there are two distinct substances, mind and body, the so-called ‘separability argument’. Descartes’ mind and body substances have been defined as follows: Any substance with mental properties lacks material properties and any substance with material properties lacks mental properties.

This is in opposition to Spinoza’s view that mind and body are attributes of the one substance, God/Nature, as has been shown above. Descartes’ assertion that mind and body are two separate entities and that as a human being he is a ‘thing that thinks’ poses the problem of how mind and body interact. This is a problem that Spinoza’s substance monism seeks to overcome. John Cottingham, in Cartesian dualism: theology, metaphysics, and science, opens by saying: “Throughout his life Descartes firmly believed that the mind, or soul, of man […] was essentially nonphysical.

” Cottingham goes on to say that for Descartes there is ‘a ‘real’ (realis) distinction between the mind and body, in other words, the mind is a distinct and independent ‘thing’ (res). In the Meditations Descartes states that in so far as he is a thinking, non-extended thing, he is distinct from his body and can exist without it. For Descartes then, mind and body are two separate entities; in particular the mind is non-physical – Descartes’ ‘incorporeality thesis’.

Descartes’ position on the question of mind and body is made apparent on his philosophical journey in the Meditations when he defines himself as a ‘thinking thing’, the cogito, which does not expressly arise in the Meditations. But what am I? A thing that thinks. What is that? A thing that doubts, understands, affirms, denies, is willing, is unwilling, and also imagines and has sensory perceptions. Specifically, Descartes elevates the mind to a position of significance over the body in terms of being able to prove his own existence in the face of the extreme doubt being pursued in the First Meditation.

Descartes comes to the conclusion that he is a ‘thinking thing’ in the Second Meditation, The nature of the human mind and how it is better known than the body. Descartes’ path to this conclusion comes while still in a phase of scepticism in the First Meditation. Descartes considers that a ‘…malicious demon of the utmost power and cunning has employed all his energies in order to deceive me…’ However, the ‘malicious demon’ is defeated by the following passage: … let him deceive me as much as he can, he will never bring it about that I am nothing so long as I think that I am something.

So after considering everything very thoroughly, I must finally conclude that this proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind. ‘Putting forward’ or the act of thinking is proof alone for Descartes that he exists. Descartes’ belief that he is a ‘thinking thing’ sits alongside his consideration of the body as a machine. Descartes has a ‘purely mechanical view of biology’. In the Sixth Mediation Descartes states that:

Admittedly, when I consider the purpose of the clock, I may say that it is departing from its nature when it does not tell the right time; and similarly when I consider the mechanism of the human body, I may think that, in relation to the movements which normally occur in it, it too is deviating from its nature if the throat is dry at a time when drinking is not beneficial to its health. Descartes also refers, in the Sixth Meditation, to the nerves which ‘pull on inner parts of the brain to which they are attached’.

For Descartes therefore, the human body is comparable to a mechanism such as a clock, a mechanism which is not without risk of malfunction, with the mind existing as a separate entity. In The History of Philosophy the union of soul and body is described as ‘entirely mechanical’ and ‘diametrically opposed’. “The soul inhabits the body as an alien thing, a mechanical and entirely artificial relationship. Without the soul, the body is like a lifeless machine or automatum (sic). Even the best-constructed robot cannot acquire a human consciousness, even if it is programmed to speak.

” Descartes’ analogy of the human body as a separate mechanism from the mind has come under close scrutiny from critics. Famously, Gilbert Ryle in The Concept of the Mind refers to Descartes’ ‘official doctrine’ of mental powers and operations as ‘the ghost in the machine’. For Ryle there was an obvious absurdity behind the idea that the mind could exist alongside the body without any explanation of how the two interact, if indeed they do at all. John Cottingham asserts that Descartes’ thesis of the immateriality of the mind presented him with ‘a nest of problems that were to become notorious stumbling blocks for Cartesian philosophy.

’ To explain how two disparate substances could co-exist, Descartes pointed to the pineal gland, in the brain as hosting the mind’s bodily existence and providing the point of contact between the ‘animal spirits’, or impulses of the brain and the substance of mind. Although Descartes is at pains to emphasise that mind and body are separate substances he is also keen to stress that the two are inexorably joined. Descartes theory that interaction between mind and body takes place in the pineal gland doesn’t appear to hold up to intense scrutiny.

