Free

Free Will Essay Essay Many people in the western world hold very dear the idea of independence, that they can think freely, choose freely, and express themselves freely. This all is connected to the idea of free will that many believe is what makes us human. Many people cannot, however, define free will. There is always the feeling that one can do whatever he/she wants. That is probably why this idea is such a pleasing concept. There is just one serious flaw in the free will concept. People cannot determine everything; there are some things, even before one is born, that determines who he will be in the future. Since people do not choose their parents, or the nationality of their family this creates a serious flaw in the free will concept. Now if people were able to choose these sorts of things they would be gods. It is not up to people to choose their skin colour, nationality etc. When one looks at this issue the concept of soft determinism is probably the safest solution to answer this problem. Since in this concept there are things determined for people, if one knows what he is doing, and the choice is not, in any way, forced by the circumstances the action that he is performing is free. (Roberts 2012) It means that even though one does not have full control over his life, meaning that one does not determine anything before he is born, people are still able to make conscious choices given that the circumstances allow it, fore example, like I am going to do this tonight, or I am visiting this person tomorrow, but these are simple choices, while there are others that you cant choose freely, like external forces have control over it than your own free will. On a smaller scale, who one person might become is really decided by the governments, society, and religions. Religions restrict the activities and freedom of those who follow it and live under its rules, just like in other countries, people are slaves to their political system. On a similar note and this is a very rare and cruel case, in countries ruled by dictators the rulers determine whether people live or not. Next comes the laws created by the governments, usually they restrict certain activities that people have to do. Also, governments make rules, regulations and legislation that determine what people will have to do. Lastly, societies impact the freedom and choices of the person who lives and interact within that society, because his choices are limited. There are many factors that would prove that free will doesn’t exist; religion is the most undecided one of them all. In the Bible particularly, many sources suggest that everybody that believes in God already has his faith determined. Various quotations, starting in the Old Testament, state that people already have their paths determined for them. In the letter to Ephesians St. Paul writes In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will (Ephesians 1:11, Jerusalem Bible). It clearly says that if one believes in God and Jesus Christ has his life determined. In another letter to Thessalonians Paul writes that from the beginning â€Å"Because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation† (2 Thessalonians 2:13). This clearly emphasizes the previous point that everyone who believes in God will has his life determined as one of the chosen people who will be saved by God. This is true for every religion, however it relates to salvation only, not man’s ability to choose his own path. In the very first book of the Old Testament one can interpret the fact that we are created in God’s image, therefore we posses God’s ability to be free (Genesis 1: 26, Jerusalem Bible). Staying with the Bible, in the book of Genesis, Adam and Eve, against God’s will ate the fruit of knowing good and evil. This in itself is a proof that humans can see what is right and wrong and therefore choose for themselves whether they want to be on one side or the other. â€Å"So then each one of us will give an account of himself to God† (Romans 14:12, Jerusalem Bible) tells people that everyone will have to, in his own heart and soul, give God the account of his own actions! On another note, the Qur’an is often wrongly interpreted as being based on determinism. This is false; if a life of a Muslim was determined for him/her at birth there would be no point in him/her trying to find out the nature of his sin, Allah would not have had to send prophets to teach his people the way, because all their actions would be already determined by them (Gorjian 2010). This suggests that, as far a religion goes people are free to do as they feel is right. This however does not justify the fact that governments take away this freedom from their citizens. Governments taking away freedom from their subjects can be traced back in history, and one the greatest examples for this would be the war of ideologies known as World War II. Political systems are based on ideas like fascism which helped Germans in their economic crisis, communism overthrew the Tzars in Russia which gave the proletariat all the influence they needed, while liberalism promised freedom. This all seems perfect, however, as it is all well known, there were flaws in each of those systems. Nazis under Hitler were only nice to a great portion of Germans as they were trying to