The Principles Of Classicist And Positivist Criminology Criminology Essay

The Principles Of Classicist And Positivist Criminology Criminology Essay Classicist and positivists do share some principles however it can be said that they oppose each other to an extent. Classicist criminology is an approach which looks at the idea of rational action and free will. This approach was developed in the eighteenth century and early nineteenth century whereby they intended to produce a criminal justice system that was clear and legitimate and was based on everyone being equal. Positivist criminology is founded by the notion of scientific understanding of crime and criminality, the basic concept is based on the idea that behaviour is determined. There are two types of positivism that try to seek the explanation of crime and deviancy and they are biological positivism and psychological positivism. The origins of positivism and the two interrelated developments were from the nineteenth century. This writing will attempt to explain to what extent Classicist and Positivist criminology oppose each other and to explore if they share any similarities with each other. In order to do this, certain factors will be addressed in order to answer this question to see how much they oppose each other and what they share. The factors which will be looked at are where these theories first derived from, human nature of the offender, definition of crime, the focus of analysis, cause of crime, the response to the crime, crime prevention and operation of the criminal justice system. In the eighteenth century many tried to seek the understanding and would question the natural laws of society. Cesare Beccaria had observed the social contract as being selfish. Believing that law should be limited as much as possible also prohibit actions which would increase instead of decreasing crime. Beccaria had examined administration of criminal justice where he had believed the rights of offenders are protected and torture is forbidden. If for example the victim and accused are in different classes the jury should be equally from both classes. Beccarias work was then led on by Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) he believed in utilitarianism. He also believed that the society was based on the ideas of pleasure and pain. Beccarias principles led to the French code 1791 which classed everyone as not being similar in the court of law i.e. a sane person is different to an insane person. Benthams work was criticised for not seeing criminals as being individuals. Positivism was born. Andre Guerry (1802-1866) examined if poverty was somehow related to crime. Education was also looked at, whether people with learning difficulties were related to crime and deviance. It was also investigated that although crime was higher in wealthy areas the poor were the most to offend. Two strands of scientific research which were attempted to seek explanation for criminal behaviour was biological and psychological. Biological positivism came from the work of Lombroso, whereby he tried to identify different types of individuals. He examined individuals due to their appearances which apparently showed that they were criminals. This was the concept of atavistic criminal. Psychological positivism emerged in England within the criminal justice institutions. Psychological theories were based on the ideas of the process of the mind in order to understand criminal behaviour. The history and development behind Classicism and Positivism show that they opposed each other. This could be down to the fact that Classicists came from a less modernised time to Positivists and thus lacked in the opportunity to be able to investigate such views as they didnt have the sufficient means to do so. In Classicism, human nature is considered as rational, free and governed by self interest. Human beings are seen to be equal in that they make their own decisions and have free will so therefore able to reason. Classicist criminologists would say the nature of the offender is voluntaristic therefore they make actions on their own accord and they are seen as being responsible for them choosing what they do with their time and also responsible for the consequences that may occur due to their actions. Although free will may not exist perfectly, the criminal law is mainly based on its presumed vitality and forms the foundation for penal sanction (Fogel, 1995, pg183) With positivism, human nature is seen as being determined or prone to certain types of behaviour such as biological and social conditioning and differences with the individual. All individual behaviour is a determined result of circumstances. Positivism say human beings have animal nature which is then socialised into the values within society so that the link from criminal to law abiding citizen in a range or degrees of socialisation. Both Classicism and Positivism oppose here. Classicism says that human nature is seen as rational and that human beings have the capacity to equally reason and to be able to make their own choices for example they may steal from a shop because they want to and also aware of it, whereas Positivism is determined due to biological and social circumstances for example a person from a criminal family may also become a criminal