Intellectual Autobiography Essay Example

Intellectual Autobiography Essay Example Intellectual Autobiography Essay Sample Intellectual Autobiography Essay Sample All I can remember from my childhood is that I was a quiet child. So quiet that my parents thought my siblings were wiser than I was and, therefore, would favor them at my expense. However, what was their wisdom when they were always fighting with the neighbors, upholding the tit for tat principle. I was different and I knew that. I did not have many arguments with either my siblings or friends. I always thought twice before I did anything. I knew how to manage anger when I was very young and I knew the power of isolation when I was at this tender age. Nevertheless, when I was advanced in years, the surrounding people recognized my power of thinking and capacities. During my education, no child in school could beat my grades. I seemed the best to everyone and they said that my book intellect was something inborn. What they did not understand is that my solitary self had a deeper world and made much more actions than the talkative me. I would visit the galaxies in my mind. Furthermore, I would construct a car, bring peace to our world, and build relationships in my introverted self. What I mean is that I used to think more than my parents could have ever considered. To them, I was a stupid child who could not fight others when wronged like the rest of my siblings. It is at this young age that I developed the real meaning of life. Some of the virtues that I hold today were constructed when I was very young. Everything my inspirers came to do in my life was to strengthen what had been built in me when I was youth. When I was alone, I could think about the ills and the misgivings of life. I would think about the situations from different angles, analyze them, and come up with a certain conclusion. Finally, as it seems today, most of my life choices were correct. The fact that I was not brought up in a religious family nor did I attend any religious gatherings when I was young surprised many. Nevertheless, the beautiful side of life came to be placed in my heart by whoever did so. Most of all, I cherished love though I did not get much of it from my parents given that they admired my siblings more than they loved me. Perhaps the deprivation of love is what came to bring a strong love in my heart. I came to realize that love conquered all evil brought even the fiercest monster into submission. My uncle, whom everyone in the extended family perceived as the black sheep of their family, can serve a perfect example. No one wanted to know the reason he was a drunkard. Everyone, including my siblings, was avoiding him like a plague, except for me. My loving self always showed him that he was a meaningful being. A part of me did this because I pretty much identified myself with my uncle. I was the black sheep of my family because, as seen earlier, most family members thought that my quiet self was because of foolishness. Therefore, there came to be a very strong bond between my uncle and me. The funniest thing is that none of us showed another verbal appreciation, but the deeds spoke volumes. I always listened to his version of his life, to which no one was ready to listen. I came to understand that his wife who took away his children hurt him to an extent that life meant nothing to him. Since then, he became an alcoholic and opted never to marry again because she was the person he loved most in his life. His family, with their imaginations and judgments, thought that he was the one stupid enough to have let his wife and children out of his life. They did not understand the extent of his pain, which made him choose a life of destruction. From my uncles’ experience, I came to understand that love cannot only build, but can also destroy. It was love that destroyed my uncle and I vowed never to allow myself to follow the destructive path. However, it was just a saying. I do not understand the love that my uncle was talking about, but I feel that later, I will become a victim of such a deep feeling. Another example of love and the situation following I could not understand was the situation of relations in our neighborhood. I developed hatred because of the way my family members treated my neighbors. It was expected that when one of us fell for one of our neighbors, we were also supposed to loathe this neighbor and it was the trend in the whole neighborhood. One of my neighbors happened to fall for my eldest sister. This situation turned out very serious because they exchanged words and the two families had to sit down in order to come up with a solution. Unknowingly, long time hatred was born between the whole families, as they developed some strong hatred against each other up to this day. However, I did not understand why the two of them and I chose not to hate anyone of them because of mistakes I knew nothing about. My personal investigations of love helped me in understanding what was inside me. One of the greatest philosophers, Plato, explained different types of love in his dialogs. Therefore, I have always tried to classify what it was that I felt for others, whether it was Eros, Philia or agape love. The latter, as I came to understand, is mostly present among higher