create the master race. All others: Slavs, Roma, Jews were hated and discriminated against. In occupied Poland Nazis closed schools, denied access to education, confiscated automobiles, (Cosby 2010) houses, land and riches. The Only secondary education available was trade school which trained youth for a specific job denying them the opportunity to express themselves in different fields. They took away people’s freedom putting them in concentration camps and Ghettos; death camps like Auschwitz detained not necessarily Jews but also Poles, Czechs, Gypsies and even Germans (Biega 1996). For the sake of creating the master race they were determined to kill and enslave, even their own people which meant that one could not choose his affiliation freely, he was either with or against Hitler. In Russia during the Bolshevik Revolution aristocrats were condemned to death. In democratic, liberal countries the process of taking away free will is different. But sticking with the systems; theory of taking away human rights, one has to talk about people operating the machine of terror. Behind every tyranny there is a tyrant including Hitler and Stalin who are probably the most reviled dictators with a very bad reputation. Out of all the evildoers in the world, they were the most remembered for imposing their will on hundreds and thousands of people leaving a stain that makes saying their name in public an awkward thing. Their acts are known to all who knows the history of the 20th century. Their actions caused a lot of distress, killing and exploiting people, imprisoning innocents and denouncing everybody simple rights, no matter if he was a friends or foes. Nobody was allowed to publically speak their minds, people could be killed for any simple reason. Both of them used concentration and death camps where people would be stripped of their freedoms and their rights did not exist and their bodies were exploited for hard labour or experiments. In these countries dictators were the law. Now if one looks at a country like North Korea with Kim Il Sung, the previous leader of the nation, he denied people rights of information, freedom of press or freedom of speech. He ordered the whole nation to be brainwashed to believe he was god. Aside from being an attack on one’s free will it was an attack on one’s understanding of the world. When the supreme leader died, people fell into chaos as they did not know what will happen the next day, if there was a next day. Kim Il Sung took away not only their freedom, but also their whole world. These are things that would be unthinkable in a democratic society. In democratic states laws are a fundamental part of the society. People are afraid of anarchy more than they are scared to lose their rights even though these laws are just written statements of already known moral facts. It is logical that killing someone is immoral, stealing is wrong; all sorts of sexual act are cruel for the victim. Laws are supposed to protect people and make sure that others are shielded from the evildoers who break the law. There is a difference though between punishing someone for what he has done and changing the laws to suit someone’s personal goal. Looking at the terrorist attacks on September 11 2001. The aftermath of this horrible event sparked even more terrible actions taken by the lawmakers. The Patriot Act was something that unjustifiably took away peoples’ rights to act free not for something that they have done but rather something they might, maybe, probably be doing. The Patriot Act targeted many innocent people who were under suspicion of being terrorists not because they took part in terrorist training, but rather because they were of a certain skin colour or race. An initiative was put together by editorial cartoonists to present the very hurtful truth of how freedom was taken away through laws. Thus, for example Lalo Alcaraz created a cartoon that presents President Bush saying that liberty is secured while on another panel the Statue of Liberty is seen in prisoner outfit handcuffed and presented like detainees from Guantanamo Bay, commentary is unnecessary for this one. Another work by Clay Bennett demonstrates workers using materials from house labelled privacy to build a fence around this house which was labelled security. What the author was trying to present is the scandal with phone calls being listened to in order to prevent another attack while trying to listen for any terrorist activity (USA Patriot Art Show). The types of activities presented in the previous argument are shunned upon by many people because they invade their privacy and freedom. On the other hand laws and regulations with the word ‘freedom’ in them are very highly thought of by citizens since they are an assurance of their freedom and ability to express it. Laws, such as the freedom of speech, freedom of information, and freedom of religious expression or sexual expression, are important, they work as a manifestation of country’s liberty. How is it than that many of these laws, even though they say freedom, do not really give people the right to exercise these rights freely? That is because they contradict with many other rights granted by the government. And so one has the freedom of speech yet he cannot say racist things or anti-homosexual