Computers and Science Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 1

Computers and Science - Assignment Example For this topic we will base our discussion on a computer program that is used for Chemistry solve a data collection. 7E Learning Model Based Computer-Assisted Teaching Materials on Precipitation Titrations use the quasi experimental design was used (Gay as cited by Kunduz 2013 787). The scenarios based on the 7E as based on real life chemical problems written by authors (786). The aim was to develop a computer assisted device which involved animations and laboratory academically computer software†¦ used in unit ‘precipitationtitration’ (789). This is very helpful for students who find it difficult during titrations this study can help with the analysis of data, instrument and procedures and findings. Didactic Analysis of the web acid-base titration simulations applied in pre-graduate chemistry. The acid base titrations accessible via the internet covered three part topics algorithm of titration course, course of titration curve and concentration calculation (Machkova 2013 837). This simulation was used for learning practice (837). The didactic analysis is used by teach about the curves for titration and the presentation of titration. This is helpful for people doing research on acid base titrations. Computer study has proved to be useful in doing difficult technical work not as compared to traditional work whereby man was the problem solver. Since titrations prove to be difficult to students the 7E learning model may be useful to teachers who would rather explain using a research already done and in abstract view of the whole process of the research. Thus the students may know the expected results for the research also the 7E learning model contains questions before the result. The Didactic Analysis is also a good research model as it gives learners choice on which specific research they want The program should also be able to get results from the individual growth rate so as to be able to calculate the average growth rate of the total

Is Chinua Achebe Correct in Asserting That Heart of Darkness Is Essentially a Racist Novel Essay Example for Free

Is Chinua Achebe Correct in Asserting That Heart of Darkness Is Essentially a Racist Novel Essay Chinua Achebe’s’ expresses his view on Heart of Darkness as an essentially racist novel and he is correct in saying this. His essay focuses mainly on the portrayal of the Congo as an ‘other world’ in which Conrad describes it to be an antithesis of Europe and the European standards and overall of civilisation as a whole. The racism presented by Conrad in the novel is evident through his manipulation of perspective and dehumanisation of the native Africans as discussed in Achebe’s essay. Joseph Conrad manipulates the perspective of the reader and the attitude they have towards the natives and Europeans alike through the bestowal of human expression to Europeans and the withholding of it from the Africans, as Achebe explains. When comparing the description of the two women, the African woman and European woman, the reader is able to depict a subtle yet definite difference in the way each woman’s expression is characterised. The African woman, who is seen to be as a mistress to Mr Kurtz, is illustrated as a very mysterious figure ‘’with an air of brooding over an inscrutable purpose’’ making her character unidentifiable. Whereas the European woman is talked about more clearly and the reader can easily recognise her character because she is given emotions and feeling, ‘’she had a mature capacity for fidelity, for belief, for suffering’’. In Conrad characterising each woman in such different ways, the reader feels as though the European woman is more relatable as opposed to the native woman who is not expressed with feelings. This lack of human expression in the description of the African woman, as commented on by Achebe, created a noticeable barrier between the complexity of natives and Europeans. For the most part, the natives are not given any dialogue but instead their speech is replaced with ‘’a violent babble of uncouth sounds’’. Achebe however, refers to two significant parts of the novel when native Africans are given English dialogue. These are when the cannibals request the humans to eat, ‘’catch ‘im. Give ‘im to us. ’’. As well as the famous announcement, ‘’Mistah Kurtz—he dead’’. When first read, the reader thinks of these as high points for the natives because they appear to be at the same level as the Europeans in terms of getting dialogue ithin the novel. Chinua Achebe opposes this by stating that in reality they constitute some of his best assaults as these examples of dialogue in fact degrade the natives. This changes the reader’s perspective into assume that through the use of grunts and incoherent speech they are inferior and inarticulate in comparison t o the language used by the Europeans. This difference in amount and quality of dialogue between the Africans and colonising Europeans contributes to making Heart of Darkness an essentially a racist novel. The novel reveals the Africans being reduced to metaphorical expanse of dangerous and dark jungle of animals into which the European colonists venture. Chinua Achebe is correct in criticising Heart of Darkness as a racist novel, this is seen particularly through Conrad’s dehumanisation of the Congolese natives. Throughout the novel Conrad’s descriptions of the natives are used to create the idea of uncivilised, savage being whom cannot be of the same standards as the Europeans. Conrad’s most effective way of dehumanising the African people is through his use of imagery, ‘’a whirl of black limbs, as mass of hands’’. This does not give the impression that these are human beings but instead that they are just parts of humans, therefore making them seem incomplete and inferior in comparison the way Europeans are described. This imagery is also important when Conrad describes native workers as ‘’decaying machinery’’, this creates the image that the Congolese are not valued as humans, as Europeans are, but rather as disposable articles who can easily be replaced after they have done their work. The language choices in which Conrad has made also have a great impact on the way the natives are perceived. By using phrases such as ‘’the beaten nigger groaned somewhere’’, the Congolese natives are referred to in a very uncivilised manner. A way in which no European would ever be described leads the reader to believe that the Africans are in fact inferior to the Europeans, making them less of a human. These descriptions make it evident that Conrad’s writing involving the natives made them appear beast-like and savage therefore dehumanising them in a way that can only be seen as racist. Although these racial depictions may not be used to knowingly dehumanise and objectify the Congolese people, Chinua Achebe rightly criticises Heart of Darkness as a racist novel. The constant comparison between the two cultures, African and European, are simply explained as one being civilised whereas the other is portrayed as savage. The unavoidable reality that Conrad’s descriptions of the natives were accurate expressions of the European perspective justifies Achebe’s assertion that Heart of Darkness is essentially a racist novel.