deities and influenced by the Divine in our lives. By this time, I was not a believer so any religion or any being did not influence me. Eros is that passionate feeling, which mostly involves sexual desire (Moseley). I guess my uncle and auntie had this type of love since it is the love between lovers. I was not in love with any of the persons in my life and only loved them for who they were and that they were human beings like me. Therefore, I came to conclude that Plato classifies the love I had as Philia. This feeling involves the fondness and the appreciation of others, which I greatly practice up to this day. The only diff erence between the ways I felt for others is that I never held grudges against anyone, never engaged in quarrels, and never gossiped. I have always questioned myself when I was young and have always thought that there must have been a hidden force that worked in that child I was many years ago. In fact, I still miss that child since life has changed me into a more intolerable person. However, up to this day, a philosophy that I started long ago when I was young still holds. Severally, my neighbors have saved my life and have directed me towards the right path. For example, once when I had an accident, my neighbor eagerly helped me as my parents were far away from me. Moreover, my neighbors advised me on the best career path to follow given that they had been in college and high school prior to me. When I was joining college, they helped me in understanding the nature of life in school and the behavior to which I was required to stick as a freshman. Therefore, this life philosophy has assisted me in surviving danger and escaping death. Furthermore, it has helped me in gaining friends across borders and having people in my life who would easily risk their lives for me. In turn, I can also commit the same action, as I am quick to note the humble hearts that are only full of love and nothing but affection. My earlier self that chose to be humble and quiet has also shaped me intellectually. Without realizing it, I found myself reading difficult and challenging books of higher level targeted at high school students. Furthermore, I also engaged in reading books that inspired and encouraged wisdom in all areas. I came to realize that there was some part of wisdom not gained naturally, but from extensive learning and interaction with other people’s deep thoughts. For example, many individuals do not embrace the idea of letting go. However, people who have practiced and written about it present a good way of encouraging others who think that letting go is a weakness. As I explained earlier, religiousness was a distinctive feature of neither my parents nor me. I came to be religious later in life when I sought to understand evil and good. In the midst, I came to know about these two forces. Since I loved reading, I found myself reading the Bible when I grew older. I was not reading it in order to practice what was written, but to know the motives behind the writings and to understand whether the content was applicable. Unknowingly, I started practicing what was written in the book and it started working for me. I was good from the very beginning; thus, it was not hard for me to practice religion and to understand more about the nature of evil. Therefore, I came not only to believe in the existence of God, but also realized that the evil certainly existed. I understood that humans have a role in deciding whom to follow. As I learned, the two beings, good and evil have the capability of influencing a person’s life. However, it can happen only if people fully allow any of the powers to impact them. Unlike others who believe in organized religion, I think that it comes from within. Therefore, people only meet to strengthen what they believe and to distort the beliefs of others. Thus, people ought to choose carefully whom to follow if they want to preserve their original beliefs. I also believe that people are born with different destinies and unless one changes that destiny it is possible to die the way one was born. Some are born with sinful hearts while others are born with good ones. However, all these can change into their opposites as a good person can become a bad person and vice versa. In my case, several things almost changed me from who I used to be. I came across some friends whom I loved, cherished and treated like my brothers and sisters. However, some of them ended up betraying my trust. Life and practice also force someone to shift from the old to the newly acquired self. In my case, real changes came later. As seen earlier, I was more of an introvert but never shy and afraid of speaking in public or in front of a huge audience. My character has changed in high school. Due to the school requirements and assignments, I educated to provide presentations on certain learned things. It meant that I had to upscale my speaking abilities and to change my quiet nature. One day, I was required to speak to a big audience with parents involved instead of the usual class speech, with which I just do away. Moreover, the audience was unusual for me because later only my classmates had served as my listeners and viewers. Therefore, I could not refuse to accept this offer, no matter what, though I knew that I did