Indeed, in the Sixth Mediation Descartes appears to gloss over the subject when he says: Every time this part of the brain is in a given state, it presents the same signals to the mind, even though the other parts of the body may be in a different condition at the time. This is established by countless observations, which there is no need to review here. John Cottingham points out Descartes problem here when he says: “ … at some point–in the pineal gland, or whatever part of the brain is chosen as the ‘seat of the soul’–there has to be a raw interaction between the two wholly alien substances, mind and matter.

This is the central difficulty for Descartes’s account of the mind. ” Descartes’ inability to adequately explain the interaction between mind and body leaves his substance dualism with an underlying problem, problems which are not apparent with Spinoza’s substance monism. Spinoza’s first mention of the notions laid out by Descartes of a ‘thinking thing’ and an ‘extended thing’ is in (1P14 Cor. 2. ) when he states that: Cor. 1: From this it follows most clearly, first that God is unique, that is (by D6), that in Nature there is only one substance, and that it is absolutely infinite (as we indicated in P10S).

Cor. 2: It follows, second, that an extended thing and a thinking thing are either attributes of God, or (by A1) affections of God’s attributes. Spinoza’s positioning of God top and centre of the philosophy contained within the Ethics enables him to explain human existence through the infinite attributes of God. Spinoza disagrees with Descartes in that he does not consider mind and body to be substances; instead they are explained as attributes of God with modes being set out in Part I of the Ethics as the ‘affections of a substance’.

For Spinoza ideas are modes of thought and things are modes of extension. As discussed earlier, in (1p14) Spinoza demonstrates that there can be no other substance besides God. As God is the source of all attributes, including the extended thing and the thinking thing, the conclusion is that the thinking thing and the extended thing are interchangeable. The advantage of Spinoza’s substance monism here, over Descartes’ substance dualism is that he eliminates the need to explain interaction between mind and body since they are attributes of the same substance.

He therefore avoids the pitfalls Descartes’ philosophy is prone to as explained above. Spinoza does away with the need to explain the overlap of extended thing and thinking thing as for Spinoza the two do not have an overlap. To have an idea of the extended thing is to have an idea of the thinking thing and vice versa. This is Spinoza’s dual aspect theory. Spinoza’s theory that the object of the idea of the human mind is the body appears in Part I of the Ethics in (A6), where he says: “A true idea must agree with its object”.

In Part II (P13) he says: The object of the idea constituting the human mind is the body, or a certain mode of extension which actually exists and nothing else. Dem. : For if the object of the human mind were not the body, the ideas of the affections of the body would not be in God (by P9C) insofar as he constituted our mind, but insofar as he constituted the mind of another thing, that is (by P11C), the ideas of the affections of the body would not be in our mind; but (by A4) we have ideas of the affections of the body. Therefore, the object of the idea which constitutes the human mind is the body, and it (by P11) actually exists.

In contrast to Descartes’ mind, which interacts with the body via the pineal gland, Spinoza’s mind and body interact seamlessly as two of God’s infinite attributes. Jonathan Bennett explains that Spinoza’s ‘parallelism’ works because of the doctrine of substance monism on which his philosophy is build and which states that one substance is responsible for both attributes. If there were two substances, one extended and one thinking, Bennett says: “ […] it would not follow from the fact that something is extended and F that anything is thinking and F.

The potentially transattribute mode that combines with extension to yield my body might not be possessed by the thinking substance, in which case my mind would not exist. ” Accordingly then, for the body to exist then the mind must exist also, and vice versa. Spinoza’s substance monism enables him to address what he saw as the flaws in Descartes’ metaphysics. The God/Nature of Spinoza is impersonal, in contrast to Descartes’ benevolent God. Spinoza’s God is also presented at the very centre of his philosophy, his one and only substance.

By approaching his ontological argument ‘God first’ and with the establishment of one substance Spinoza is subsequently able to overcome the most notorious of Descartes’ problems, the relationship of mind and body. Ends 2873 words Bibliography Primary sources Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy. Trans. by John Cottingham. Cambridge, 1985 Benedict Spinoza, The Ethics, Parts One & Two from A Spinoza Reader, Ed. & trans. by Edwin Curley. Princeton Univ.