slurs as it violates the anti hate speech law. This is a very big and unsubordinated flaw on the part of the governments if they are able to pass two contradicting laws. If they do that hen freedom of speech is not so free anymore and takes away one’s ability to say whatever he wants, no matter how offensive or inappropriate it is. However, as much as we can see governments and religions as factors that manipulate or free will, society can be considered one of the biggest factors too. Society, the people we interact with, live by, and see everyday, those are the ones that constraint your choices and free will. Society even though it is not shown clearly, it still forces the individual to forget about making free choices that will deviate him/her from the norm. destructive attitudes such as racial prejudice, attitudes can lead our thoughts and actions. Social influences can affect human behaviour by changing our attitudes. So, actions like what i just mentioned affect our choices, and limits the options we have to choose from in life. Society can limit the ways you think, behave, choose, act, and develop, which makes it the perfect tool to completely strip away someones freedom without showing that its forcing this freedom to be taken away, basically, how society works is it makes us think we are free willed, but we are not free to choose what we want to do. There was enough said in this essay, maybe even too much. There were a lot of thoughts meant to be conveyed and views to be shared. There is only hope that one might understand the fact that governments don’t have to be evil fascist dictatorships or communist oppressors to control its citizens. Even though we may feel like we have complete control over our free will, there are external forces that impact the way we make our choices and the the paths we choose. Societies, religions, and governments are the major part of these external forces that manipulate our choices and our free will, so in the end, this idea of complete free will might be an illusion since humans are controlled by and external force whether it be government, religion or the society and individual lives in. â€Å"Because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation† (2 Thessalonians 2:13, New Revised Standard Version) In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will (Ephesians 1:11, Jerusalem Bible) In the very first book of the Old Testament one can interpret the fact that we are created in God’s image, therefore we posses God’s ability to be free (Genesis 1: 26, Jerusalem Bible) â€Å"So then each one of us will give an account of himself to God† (Romans 14:12, Jerusalem Bible).

Racial Equality and the Abolition of Slavery in France :: Exploratory Essays Research Papers

Racial Equality and the Abolition of Slavery in France When Abbà © Sià ¨yes wondered, "What is the Third Estate [or are slaves]? Nothing. What has it [have they] been until now in the political order? Nothing. What does it [do they] want? To be become something†¦" (65), he could have just as easily spoken of slave's misery rather than the Third Estate's plight. While, his scope was limited, his pains were not. Following their first revolution, the French National Assembly helped to change the world. Enlightened, they saw, they defined, they tried to ease all of mankind's suffering. Finally, the term man began to transcend color. If man has rights, they must apply to all men. And thus, the concept of racial equality is born. I will argue in order to achieve this end, and to prove the necessity of racial equality, Enlightened thinkers exposed flaws in current social philosophy, demonstrated the logical conclusions of their progress, and finally addressed the implications of abolition. Marquis de Condorcet was an outspoken advocate for all forms of human rights-religious, gender, political and especially racial. In his "Dedicatory Epistle to the Negro Slaves" he writes: My Friends, Although I am not the same color as you, I have always regarded you as my brothers. Nature formed us with the same spirit, the same reason, the same virtues as whites†¦Your tyrants will reproach me†¦indeed, nothing is more common than the maxims of humanity and justice†¦ Reducing a man to slavery†¦[takes] from the slave not only all forms of property but also the ability to acquire it†¦ (56). Condorcet employs the technique of de/humanizing his subjects to display the arbitrary nature of slavery. Moderates, slaves, and whites-anyone could achieve slave status under these random means. Society needs to prevent subordination. The white Condorcet speaks almost in apostrophe; the style of his introduction greatly resembles an ode. Addressing the slaves in this manner gives even more deference to the lowly slaves. Similarly, the slaves have been elevated to "My Friends," further humanizing their cause. Although Condorcet was a well-respected member of the National Assembly, he relates to the slaves how "he is not one of the them." The ordered diction again serves to equate a white man to a slave. This segment's tone lacks both condescension and sarcasm. He nearly supplicates to the slaves for their quintessence. His friends-the blacks-are his brethren. If he shares spirit, virtues, and reasons with slaves, what is to distinguish them?