not like the whole idea. I was informed earlier than usual and for a whole week, I struggled with the idea of me having to speak to a large audience. I was given a large wr iting, which was meant to guide me through and I was required to read it a hundred times in order to understand what was required of me and how I should perform in front of all the parents. I read it many times in order to avoid stammering and going out of topic. Now, I remember the topic I talked about was students’ active involvement in school work and enhancing their creativity. It was not hard for me to understand the topic given because I was a bright and diligent student and had read many books. On this particular day, the school principal introduced me to the large audience. I had never seen so many eyes assembled together waiting for whatever came out of me. At first, it was a shocking site since all the eyes were gazing at me. I felt as if I would pass out, but continued to give myself some motivations that I would make it. I began mumbling some words and I almost lost track of the entire topic. However, my encouraging class teacher was with me and one look at her helped motivate me and also helped gather my insignificant strength. From then onward, I talked with much power and passion that I could hear the audience clapping more than one time. I also learned that interceding with moments of humor was an effective way to keep the crowd engaged. During the entire speech giving experience, I forgot that I had a written speech and talked about whatever ca me to my mind. Unknowingly, that was the beginning of my public speeches to which I am always ready today when given the chance. It was also a beginning of a long chance that allowed me to speak out my philosophies of life. The lack of confidence I suffered from in the beginning turned into a big opportunity, which made me bury my introvert self. By the time I finished the speech, everyone was on their feet, including my parents, who did not know that I possessed such a talent. As seen earlier, I had struggled with my parents since they thought that I was unintelligent simply because I chose to keep quiet in relation to many things that happened in my life. My parents and my siblings expected that I would perform lower in such an activity and the worst or probably the best thing for them was that I did not turn into what they expected. Whatever I had learned from myself and my books came into full force and helped provide me with a subsequent topic during my speeches. Our school principal was very excited to an extent that he rewarded me for the excellent speech given. Since that day, I was the one to give out some notable speeches owing to my diverse audience. On the other hand, my friends and those I cared for demotivated my virtuous nature. For instance, one of my high school friends chose to use me and abuse my good self since she thought that I was good and that I could not deny her anything. I could help her with homework, run her errand, and even help her with some other things. At first, the thought that this time was the last time helped me. However, such a process did not stop. I was forced to take a strong stance against my friends and become an activist for my rights. I learned that not loving but allowing others to use my good nature was a weakness. I realized that this was the reason my parents and siblings always thought I was weak. Up to this day, my transformation still amazes my parents, brothers, and sisters. They also understand that inside me there is a very intelligent person who was hard to ignore and who should be respected by everybody. One of the questions that people constantly ask me is who have inspired me to become who I am; however, I consider the answer is clear. Life experiences have shaped me into my present self. However, I have had several people who have stimulated my thinking, one of them being my uncle. My family, though in the hard way, also contributed to my success in life. Furthermore, my teachers also assisted me because they were quite supportive and helped straighten my paths while others acted as barriers that needed to be overcome in order to learn and survive. My class teacher in the primary school, however, had a large influence on me since she always persisted that I should work hard on my education. She continued following me even when she was not my class teacher and she made sure that I excelled in all ways. She also connected me with the right people in my learning life in order to impact who I was and to strengthen my hidden capabilities. Up to this date, she still insists on knowing a bout my performance and encouraging me to work better than I have been doing given that I can achieve higher results. In conclusion, it is worth noting that my intellectual path has been a long and bumpy one. It started when I was young and is still going on. I have faced the challenges that have helped shape my destiny. I have also experienced some barriers that I have had to overcome in order to be who I am. One thing I know for certain is that the journey is not yet finished since no one stops learning until they are in the grave. Therefore, I still have a long journey ahead of me. The only difference is that I am more knowledgeable than I was in the past.