due to child rearing methods.. The Definition of Crime for classicism is that which goes against society. It is not an effect against the state but against the individuals of the society. Individuals of the society abide by the social contract therefore a criminal act which goes against that society would be regulated through legislation they concentrate heavily on the act and not its surroundings such as the reasons, circumstances and influences. Classicism has the view which is founded by the Anglo Saxon law that individuals are free to do what they like as long as it is not forbidden by law. It is about law and morality concerning the protection of the social contract. Positivism defines crime using the word deviant as they view crime as violation of legal codes. As something that may be normal behaviour may be a violation of the legal code. However something that is deviant may not be a violation of the legal codes. They take the value of society which can be scientifically taken and from this it is judged as to whether an act is deviant or not. Classicism defines crime as a violation of the social contract whereby they have free will and self interests and for them to violate the law is breaking the social contract. On the other hand positivism define crime as a violation of the legal code, which in some way is similar to classism as they both define crime as breaching the law. The focus of analysis for classicism is based on the criminal act. Therefore it doesnt take into account of the individuals circumstances. So instead of focussing on the individual, they only see what criminal act they have committed and what the best punishment would be in accordance with the law. The main focus would be the criminal act committed. Positivisms focus of analysis focuses on the offender therefore looks at the offenders characteristics, rather than the offenders criminal acts. Offenders can be scientifically monitored and the reasons that lead up to their criminality can be diagnosed and try and be treated or try and be dealt with in some way. It would be the experts job to try and spot the reasons as to why the conditions that leads to criminality in a particular case. Classicism and positivism oppose here as their focus of analysis differ. Classicism looks mainly at the criminal act and how anyone who has committed a crime will be punished based on their actions however positivism focuses on the offender and look at what may have triggered the individual to have turn to deviant and criminal behaviour in the first place. The whole concept of the Causes of crime for the Classicist paradigm is that it links to the question of rational motivation. The cause of crime is said to be due to rationality, individual choice and irrational choice. The consensual majority where there is proper balance due to reason and self interest, the costs of crime outweighs the benefit. Therefore no one should want to commit crime as this would be an irrational calculation. However some occasions there may be have been benefits which were greater than costs and so crime was seen as a rational calculation. Criminality is basically seen as making the wrong choices which violate the law. Individuals are held to blame for their actions. For positivism the cause of crime is a product of the under socialisation of the individual. This can be a result of number of things such as innate genetic or physiological incapacity of the individual to be easily socialised, family background which is in use of socialisation techniques in child rearing practices. Causes of crime are due to pathology, individual deficiency, its not a matter of the individual making their own choice. If a person is from a family which have a criminal member within them then they are considered to be high risk of committing crime. Every criminal is the result of individual, physical and social conditions Classicism and positivism are similar in the sense that they try to identify the causes of crime. However Classicists believe that individuals make their own conscious choices but Positivist believe that individuals subconsciously are led to crime due to their background and other factors and therefore do not commit crime out of choice. Classicisms response to the crime is punishment. The punishment should be proportionate to the crime. for example if a wealthy women walks out of a shop and is found that she has stolen a pen she should be charged with theft, and if another woman who is poor and walks out of the shop with baby food to feed her child she also should be charged with theft. So therefore classicists would assume that both should be punished for their actions no matter what the circumstances are as people are seen as being capable of being able to make their own choice in what they do so therefore should face the consequences of their actions everyones response to crime should be equal. Rather than being focused towards punishment, Positivists response to crime is treatment towards the offenders. Offenders behaviours are analysed in terms of factors which may be beyond the control of the person. So therefore in order to respond to crime is to be able to understand the reasons as to why the offender acted in this behaviour. All offenders are different from each other thus treatment