Respiration and Photosynthesis

â€Å"Respiration† and â€Å"Photosynthesis† All life depends on two chemical reactions â€Å"Respiration† and â€Å"Photosynthesis†. These two processes are quite crucial because they are a source to nearly all life on Earth. Both of these processes are quite similar yet differentiate vastly. In this essay I’ll be comparing and contrasting â€Å"Photosynthesis† and â€Å"Respiration†. I’ll start by discussing what actually happens in both these processes and how? Moving on to the energy transfers these processes go through and how these reactions relate to each other. Plants feed using a process called ‘Photosynthesis’. Photosynthesis is the chemical change which happens in the leaves of green plants. It’s the first step towards making food; not just for plants but ultimately every animal on the planet. During this reaction carbondioxide and water are converted into glucose and oxygen. For this reaction to occur both carbon and nitrogen are absorbed from the roots as nitrate and so is carbon as carbondioxide from the air and it also needs energy as the reaction is endothermic, therefore the energy is ‘light’ from the sun. This is absorbed by a green substance called chlorophyll in the leaf. Therefore, photosynthesis takes place in the chloroplasts which are present in the palisade cells (found near the top of the leaf. ) (fig: 1 ) As chloroplasts contain a green pigment called chlorophyll, which absorbs light energy needed to make photosynthesis happen. The equation for this reaction is: 6CO2 + 6H2O+ light energy —> C6H12O6 + 6O2 Sugars created in photosynthesis can be later converted by the plant to starch for storage, or it can be combined with other sugar molecules to form specialized carbohydrates such as cellulose, or it can be combined with other nutrients such as nitrogen, phosphorus, and sulfur, to build complex molecules such as proteins and nucleic acids. Moreover, ‘respiration’ is reversibly related to photosynthesis because it takes in light energy and respiration gives out energy, which is used by the body as the glucose is converted into starch or stored. Oxygen is consumed unlike in photosynthesis, although in respiration energy is released in a more controlled and manageable way. During photosynthesis water and carbondioxide are chemically combined to make glucose and oxygen. The equation as follows: C6H12O6 + 6O2 —> 6CO2 + 6H2O In addition, respiration and photosynthesis are both processes which depend on each other on a very wide scale. Fig: 2 explains this. (Fig: 2 ): Shows a cycle and how photosynthesis and respiration are dependent on each other. As the leaf produces oxygen through photosynthesis and then that oxygen is inhaled by an animal. Later, the animal breathes out carbondioxide, and that is then absorbed by the plants through leaves by the air, in order for respiration to happen; making this ongoing cycle continue. Though photosynthesis only takes place in leaves of plants (inside palisade cells) during the presence of light, respiration takes place in every living organism inside the mitochondria of the cell, with or without light being present or not. As all cells need energy through the sugar they made in their leaves; oxygen moves through diffusion through the plant from cell to cell. Any oxygen not used by the plant in respiration, leaves the plant through tiny holes under the leaf called stomata. That’s then part of the air we breathe, making the whole process start again. That’s how closely photosynthesis and respiration are linked to each other. Whilst, both respiration and photosynthesis are quite similar yet unlike at the same time. Respiration is a process by which energy is liberated. On the other hand photosynthesis is a procedure where energy is stored in carbohydrate molecules as in, photosynthesis is an anabolic (constructive) process, resulting in the building up of carbohydrate molecules. While in respiration a catabolic (destructive) process occurs, resulting in the breakdown of carbohydrate molecules. So, respiration results in a loss in dry mass where photosynthesis is totally the opposite, it results in a gain in ordinary mass. Furthermore, there are enzymes involved in the process of respiration. Enzymes are biological catalysts that speed up a reaction. The organic compounds that are broken down are substrates. Glucose is the most common substrate. The general equation for respiration is: C6H12O6 + 6O2 —> 6CO2 + 6H2O + 38ATP During respiration, glucose undergoes glycolysis forming pyruvic acid. Glycolysis consists of nine separate chemical reactions, each catalysed by a specific enzyme. The key players in glycolysis are the enzymes ‘dehydrogenase’ and a coenzyme (a non-protein helper). So, in photosynthesis is catalysed by chlorophyll. To summarize, photosynthesis takes the raw ingredients of water, carbondioxide and uses light to make glucose and oxygen. Despite, respiration uses glucose and oxygen to produce carbondioxide and water as waste products. Both these processes takes place in cells except respiration takes place in the mitochondria of a cell. Photosynthesis is catalysed by chlorophyll acting in concert with lipids or sugars, while in respiration ‘dehydrogenase’ is used. Nevertheless, photosynthesis and respiration both are a part of an ongoing cycle and work together in order for plants or animals to survive.