Public Speaking and the Youth of Todayv Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Public Speaking and the Youth of Todayv - Essay Example Since we do and cannot exist on our own we will need to effectively communicate our desires or messages (as this will be referred to later in this paper) to obtain the response we expect and make the communicative act more rewarding. No one is alike in its desires, opinions on certain things, acceptance even in non-acceptance of an idea for everyone is brought up in different environment by different significant others and are exposed to different stimuli. Engaging in a communicative act is, in effect, creating a common ground that will serve as a spring board for consequential interactions. We may study communication or the communicative act in two ways: either as a process and or as an activity. On the one hand, if it will be studied as a process, communication will be explored based on the basic principles involved: thinking, the verbal as well as non-verbal form of communication, the elements involved in the process (i.e source, message, channel, and the receiver), and factors affecting each element in the communicative act. ... Finally, if the communicative act is seen as an activity, the result or the effect of the communicative act will likewise be examined after engaging in a specific form of communication. In a group discussion, for example, emphasis will be on the result-i.e whether a solution has been made. In a persuasive discourse, however, whether the audience is convinced of the ideas presented by the speaker. All of these will be explained in this paper, except, of course the actual presentation of each form. Much of the discussion, however, will focus on public speaking and its effect on one of the most difficult to persuade audience: the youth. The basic guiding principles that will motivate such genre of receiver will be given emphasis in the later part of this paper. The communicative act, as specified earlier, may take different forms. The most common form, so common that it tends to be given least consideration, is intrapersonal communication or "the processes which operate within the individual (Intrapersonal Communication)."In this level of communication an individual acts as both the originating and the responding communicator. It ranges from simply thinking, meditating, and reflecting to talking to one's self or writing oneself a memo. Then there is what is called the interpersonal level of communication. While in the intrapersonal level, both the source and the receiver of the message pertain to an individual, interpersonal communication involves another person. It may take the form of a conversation, a dialogue or an interview. As you might have guessed, two personae are now actively participating, affecting and being affected in the process. The success in this

Business Strategies and Decision Making Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Business Strategies and Decision Making - Essay Example Several authors have observed a consistent pattern in strategy development and there is no empirical doubt that managers are for it (Higgins, 2013:30). Managers in various organisations, as evident in several publications, agree that it is not easy to hold together all the components of an organisation if a well-patterned strategy is not developed. The importance of such a plan can be drawn from the point those core goals, actions and policies are integrated into a strategic plan that drives the success of a business-both large and small. Managers though, observe that developing a strategy alone is not sufficient for a corporation to realise its success, but rather, should be a well-engineered plan that brings together and allocates resources equitably in all operations. Nevertheless, all corporations-large or small- need a form of a patterned strategy put in place so as to experience success as other successful firms. The effect of ignoring such plans may result in haphazard resources spending and consequently, lead to wasteful use of the already limited resources. In comparison, large organisations’ strategies are formalised as compared to small-sized ones. However, small sized organisations are of late realising the importance of developing critical strategies that are formal and communicated to staffs. As much as patterned strategy development has been taking centre stage in several organisations, there has a negative counter-development- strategy drift. A business external environment such as competitors, consumers, suppliers among others, is essential to any firm. When a firm fails to respond to such aspects, the condition is termed as a strategy drift. It is not a new phenomenon to find a formally stable business close down as a result of failing to effectively respond in a strategic manner to its external environment (Wild, Wild and Han, 2008:230).  