is seen to have to be individualised. So if they are sentenced for a crime it shouldnt be on nature as to which the crime had been committed, it should take into account the diagnosis of the offender and the form of treatment which should be given to the individual. Classicism and Positivism oppose with each other on the response to crime, classicism focuses on punishing the offender for the crime they have committed whereas positivism focuses on trying to give treatment to the offender and reform, both theories response to crime differ. In order to prevent crime, classicism has the idea of deterrence. As Beccaria viewed that punishments should be equal to offences, to defer criminals from re-offending. Jeremy Bentham assumed that society is based on the notions of pain and pleasure. If the crime is committed and the punishment is more painful therefore the amount of pleasure that is received will prevent the crime, this was based on Benthams moral Formula. Bentham believed that condemning someones actions is more useful than physically harming them. Positivism on the other hand tries to diagnose and classify. They have the idea of early intervention. Individuals learn not to offend when they gain self control, those who do offend dont have self control therefore are likely to control. Child rearing is seen to be a important development in having the ability to have self control which was argued by Gottfredson and Hirschi from the control theory. Poor child rearing methods which involve lack of supervision from parents lead to individuals with low self control which then could turn into them becoming offenders in the future. The way classicism and positivism deal with crime prevention is seen as a similarity, even though both approaches are different, they both try to establish a way to reduce crime. Classicism tries to reduce crime with deterrence and Positivism tries to reduce crime with treatment. The classicist way is to punish in order to deter others whereas positivists try to prevent the crime from occurring from the outset. The classical approach on the operation of the criminal justice system is to take a legal-philosophical approach. The criminal justice system looks at just the criminal act. The rule of law says that each violation of law that has been breached should be treated in the same way. The main aim of the legal proceedings is equality where everyone is seen equal in the eyes of the law. Classicism shows the importance of the clarity in giving a offender a sentencing, the offender should receive a sentencing that ensures the pain from the sentence outweighs the gain from the offence. Positivists take a scientific approach. As offenders are all different and individual, they can be somehow measured and classified in some way. Instead of seeing people in terms of equal rights positivist view emphasises difference. Therefore they can be scientifically studied focusing on areas where there is a high crime rate and low social economy. Classicism take a very different approach as to the operation of the criminal justice system as they take a legal philosophical approach whereby the criminal justice system looks at the criminal act instead of the person who actually committed the crime which differs with the notions of positivism as they take a scientific approach and believe all individuals are different and shouldnt be sentenced based on what criminal act they had committed because there may be factors which may have led to their criminality. Classicism and Positivism are both very influential theories that relate to crime and deviance. We see both approaches in dealing with crime in modern times. Punishment, to punish offenders and deter, and reform methods and education to prevent the crime from happening. Classicism exemplifies its notions through the enlightenment and positivism through moral statistics. They both are very different and therefore oppose and differ on many factors though they do share some similarities. To conclude, the main difference between classism and positivism is that classicists look at punishment and positivism looks at treatment and causes of crime. However one of the main similarities between them is that they both look for causes of crime and have ideas in reducing crime but they have very different views in ways to achieve that result. Classicism and positivism oppose each other to quite an extent, they have some similarities however the amount the both oppose is a lot higher.

Douglass -- The Narrative Essay -- essays research papers fc