Essay A look at Nora’s transformation from beginning to end

Many human beings, in particular women, are always searching for the especial individual and do anything in order to get what they expect. Love is a crazy feeling in which the heart leads the way and sometimes we can consider those in love under a spell. The brain has no saying and common sense is lost against this so-called â€Å"feeling of love.† I will be discussing the play a â€Å"Doll’s house† by Ibsen and in particular the transformation that Nora undergoes throughout the play until she recognizes that she is not in love with Torvald. This play was set in a time were women were dependent on man most of the time and were not able to define themselves. The only duties given to a wife, like Nora, were to be a good House wife, Take care of the†¦show more content†¦Nora explains â€Å"the past eight years have been such happy time.†(Ibsen,7). This quote gives the sense of dependency to Torvald and how much in love she thinks she is. Meanwhile, N ora enjoys being a wife and a mother at times. Nora is depicted by Torvald as animal names and she enjoys to be called these names. The names range from â€Å"My little squirrel, little lark, little sweet tooth, my pretty little pet and little spendthrift.†(Ibsen, 1-5). Of course Nora enjoys to be called those names because they are coming from the man she belongs to and one that has kept her happy for the past eight years. In comparison, this stage in their relationship relates to stage four of Stendhal’s â€Å"Love†. Nora has grown acquainted to Torvalds â€Å"name calling† and therefore, â€Å"Love is born, to love is to enjoy seeing, touching, and sensing with all the senses, as closely as possible, a lovable object that loves in return.†(Stendhal,45). In this case Nora is the object that loves him in return. Following this further, the first crystallization begins and Nora counts her blessings that Torvald has brought to her life. This explain s all the chatting and extra ta;king she did with Kristine in order to bring her up to date about her life. Nora mentions to Kristine, how Torvald became sick and they had to move, â€Å"and he became seriously ill. The doctors said it was essential for him to go south.†(Ibsen,9). The crystallization stage is fond of â€Å"counting yourShow MoreRelatedAnalysis Of Henrik Ibsen s A Doll s House 1381 Words   |  6 PagesAssignment, HL 9 May 2017 The Role of Symbolism in Nora’s Transformation from Repression to Liberation in A Doll’s House The play in prose A Doll’s House is written by Henrik Ibsen, and set in Norway in 1879. By inserting symbols into the storyline, Henrik Ibsen reveals the theme of female submissiveness and male superiority during the 19th century and highlights character revelation in the play, namely through Nora’s transformation from being repressed to being liberated. Ibsen includesRead MoreA Doll s House By Henrik Ibsen1421 Words   |  6 Pagesduring that period. She seems to be powerless and confines herself through high standard expectations, demonstrating what the role of a women would be as a wife and mother. The protagonist of A Doll’s House is a woman named Nora Helmer. Ibsen shows how Nora’s design of perfect life gradually transforms when her secret unravels. In the play A Doll House, Nora Helmer, who throughout much of the play is oppressed, presents an inauthentic identity to the audience and throughout the play attempts to discoverRead MoreThem e Of Marriage In A Dolls House1624 Words   |  7 Pagesthe main character’s marriage fail because of secrets, but because of the reasoning behind having those secrets. The late 1800’s when the play was published saw more than it’s fair share of sexism but the twist comes with Nora leaving Torvald at the end of the play, which at the time was unheard of. More often than not this play leaves the reader siding with Nora and for a good reason as well since her intentions throughout were only to help her husband and share an equal marriage, Torvald not so muchRead MoreEssay On The Role Of Women In A Dolls House1435 Words   |  6 Pagesthe time are