Press, 1984 Secondary sources Tim Crane, (2000), Dualism, Monism, Physicalism, originally from Mind and Society (ed. R.Viale), cited from http://web. mac. com/cranetim/Tims_website/Online_papers. html Howard Robinson, “Dualism”, in The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (Fall 2009 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed. ), http://plato. stanford. edu/archives/fall2009/entries/dualism/ Steven Nadler, (2006) Spinoza’s Ethics An Introduction, Cambridge University Press Michael Della Rocca (1996) Representation and the Mind-Body Problem in Spinoza. Oxford University Press Edwin M Curley (1996) Spinoza, Life and Works, for the Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy, Blackwell, cited from http://www. sitemaker. umich. edu/emcurley/spinoza.

Gonzalo Rodriguez-Pereyra, (2011) “Descartes’s Substance Dualism and His Independence Conception of Substance”, http://www. philosophy. ox. ac. uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/3104/Descartess_substance_dualism_and_his_independence_conception _of_substance. pdf John Cottingham (1992) “Cartesian dualism: theology, metaphysics, and science”, in John Cottingham (Ed. ) The Cambridge Companion to Descartes: Cambridge University Press, p236 Alan Woods (2011) “The History of Philosophy” Chapter Five Descartes, Spinoza and Leibniz. http://easyweb. easynet. co. uk/~socappeal/philosophy/chapter5. html.

Gilbert Ryle, (1955) The Concept of Mind, Hutchinson & Co (Publishers) Ltd Jonathan Bennett, (1996) “Spinoza’s Metaphysics”, from Cambridge Companion to Spinoza, Ed. by Markku Peltonen, Cambridge ——————————————– [ 1 ]. Tim Crane, (2000), Dualism, Monism, Physicalism, originally from Mind and Society (ed. R. Viale), cited from http://web. mac. com/cranetim/Tims_website/Online_papers. html [ 2 ]. Howard Robinson, “Dualism”, in The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (Fall 2009 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed. ), http://plato. stanford. edu/archives/fall2009/entries/dualism/ [ 3 ].

Howard Robinson, “Dualism”, in The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (Fall 2009 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed. ) http://plato. stanford. edu/entries/dualism/ [ 4 ]. CSM II, p54 [ 5 ]. Steven Nadler, (2006) Spinoza’s Ethics An Introduction, Cambridge University Press p56 [ 6 ]. Michael Della Rocca (1996) Representation and the Mind-Body Problem in Spinoza. Oxford University Press, pp 5-6. [ 7 ]. Ibid p6 [ 8 ]. CSM III, 31 [ 9 ]. Edwin M Curley (1996) Spinoza, Life and Works, for the Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy, Blackwell, cited from http://www. sitemaker. umich. edu/emcurley/spinoza [ 10 ].

Gonzalo Rodriguez-Pereyra, (2011) “Descartes’s Substance Dualism and His Independence Conception of Substance”, http://www. philosophy. ox. ac. uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/3104/Descartess_substance_dualism_and_his_independence_conception _of_substance. pdf [ 11 ]. John Cottingham (1992) “Cartesian dualism: theology, metaphysics, and science”, in John Cottingham (Ed. ) The Cambridge Companion to Descartes: Cambridge University Press, p236 [ 12 ]. CSM II, p19 [ 13 ]. CSM I, p15 [ 14 ]. CSM II, pp 16-17 [ 15 ]. John Cottingham, (1992) “Cartesian Dualism”, from Cambridge Companion to Descartes.

Ed by John Cottingham, Cambridge, p239 [ 16 ]. CSM VI, pp 58-59 [ 17 ]. Ibid, p60 [ 18 ]. Alan Woods (2011) “The History of Philosophy” Chapter Five Descartes, Spinoza and Leibniz. http://easyweb. easynet. co. uk/~socappeal/philosophy/chapter5. html [ 19 ]. Gilbert Ryle, (1955) The Concept of Mind, Hutchinson & Co (Publishers) Ltd, pp15-16 [ 20 ]. John Cottingham (1988) The Rationalists, Oxford University Press, p124 [ 21 ]. CSM VI, pp59-60 [ 22 ]. Jonathan Bennett (1996) “Spinoza’s Metaphysics”, from Cambridge Companion to Spinoza, Ed. by Markku Peltonen, Cambridge, p81.

What Advantages Does Spinoza’s Substance Monism Have over Descartes’ Dualism? Essay