Debunking the Southern Secret â€Å"Sincerely and earnestly hoping that this little book may do something toward throwing light on the American slave system, and hastening the glad day of deliverance to the millions of my brethren in bonds †¦ relying upon the power of truth, love, and justice, for success in my †¦ efforts and solemnly pledging myself anew to the sacred cause, I subscribe myself† (Douglass 76). With these words, Frederick Douglass (c. 1817-1895), an emancipated slave with no formal education, ends one of the greatest pieces of propaganda of the 19th century America: that slavery is good for the slave. He writes his autobiography, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass: An American Slave, as an abolitionist tool to shape his northern audience’s view of southern slaveholders. Through personal anecdotes, Douglass draws an accurate picture of slave life. Simultaneously, he chooses these events for how they will affect the northern audience’s opinion of southern slav eholders (Quarles ii). By using the written word, Douglass targets educated northern whites because they were the only group capable of changing the status quo. Illiterate northern whites and free northern blacks could not vote, while white Southerners would not vote because they did not want change. For that reason, Douglass used his life story as an instrument to promote abolition among literate northern whites (vi). Douglass uses family relationships, starting with his own birth, to gain the compassion of his target audience. He never knew the identity of his father, but it was â€Å"whispered† (Douglass 2) that it was his master. Douglass mentions this to demonstrate how the â€Å"master in [many] cases, sustains to his slaves the double relation of master and father† (2). This was so commonplace that it was â€Å"by law established that the children of women shall in all cases follow the condition of their mother† (2). This meant that these bastard children were slaves despite their paternal heritage because their mother was a slave. The effect of this revelation was to shock and offend the morals of the conservative northern whites. Northern society scorned people in adulterous and interracial relationships. By portraying these Southerners as immoral and adulterous, Douglass wanted to cultivate in his audience a damaging opinion of southern slaveholders (Quarles ix). Continuing with the theme o... ...streated and punished their slaves, and how they used religion as an excuse to legitimize their immoral actions. â€Å"Slavery was a most painful situation; and, to understand it, one must experience it, or imagine himself in similar circumstances †¦ then, and not till then, will he fully appreciate the hardships of, and know how to sympathize with, the toil worn and whipped-scarred †¦ slave† (64). Douglass’s own words are meant as a plea for his readers to imagine themselves in his situation he and other slaves endured to better understand the hardships he and other slaves endured (Quarles xi). Frederick Douglass used family values, basic human rights, and religion to persuade the northern white audience toward the cause of abolition. He expects his readers will share his â€Å"hate [for] the corrupt, slaveholding, woman whipping, cradle-plundering, partial and hypocritical Christianity of [southern slaveholders]† (Douglass 71). American slavery does not exist in today due partly to Douglass’s effort to help advance the cause of abolition. Works Cited Quarles, Benjamin, ed. Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass: An American Slave. By Frederick Douglass. Cambridge: Harvard Press, 1988.

The League Of Nations And Its Impact On World Peace Essay examples --

Through my studies and research I have come to the following conclusion about the League of Nations: despite all of President Woodrow Wilson's efforts, the League was doomed to fail. I feel this was so for many reasons, some of which I hope to convey in the following report. From the day when Congress voted on the Fourteen Points, it was obvious that the League had a very slim chance of being passed in Congress, and without all of the World powers, the League had little chance of surviving. On November 11, 1918 an armistice was declared in Europe. Wilson saw the opportunity to form an international organization of peace to be formed. He acted quickly. On January 18, 1919 he released his fourteen points. The Fourteen Points consisted of many things, but the most important was the fourteenth-the establishment of a league of nations to settle international disputes and to keep the peace. After congress had voted, only three of Wilson's fourteen points were accepted without compromise. Six of the others were rejected all together. Fortunately the League was compromised. Wilson then went to Europe to discuss the Treaty of Versailles. Representatives from Italy, France, and Britain didn't want to work with the nations they had defeated. They wanted to hurt them. After much fighting and negotiating, Wilson managed to convince them that a league of nations was not only feasible, it was necessary. The Senate supported most of the Treaty of Versailles but not the League. They thought it would make the U.S.A. too involved in foreign affairs. Wilson saw that the League may not make it through Congress, so he went on the road and gave speeches to sway the public opinion. Unfortunately, Wilson's health, which was already depleted from the negotiations in France, continued to recede. Wilson's battle with his health reached its climax when Wilson had a stroke on his train between speeches. After Wison's stroke, support of the League weakened, both in Congress and in the public's opinion. In 1920 G. Harding, who opposed the League, was elected as president. The League formed but the U.S. never joined. The first meeting of the League was held in Geneva, Switzerland on November 15, 1920 with fourty two nations represented. During twenty-six years the League lived, a total of sixty-three nations were represented at one time or ano... ...to