The New Right Essay Example for Free

The New Right Essay The New Right, as it is called, has had a phenomenal impact in Britain and the United States since 1979. Both its successes and failures have led to an intense ongoing debate, especially within the British Conservative Party, as to what extent the New Right represents a departure or continuance of, what some perceive as, traditional Conservatism. The long and rich past of the Party has made the citation of a particular period of its history, as being either a source or illustration of traditional Conservatism, very difficult indeed. Nonetheless, certain tenants transcend the breadth of its history to form the criteria by which the New Right can be judged. Conservatism is, first and foremost, composed of many conflicting strands of thought. It does not stand as a monolithic ideology offering an unalterable set of prescriptions which configure to some preconceived, and as yet, unrealised ideal of society. It is not surprising then that there are many conservatives who would deny the attribution of ideology to their beliefs.1 British Conservatism is, therefore, more accurately, characterised by the prevailing strand or grouping at any given time. This displays a fundamental point, namely that Conservatism avoids being ideological because it is, by nature, not. By contrast, one of the most striking aspects of the New Right is its strong ideological fervour. Margaret Thatcher and her mentors, like Sir Keith Joseph, were fired up by the battle they believed they were waging against the damaging post-war consensus and the pernicious ideology of socialism. Unlike previous incarnations of Conservatism, Thatcherism (which is the British New Right) relied heavily on actual thinkers and academics rather than the traditional sort of ancestral wisdom which was personified by Harold Macmillan: who had once said distrust the clever man. In light of this, it is of little surprise then that John Stuart Mill referred to the Tories as the stupid party.2 Although having borrowed from Adam Smith in the early nineteenth century the Conservatives by no means had a Karl Marx. Thatcher felt that this traditional absence of a strong ideology was a disadvantage. She is reported to have said after her election as Party leader in 1975 that: We must have an ideology. The other side have got an ideology that they can test their policies against. We must have one as well. This is where Friedrich A. Hayek, Milton Friedman and the Centre for Policy Studies came in. The Conservative Party had not witnessed this degree of ideological zeal before and it represents something of a departure. It also worked exclusively thereby distancing itself, maybe misleadingly, to what had gone before. Thatcherites saw each MP as either wet (meaning a paternalistic Conservative) or as a dry (an ideologue). The wet Ian Gilmour (dismissed from the Cabinet in 1981) entitled his assault on Thatcherism Dancing with Dogma. It has passed into Thatcher legend how being one of us was the only way to gain favour. The importance of this term is reflected in how it was used as the title of Hugo Youngs acclaimed biography of Margaret Thatcher. This ideologicalism is a departure but it does not represent a complete break with the past. Most Conservatives today, who speak of traditional Conservatism, refer to a paternalistic aspect which reached its zenith in the period after the Second World War up until about Edward Heath. It is usually identified by language which stems from Disraeli and his references to One Nation from his novel Sybil in 1845. It is highly debatable as to whether this is indeed the most traditional form of Conservatism because it did, after all, contain some facets which differed from the eras of Edmund Burke and Robert Peel. Indeed, some of the differences within Conservatism are reflected in the tremendous difference between these two giants of Toryism or Conservatism alone. This complexity is not surprising considering the Partys long history which has seen Conservatives adapt and respond to changing circumstances in order to meet the needs of the Nation and Party. What the two figures above illustrate is a form of Conservatism which reflected the needs of the period within which it had to exist and survive. It also allows for the fair conclusion that traditional Conservatism emerged, in frail form, under Peel in the mid-nineteenth century to embrace its belief in measured and progressive change with a sense of compassion. Although this overview implies differences with the New Right there are also similarities. The New Right fits in with the Conservative tradition of rising to the needs of Nation and Party and is an example of typical Conservative adaptability. It is, after all, the worlds oldest and most successful political party. Peel dramatically refashioned the Tory Party by moving it in a new direction, despite hostile opposition, to expand its base of support and to deal with the land-owning elitism of politics. A tradition continued to a different extent by Disraeli. Much the same could be said for Thatcherism, which pressed unreservedly for the end of the broadly accepted status-quo. Keynesianism (which was already being gently questioned under Jim Callaghan) and corporatism were held responsible for British decline and she aimed to obliterate them. Again, it ushered the Party further in a new direction away from its previous acceptance of such arrangements and the general consensus which had surrounded the essential matters of politics since the War. The Party examined itself and the national condition, remodelling itself accordingly. This is a very distinctive Conservative tradition. The New Right did, however, abandon any notions of paternalism and instead emphasised the importance of economics in emancipating the individual. Economics was above politics. This brought the New Right into conflict with the One Nationists who felt, like P. Norton and A. Aughey in 1981, that the disposition towards economic policy may entail the disseveration of the concept of One Nation.3 The emphasis on free markets, deregulation and an non-interfering state has a strong tradition in Conservatism which stretches back to the publication of Adam Smiths The Wealth of Nations. It was, however, a departure from post-war Conservatism. There had always been mixed and opposing views within Conservatism on the merits of capitalism. Lord Hailsham had criticised capitalism as an ungodly and rapacious scramble for ill-gotten gains whereas Burke before him regarded the laws of commerce as being the laws of nature, and consequently the laws of God.4 In this respect the New Right had roots within the longer history of Conservatism. The ferocity with which it economic policies were pursued, in the face of stiff opposition, represented something of a departure in the broad consensus of post-war Britain. It was really a return to the traditional policies pursued by Conservatives before 1940 rather than a revolutionary new approach. This also illustrates how difficult it is to define traditional Conservatism. It is misleading however to consider this conversion or reversion as something which began suddenly with Thatcher. The New Right had come to exist after a period of gradual change and modification to Conservatism which began under Edward Heath. The 1979 Party manifesto contained many similarities with one of 1970. Admittedly, this does not account for what came after, in subsequent General Elections. The Selsdon mentality bore parallels with the New Right in moving towards a radical, technocratic questioning of institutions, customs and ideas.5 Heath had shown the same propensity to dispense with the past where necessary when he said: we are going to build on the past but we are not going to be strangled by it5 The New Right aroused tension in the party because, unlike Heath, it saw itself as ideological and was wholly unwilling to compromise. Yet, t is crucial to mention, in this context, that compromise had never really been a feature of traditional Conservatism. It only came to be regarded so in the consensus of post-war Britain. The New Right represented a visible continuation in continually pertaining, mainly in rhetoric, to various nebulous concepts in which all Conservatives take refuge: Nation, Church, Monarchy, Family, Authority, the Rule of Law, Order, Hierarchy, Deference, Community and so forth.6 The New Right held to virtually all of these in its rhetoric. This is advantageous because each of these concepts, as all Conservatives know well, unites each of them as well as being able to transcend class in their appeal. The New Right was hugely populist and classless, keeping to a later Conservative tradition as the franchise was extended in the last century. Some, but not all, traditional Conservatives feel, however, that the New Right has undermined Conservative values due to its own inherent contradictions. A few examples are the conflict between meritocracy and monarchy or community and individualism. The New Right chose to be opposed to constitutional reform (unlike almost every other leader since Peel) while fundamentally altering institutions such as the Civil Service and Local Government. Maybe it is the undermining of traditional Conservative concepts that lays the New Right open to the accusation that it un-Conservative. It could be retorted that it is a belief in certain traditional Conservative values which has bred the contradictions and anomalies in Thatcherism by splitting the New Right between Traditionalists or Authoritarians and the Libertarians. The former wish to maintain traditional Conservative values while also pursuing a New Right agenda. Arguably it is the latter, represented by MPs like Alan Duncan, which are the departure from traditional or any other form of Conservatism. Thatcher represented the dominant Traditionalist grouping which Alan Clarke has stated is really Gladstonian Liberalism. In his view Thatcher was not really a Conservative. Heath is of the same opinion. In 1985 Heath wrote: I dont believe that what we have now is true Conservatism. Its 1860 Laissez-Faire Liberalism.7 Yes, Thatcherism does have many similarities, in domestic terms, to the Liberalism of the past century. What is negated in this argument is that Gladstone had been a Peelite and was once regarded as a future Conservative