depicted. From this play you can see how woman were treated compared to men through the main character Nora Helmer. Nora’s character represents the â€Å"doting wife†, willing to do anything in order to keep her husband happy. Ibsen wrote about what he believed to be the roles in society, feminism and equa lity. â€Å"A Doll’s House† was written in the 1800s however in a bigger social context not much has changed. The society in â€Å"A Doll’s House† strives to take away Nora’s identity. She is not seenRead MoreParallels between A Doll’s House and The Awakening Essay918 Words   |  4 Pagesindividuality, Nora Helmer, from A Doll’s House, and Edna Pontellier, from The Awakening, each uniquely discovers themselves. Since the beginning of the play, Nora was very loyal to her husband and even told him how she would â€Å"not think of going against your [his] wishes† (Ibsen 6). However, she does not act like an individual because she is controlled by her husband, along with other men, and acknowledges their role as her superiors (Ibsen 20). After Torvald, Nora’s husband, finds out about herRead MoreA Doll s House By Henrik Ibsen1666 Words   |  7 Pagessince a paradigm shift occurred in the modern society that women are no longer dependent upon men. After the publication and the first stage production, the play sparked an immediate outbreak of debate and controversy, and most of it centered on Nora’s decision to abandon her marriage at the conclusion. Many people considered the play as a revolutionary action of feminism, which contradicted Norwegian patriarchal society norms. One review of the period stated that the portrayal of the characterRead MoreHow Significant Is the Change in Nora in a Dolls House1376 Words   |  6 PagesHouse, in Nora’s character, who throughout much of the play is oppressed, presents an inauthentic identity to the audience and throughout the play attempts to discovery her authentic identity. The inferior role of Nora is extremely important to her character. Nora is oppressed by a variety of oppressive social conventions. Ibsen in his A Dolls House depicts the role of women as subordinate in order to emphasize their role in society. Nora is oppressed by the manipulation from Torvald. TorvaldRead MoreEssay on Theme of Self-discovery in The Awakening and A Dolls House1121 Words   |  5 PagesHouse      Ã‚  Ã‚   In Chopins The Awakening and Ibsens A Doll House, the main characters each experience an awakening. Although they lead different lives, Nora Helmer and Edna Pontelliers respective awakenings are caused by similar factors. From the beginning, neither character fits the standard stereotype of women in the society in which they lived. Another factor that influences Nora and Ednas awakenings is their marital relationship. Neither Nora nor Edna are treated as an equal by their husbandRead More A Dolls House: Nora Essay964 Words   |  4 Pages  Ibsen  takes  this  realistic  story  and  invests  it  with   universal  significance.  Wrapped  up  in  the  technique  of  this  well  constructed   play, Ibsen  is masterful  in  his  presentation  of  not  only  realism,  but he  holds  a  mirror  up   to the  society  of his day by  using  the male  figures  as  catalysts  for  Noras  ultimate   knowledge  of  self-actualization.  He  accomplishes  this  with  such  precision that  the  audience  might  not  be  aware  all  the  subtleties  that  are  creating  their theatrical  experience.  Ã‚   nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;In  A Doll House,  Nora  Read More Noras Quest for Justice Essay examples3608 Words   |  15 Pages Nora’s Quest for Justice In Henrik Ibsen’s, A Doll’s House, Nora struggles to achieve justice and her rightful place as a woman, mother, and wife, despite the hardships and mistreatment of her husband Torvald and her father. Throughout Nora’s life, she has faced hardships in order to survive as a normal person because of the mistreatment she received from the two men in life she ever loved; her father and her husband. The mistreatment of Nora’s father and husband has caused Nora to become and be