effect its own dissolution, whereupon much of its property and organization were transferred to the United Nations which had resently been founded. Never truly effective as a peace keeping organization, the lasting importance of the League of Nations lies in the fact that it provided the groundwork for the United Nations. This international alliance, formed after World War 2, not only profited by the mistakes of the League but borrowed much of the organizational machinics of the League of Nations. The League of Nations and its impact on world peace John James Mrs. Hippe History March 7, 1996 Bibliography: Mothner, Ira. Woodrow Wilson, Champion of Peace. New York Watts Inc., 1969 Mason, Lorna; Garcia, Jesus; Powell, Frances; Risinger, Fredrick. America's Past and Promise. Boston McDougal Littell, 1995 Albright, Madeleine. "America and the League of Nations, Lessons for Today" Speech United States Department of State 1994 McNally, Rand. Atlas of World History. New York Reed International Books Limited, 1992 Microsoft. "The League of Nations." Excarta 95. 1995

Child Rearing In Victorian Times :: essays research papers fc

Child Rearing in Victorian Times   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Childhood barely existed for most British children at the end of the eighteenth century, since they began a lifetime of hard labour as soon as they were capable of simple tasks. By contrast, the fortunate children of the wealthy generally were spoiled and enjoyed special provisions for the need of a lengthy childhood, yet who in a way may have endured the same pain of those who were not as fortunate.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Child rearing in the Victorian times was not at all similar to child rearing today. There were of course two different categories on how the child was brought up. They went from one extreme to the other. They were the difference of the classes. The life of an upper class child during the Victorian era, was as one may put it, stuffy, conventional and routine, not to mention quite lonely at certain times. Yet others argue Victorian children should have been quite content, given the fact that they were treated to only the best of toys, clothes and education and it was absurd to even consider the child being neglected.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Mothers and Fathers were seen as special, glamourous guests, due to the fact that they were never around and rarely seen by their children. This was because child and parent led totally separate existences, they were only summoned to appear before their parents at a certain set hour of the day. Many Victorian children like Winston Churchill and Harriet Marden recall such cold relations between their selves and their mothers that they would be able to count how many times in their life they had been hugged. Family life was formal, although during that time child rearing manuals urged bonding and maternal ties, mothers remained cool and distant. Children were a convenience to their parents, they obeyed them as they would an army officer. Sir Osbert Sitwell once argued, Parents were aware that the child would be a nuisance and a whole bevy of servants, in addition to the complex guardianship of nursery and school rooms was necessary not so much to aid the infant as to screen him from his father or mother, except on some occasions as he could be used by them as adjuncts, toys or decorations. Although this only describes a minority of parents it was always in the best interests for the child not to be heard or in the way, it was rarely taken to the extent of screening the child.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  It was the era of nurses and nannies, the child was not raised by the woman who gave birth to him, but by the hired help.

Humor and Irony in British Literature

The comic novel is a very English kind of fiction and does not always settles down in other national literatures well. Certainly the English novel tradition is remarkable for the number of comic novels among its classics from the work of Fielding, and Sterne and Smollett in the eighteenth century, through Jane Austen and Dickens in the nineteenth to Evelyn Waugh, Arnold Bennett and David Lodge in the twentieth.Even novelists whose primary intention is not to write funny novels such as George Eliot, Thomas Hardy and E.  M. Forster have scenes in their fiction which make us laugh aloud. In this work we will define on the example of literary texts of British literature the notion of humor and irony both of which are based on the comic element.Comedy in fiction would appear to have two primary sources, though they are intimately connected: situation (which entails character – a situation that is comic for one character wouldn’t necessarily be so for another) and style.Bot h dependent upon timing, that is to say, the order in which the words, and the information they carry, are arranged. The principle can be illustrated by a single sentence from Evelyn Waugh’s Decline and Fall. At the beginning of the novel, the shy, unassuming hero, Paul Pennyfeather, an Oxford undergraduate, is divested of his trousers by a party of drunken aristocratic hearties, and with monstrous injustice is sent down from the University for indecent behavior.The first