leader. So, if Thatcherism is neo-liberalism it does not necessarily mean it is not traditional Conservatism. Her domestic view was indeed Gladstonian but her foreign policy view was, to muddy the issue further, closer to Disraeli and that of Winston Churchill (a former Liberal). The foreign policy of Thatcher (excluding Europe because it defies categorisation) was very Conservative indeed, and the Falklands is considered its proudest achivevement. The New Right has been found not to be a departure in all key aspects so it must therefore be concluded that it represents a continuation it is not separate from traditional Conservatism. There are too many threads within it which relate to Conservative history and values for it to be considered a break with what had gone before. It did not or does not seem a blatant continuation because, as time wore on, it increasingly sought to exclude or sideline those who held reservations about the New Right project (the One Nationists). The New Right thrived on confrontation by constantly defining itself by what it was against. Its abandonment of consensus meant it departed from post-war Conservatism but not from traditional Conservatism per se. Sir Robert Peel, back in 1846, had split the entire party due to his refusal to compromise over protectionism for the land-owning classes. By contrast, the Party managed to hold together under the leadership of Thatcher for ten years and even went on to win a further Election in 1992. A simple majority of MPs had supported Thatcher in the internal ballot of 1989. There must have been common ground under the New Right for all this to have been achieved. The New Right saw themselves as an ascendant strand of traditional Conservatism and did not regard themselves as a complete departure. Between lasting values and changing circumstances there must be a constant dialogue Thatcher had said in 1977. It was or is its uncharacteristic ideologicalism which obfuscates the issue of continuity making it seem like a departure. It refused compromise and objected to any tempering of what it thought the best way to proceed. The New Right was not really new because it related to many aspects of Conservatism which had gone before: the New Right is in fact a renewed Right. It prized freedom, was thrift, classless, populist, nationalistic or patriotic and authoritarian to name but a few. Neither its contradictions or an erroneous view of traditional conservatism should allow it to be labelled a wholesale departure from traditional Conservatism, it is not.

Essay --

The task of defining what a religion is, is certainly not an easy task. For countless millennia mankind has worshipped a pantheon of deities whether that is the Sun as seen within ancient Aztec culture or whether that is the God of the Hebrews. Therefore a definition of what is Religion must be accessible and far encompassing as it seems it must address a myriad of beliefs which differ in scope. The three definitions I have chosen in order to analyse focus primarily on the nature of the Belief within a religion. For example Marx saw Religion as a means of enslavement in order to maintain the status quo through the impartiality of an ideology which maintained absolute equilibrium leading to stagnation and thus a lack of change. Thus the belief in a religion is simply the reaction of the oppressed to offer them a shade of comfort in a â€Å"heartless world.† Tylor focused upon the notion of belief as defining religion, in that Religion itself is formulated by primitive man expla ining what he did not understand by giving all things Anima`s to explain what they could not understand. He claims belief in spiritual beings to be Animism and that mankind has carried the resultant ignorance. Feuerbach`s definition is certainly thought-provoking as his definition of God being a construct of Man, rather than traditional vice versa. Feuerbach as with Tylor and Marx, focus on the nature of belief within religion, I have chosen this as I would prefer to focus upon the belief of religion, rather than the practice due in part to Freud’s insistence the practice of religion is a neurosis which has spread through the generations, and also as I would prefer to be able to make comparisons between the three definitions with the nature of belief being a funda... ... primitive man could not understand, and as such are of the result of the ignorance of early society. Tylor therefore argues that the idea of a belief in a God or Gods is the result of the â€Å"survival† Religion surviving, Tylor claims that Religious survival is due to some being guilty of limiting and relying on an outdated custom whilst science can explain away such phenomena away. This explanation is difficult to categorise, as it is certainly a sociological explanation, as well being anthropological and psychological. Studies analysed by Keleman have identified that children seem to identify some objects in a similar method of Tylor`s animism in that things are given morality – positive or negative based on the likelihood of causing harm to the child. This could be evidence supporting Tylor`s argument that through knowledge such things become more than good or bad.