chapter concludes: â€Å"God damn and blast them all to hell,† and Paul Pennyfeather meekly to himself as he drove to the station, and then he felt rather ashamed, because he rarely swore. (Waugh, 1929) We laugh at this because of the delayed appearance of the word â€Å"meekly†: what appears, as the sentence begins, to be a long-overdue explosion of righteous anger by the victimized hero turns out to be no such thing but a further exemplification of his timidity and passiveness.Lucky Jim of Ki ngsley Amis exhibits all properties of comic fiction in a highly polished form. As a temporary assistant lecturer at a province university, Jim Dixon is totally dependent for the continuance of his employment on his absent-minded professor’s patronage, which itself requires that Jim should demonstrate his professional competence by publishing a scholarly article. Jim despises both his professor and the rituals of academic scholarship, but cannot afford to say so.His resentment is therefore interiorized, sometimes in fantasies of violence: â€Å"to tie Welch up in his chair and beat him about the head and shoulders with a bottle until he disclosed why, without being French himself, he’d given his sons French names† (Amis) and at the other times, as here, in satirical mental commentary upon the behavior, discourses and institutional codes which oppress him. The style of Lucky Jim is full of little surprises, qualifications and reversals which satirically deconstru ct cliches. Jim’s powerlessness is physically epitomized by his being a passenger in Welch’s car, and a helpless victim of his appalling driving.The banal and apparently superfluous sentence â€Å"Dixon looked out of the window at the fields wheeling past, bright green after a wet April† (Amis) in fact proves to have a function. Looking from the same window moments later, Jim is startled to find â€Å"a man’s face staring in his from about nine inches away† Surprise is combined with conformity to Welch’s incompetence. â€Å"The face, which filled with alarm as he gazed, belonged to the driver of a van which Welch had elected to pass on a sharp bend between two stone walls.† (Amis) A slow motion effect is created by the leisurely precision of the language: â€Å"about nine inches away†, â€Å"filled with alarm†, â€Å"had elected to pass† contrasting comically with the speed with which the imminent collision approa ches. The reader is not told immediately what is happening, but made to infer it, re-enacting the character’s surprise and alarm. Another stylistic device based on humorous effect it creates is irony. Irony consists in saying the opposite of what you mean or inviting an interpretation different from the surface meaning of your words. Unlike other figures of speech – metaphor, simile, metonymy, synecdoche etc.– irony is not distinguished from literal statement by any peculiarity of verbal form. An ironic statement is recognized as such in the act of interpretation. When, for example, the authorial narrator of Pride and Prejudice says â€Å"It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a fortune, must be in want of a wife,† (Austen, Chapter I) the reader, alerted by the false logic of the proposition about single men with fortunes, interprets the â€Å"universal† generalization as an ironic comment on a particular social group obsessed with matchmaking.The same rule applies to action in narrative. When the reader is made aware of a disparity between the facts of a situation and the characters’ understanding of it, an effect called â€Å"dramatic irony† is generated. (Lodge, 179) Arnold Bennett in his The Old Wives’ Tale employs two different methods to put his characters’ behavior in an ironic perspective. Sophia, the beautiful passionate but inexperienced daughter of a draper in the Potteries, is sufficiently dazzled by Gerald Scales, a handsome commercial traveler who has inherited a small fortune, to elope with him.The embrace described in the passage below is their first in the privacy of their London lodgings. Her face, view so close that he could see the almost imperceptible down on those fruit-like cheeks, was astonishingly beautiful; †¦[and] he could feel the secret loyalty of her soul ascending to him. She was very slightly taller than her lover; but somehow she hung from him, her body curved backwards, and her bosom pressed against his, so that instead of looking up at her gaze he looked down at it. He preferred that; perfectly proportioned though he was, his stature was a delicate point with him.(Bennett, 278) What should be a moment of erotic rapture and emotional unity is revealed as the physical conjunction of two people whose thoughts are running on quite different tacks. Gerald in fact intends to seduce Sophia, though in the event he lacks the self-assurance to carry out his plan. Even in this embrace he is at first nervous and tentative, â€Å"perceiving that her ardour was exceeding his. † (Bennett, 278) But as the intimate contact continues he becomes more confident and masterful: â€Å"His fears slipped away; he began to be very satisfied with himself† (Bennett, 278).There is probably a sexual pun hidden in â€Å"His spirits rose by the uplift of his senses†, for Bennett frequently hinted in this fashion at things he dared not describe explicitly. Gerald sexual arousal has nothing to do with love, or even lust. It is a function of his vanity and self-esteem. â€Å"Something in him had forced her to lay her modesty on the altar of his desire†. Like â€Å"the secret loyalty of her soul ascending to him† (Bennett, 279) earlier, this florid metaphor mocks the complacent thought it expresses.The use of the word â€Å"altar† carries an extra ironic charge since at this point Gerald has no intention of leading Sophia to the altar of marriage. Up to this point, Bennett keeps to Gerald’s point of view, and uses the kind of language appropriate to that perspective, thus implying an ironic assessment of Gerald’s character. â€Å"So he kissed her yet more ardently, and with the slightest touch of a victor’s condescension; and her burning response more than restored the self-confidence which he had been losing.† (Bennett, 279) The description of his timidity, vanity and complacency – so very different from what he ought to be feeling in this situation is enough to condemn him in reader’s eyes. In the next paragraph Bennett uses the convention of the omniscient intrusive author to switch to Sophia’s point of view, and to comment explicitly on her misconceptions, adding to the layers of irony in the scene. Sophia’s words are more creditable than Gerald’s, but her words, â€Å"I’ve got no on but you now† , are partly calculated to endear him to her.This merely reveals her naivety, however. â€Å"She fancied in her ignorance that the expression of this sentiment would please him. She was not aware that a man is usually rather chilled by it, because it proves to him that the other is thinking about his responsibilities and not about his privileges. †¦ [He] smiled vaguely. † (Bennett, 279) As the â€Å"burning† Sophia utters this sentiment in a â€Å"meltingâ₠¬  voice, Gerald is â€Å"chilled† by the reminder of his responsibilities.He responds with non-committal smile, which the infatuated Sophia finds charming, but which, the narrator assures us, was an index of his unreliability and a portent of disillusionment to come: â€Å"A less innocent girl than Sophia might have divined from that adorable half-feminine smile that she could do anything with Gerald except rely on him. But Sophia had to learn. † (Bennett, 279) The reader is supplied with knowledge that helps to feel pity for Sophia and contempt for Gerald. This type of irony leaves us with little work of inference or interpretation to do; on the contrary, we are the passive recipients of the author’s wisdom.To conclude it is necessary to note the main difference between humor and irony. These two devices while both based on comic element apply different approaches to their object. Irony the funny object is hidden beyond the mask of seriousness, and the negati ve, derisive attitude to the object is expressed. The different is humor, where the serious thing is hidden beyond the mask of ridiculous and the attitude to the object of derision is predominantly positive. Works Cited List: Amis, Kinsley. Lucky Jim. London: Gollancz, 1954.Austen, Jane. Pride and Prejudice. Reissue edition, Bantam Classics, 1983. Bennett, Arnold. The Old Wives’ Tale. New York Hodder & Stoughton, 1909. Carens, James F. , The Satiric Art of Evelyn Waugh. Seattle and London, University of Washington Press, 1966. Lodge, David & Wood, Nigel Modern Criticism and Theory: A Reader. Harlow: Pearson, 2000 Nilsen, Don L. F. Humor in Eighteenth-and Nineteenth-Century British Literature. A Reference Guide, 1998. Waugh, Evelyn. Decline and Fall. London: Chapman & Hall, 1928.

Alcohol vs Marijuana

Alcohol and marijuana are two drugs commonly used and abused in the United States. Alcohol is the number one abused drug, while marijuana is number one among illegal drugs. While alcohol remains legal, and marijuana illegal, this does not necessarily mean that alcohol is better for you. There have been many arguments where people suggest that marijuana should be legal because alcohol is more deadly. On the other hand, there are alcoholics who would tell a pothead that smoking weed is bad for you. Both substances are very bad for your health and should not be heavily used by anyone but we do need to be a little more piteous to the people that do drugs because you don’t know what they go through in life . Although, Marijuana has such a bad reputation Marijuana is one of the most common drug today and its also arrant. But what exactly is marijuana? Marijuana is a green, brown, or gray mixture of dried, shredded leaves, stems, seed, and flowers of the hemp plants. There are a lot of names for this drug and they are: pot, herb, weed, grass, boom, mary jane, gangster, or chronic. Marijuana has been around for many years and has been thought to be illegal and harmful. But marijuana has been used for medical reasons, including: medicine, hemp rope, crude cloth and enjoyment. Why do young people use marijuana? There are many reasons why they do that and most young people smoke marijuana because their friends or brothers and sisters use marijuana and pressure them to try it. others may think its cool to use marijuana because they hear songs about it and see it on TV and in movies. Some teens may feel they need marijuana and other drugs to help them escape from their problems at home, at school, or with friends. Alcohol is a drug that is