Main Purpose of Education

Main purpose of education Nowadays,Hong Kong education system has an controversial issue which is about the teachers train their students in order to ensure they obtain the highest grade in public examination. As a result ,they do not know how to apply the knowledge they learned into the workplace. Teachers only teach the knowledge and students recites the information from the textbook,thus many secondary school graduates are lack of the ability to present their opinion and idea in a precise and organized way..The current education system ignores the main purpose of education which is to train the students’ critical thinking in the lesson. Practicing the critical thinking is definitely essential for the students because they have to contact with the hustle business environment after they graduate from the college. If they can elaborate their point of views in current affairs clearly before they graduate, they could compete with other candidates and have the higher opportunity to be hired by employer.The world is changing and going forward gradually, as Charles Darwin have said ‘Survival of the fittest’. There is a great deal of workers who has high education level in society, the employer tend to employ the people who can criticize and analyze social topic with valid reasons since well critical thinker can communicate effectively and easier to find solution of complicated problems. Provided that the students equip with critical thinking, they can be an independent and lifelong learners.Moreover , being a competitive worker should apply the critical thinking in the daily life ,instead of reciting the theory from the textbook. Even if students can comprehend the textbook’s knowledge ,it still have colossal difference between the theory and real condition. For instance, if you learned the marketing skill through the textbook, it is impossible to duplicate the whole theory in the varied business environment since there are numerous uncert ain and unpredictable factors such as adjustment of government policy to affect the decision making.Therefore, it is crucial for the students to learn how to criticize the issue since the secondary school education. After we understand the significance of critical thinking, there are several ways to exercise the students to equip with it by the parents and teachers. Firstly, teacher can change the teaching approach so as to make the students can ponder the same issue in various angles. They should adopt multidisciplinary education method instead of spoon-fed education method.They can inspire and motivate the students to think more about social issue and topic, whereas the students can express their notion to teacher and student. For example, when they learn the social condition in China, teacher can teach them the current social issue such as the problem of rural and urban disparity rather than using the outdated examples in the reference book. Having more opportunity to discuss the issue with classmates is an effective way to cultivate students’ critical thinking in the class.Secondly ,the parents can instruct their children through the social issue as many adolescents love to face the virtual environment and they overlook the social topic . When they receive the news from the media ,they will not analyze and assess the topic immediately because their parents force them to attend the tutorial and they only get the skill to answer the questions, not the ability of critical thinking.Being attentive to current affairs will enhance the competence of critical thinking,hence the parents can encourage their children to read more editorial in newspaper since the students can develop their own reflection on some issue after they comprehend other’s point of view . Ultimately, getting the highest grade does not equal to obtain the better occupation. The aim of education is not only to let the students learn the knowledge and apply it to the real situation. More importantly, it should train students to be well critical thinker for the sake of working in the society.

Movie Review My Biggest Pet Peeves - 1440 Words

One of my biggest pet peeves when it comes to movies is how the ending occurs. Whether it is a happily every after, or a dark turn of events, as long as the flick doesn’t end abrupt I will most likely enjoy it. 12 Angry Men went the other direction. Resulting in a cliffhanger to end without telling the audience whether or not the boy actually did the crime. Compelling, yet thrilling as the director left a big question mark at the end of this film. The jurors in this film each had their own personality and creative background in their lives creating a mess in the juror room. Two distinct jurors popped out to me while watching this film. These two jurors who were more different than each other could ever be reminded me of certain characteristics that I could relate to. Juror number one who was the high school coach with a vary laid back attitude towards the actions of the room was the first juror who I could relate to. Almost immediately you could tell that he had selective list ening engaged during the first 45 minutes into the film. Willing to agree with the majority on the verdict of guilty, juror number one wasn’t going to stand out and vote not-guilty and start the feud, that will come later by juror number 8. After hearing what juror number 8 had to say about his strange vote towards not-guilty, juror number one was only paying attention to the vast majority of guilty voters who stated the obvious facts against the accused. He wasn’t about to listen to some lone random