classified as a central nervous system depressant. There are three forms of alcohol, beer, wine and distilled spirits. Alcohol is one of the most commonly used drugs in the United States and has more adverse effects that most other drugs combined. There are many aspects to consider when thinking about alcohol as a drug. There are many myths surrounding alcohol, including who uses it, what its effects are on users, social and sexual situations and the amounts people drink. The vast majority of the American population uses alcohol and in many various ways and this also causes different effects. Alcohol is also has a great causation in crimes committed by users, social, medical, and educational problems as a result of use as well. Marijuana and alcohol are similar in many ways because weed and alcohols seems to satisfy most teenagers in today’s world. Some of there similar effects are that they both make you very hungry and sleepy and they both make you escape from reality. When I say they both make you escape from reality I mean that most people drink in smoke because they are going through something and they just don’t want to think about it anymore and that’s how they escape from reality. If they were to get rid of marijuana and alcohol I think that would be very formidable. As you can see marijuana and alcohol are the most common drugs used in today’s society but does that make it right for everyone to do them? Should alcohol be illegal since marijuana is illegal or should they both be legal? Those are some of the questions you have to ask yourself because just because your friends are drinking and smoking doesn’t mean you have to drink and smoke also, jus be above the influence!

Reason We Go to College Essay

Everyone has their own reason for wanting to get a degree in higher learning. Some of the reasons are; the love of learning, the chance to get away from their parents and be on their own. While others do it for the promise of a better future or just because they think that it is the right thing to do. Needless to say, there are countless reasons why we choose to further our education. Just like there are different reasons people go to college, there are different ways that people learn best. I will be telling you a little bit about my desire to earn my college diploma and how I think I learn best. Lots of people like to make money ever since currency was created and that is one of my motivations to complete college. According to Shaffer (2010), the top five reasons that people go to college are: to get an education, to expand their circle of awareness, to discover their passion, to network and to challenge themselves. I agree with all of these but as a parent, I also want to provide a great lifestyle for my children and complete what I’m teaching them to aim for. I love learning new things and having knowledge in my head instead of having to grab a dictionary, my phone or a computer to understand something. Though I love to increase my knowledge base, there are certain styles of learning that I excel in learning over others. Learning styles is new to me. All through high school and the first two years of college I have never heard of learning styles. I did know that I was more interested in a subject if a teacher/professor was lively, animated or just really excited about what they were teaching. I thought that’s how everyone else was. I was mistaken with that mindset. I took a couple of quizzes and learned that a few styles were my preferred method of learning. As written in Attribute advanogy. om (2004), There are seven main learning styles and they are: Visual (spatial), Aural (auditory), Verbal (linguistic), Physical (kinesthetic), Logical (mathematical), Social (interpersonal) and Solitary (intrapersonal). The tests that I took with Attribute (2004) and The Center for New Discoveries (2012), show that my preferred learning styles are verbal, aural, social and physical. My logical score was pretty high but it only showed up on one of the test results. The result are based on what I call the normal person standard, but I do not consider myself normal. Since that is the case, I will let you know if I agree with the results. Do I see myself as a verbal learner? Yes, because I love to talk and I like being able to get feedback instantly. I would rather give an oral presentation than type up a paper. If someone is lecturing on a subject, I will retain it easily if there is dialogue going back and forth in the class. The aural style I do not agree with as much because I can listen to music all day but if it is about school and it is something that I have to listen to, I will be going to sleep. I really enjoy touching things so the physical is a no brainer for me. I crave taking things apart to see how they work. As I said, I love to talk and I cannot talk to myself without being considered crazy, so yes, I am a social learner and I thrive off of others ideas. So, the tests got a three out of four which is not bad. Earning a college degree does not only hold the reward of monetary increase but it provides a sense of accomplishment and an example for our children who will be our future. Knowing how you learn best as an individual can help you know your shortcomings and prevent pitfalls and roadblocks on the road to a degree.