Sociological and Psychological Theories of Crime

Sociological and Psychological Theories of Crime In this task I am going to be looking at different theories which involve criminology, once I have completed that I am going to research one sociological and one psychological theory. At the same time I am going to look at the normal factors that might influence crime. I am also going to be looking at what criminology is and lots of different aspects of crime. Contents (Jump to): Biological Theories  of Crime Nature vs nurture Sociological Theories of Crime Functionalism Merton’s strain theory Marxism Labelling Theory Chicago School Psychological Theories of Crime Psychoanalytical theory Social learning theory Introduction What is criminology? Criminology is a subject which has a lot of different aspects to it. There are a lot of different areas why people turn to committing crime. The reasons are: Sociology Psychology Biology Geography Law Anthropology What is crime? My definition of crime would be that it is something that someone has done wrong, which is breaking the law. So should be punished for it. Another definition for crime would be crime is the breach of a rule or law for which some governing authority or force may ultimately prescribe a punishment. Right or wrong? We also had a class discussion about what is crime and what is right and wrong? The comments that came up are: An act that is punishable by law. Something that someone has done which is illegal. Behaviour which is contrary to the laws of society. I think that a right reason for breaking the law if there was one would be if someone was so poor and they didn’t have any money to get any food and they stole some food to keep them from starving to death. That isn’t as bad as some crimes and they are only committing the crime so they can stay alive. A wrong reason for committing a crime would be if someone murdered someone else. That is a wrong crime because there will never be a good enough reason for killing someone. Time and place Laws are brought in everyday and different parts of the country and also world. Some examples of different times and place laws have come in are, in 1908 incest was not regarded as a criminal offence in the UK. Everyone knew that it was wrong and that you shouldn’t do it but it wasn’t until 1908 that a law was brought in to stop people who do commit the crime. Another example of this was that it wasn’t illegal to rape within in marriage and that only changed in 1991, when it became illegal. An example of places when it comes to laws is that some laws are different in some country than others. An example of this would be, in the Netherlands they are legally allowed to have sex at the age of 12, but in England they are only legally allowed to have sex when they are 16. In a class discussion we had a look at what might be legal in five years and what is legal now but wouldn’t be legal in five years. A few examples of thing that might not be legal in five years are: Drinking age might have gone up to age of 21. Driving age might go up so there are will be fewer accidents involving young drivers. Children allowed in pubs. Having a drinking whilst eating a meal with parents. We also looked at laws that are illegal at the moment but they might be legal in five years. Examples of this would be: Smoking cannabis might be made legal for everyone not just people who need them for the medical reasons. They might have special licenses that mean people are allowed to smoke in pubs which have the license. Explanation of why do people commit crime? There are many reasons why people commit crime but they have been defined it into three categories. The three groups that they have been put into are biological or genetic, sociological and psychological. Biological or genetic: this is theory that people who have committed have inherited it from their parents. So they are basically born as a criminal. Sociological: this theory is that people will commit crime on depending on who they socialise with. They might do it because they are being pressured by the people they socialise with. Psychological: this is theory s that people will commit crimes all depending on what their personality is like. If there have a good personality they are less likely to commit crime. Biological Theories for Crime Underlying which is also known as distal. Something that effect someone their whole life and it is being held deep down might cause them to commit crime. This might be how they were brought up when they were younger. Immediate this is also known as proximal. Is where the surrounding of a person include the people they will be hanging around with, might effect if someone commits crime or not. Factors that might affect people to commit crime are: Cultural factors (learned social behaviour). This could be their family or even where they come from. It could relate their religion and what they are told they should and should not do. Power of peer group. This could be friends because they might feel pressured to commit crime because all of their mates are. They might want to fit in a group and to be in that group they may have to do something to show they are good enough. Media- the media can affect people in a lot of different ways. It can make people happy, sad or even angry. They have affect on people to do things might not normally do. Statistics Statistic is something where they will collect data and make averages and probabilities out of the results. One of many statistics is that men are twice more likely to commit a crime than women are. Another statistic is that 16 24 have the highest rate for crime in both sexes. BIOLOGY – nature v nurture Nature and nurture will come into to forms when it comes to crime. They have two different views on why people commit crime. The two different views are that people are born a criminal or they are made a criminal once they are born. Nature: This is a theory where they believe that people are born the way they are and they don’t develop into the way they are now. So when crime is involved they have the theory that they will be born as a criminal, and they don’t develop it over time. It will come down to the genetic inheritance, if their parents are criminals they will become a criminal as well because of the genetic inheritance. They will say that genetic determination is inherited which includes the tendency to commit crime. Not many people still believe in this theory it came about in the early stages of the last century, when biologists like Darwin where about. They did studies with twins, which are identical. This means that they are the same in everyway including the same genes. They studied both of the children to see if one of them or both of them become a criminal. They also looked if one did commit a crime the other one is more likely to commit a crime. This is known as concordance. This is more likely to happen with Identical twins than just twins because identical twins have the same genes but twins only share half. A study which supports this theory with evidence is Goldman and Cottesman (1995). They have evidence to support this theory because they showed that if one identical twin does one thing the other one is more likely to do it as well. But they also found that they are in the as environment so they have been brought up the same. Maybe if they were apart it might be different. Nurture This is a theory where they don’t believe it is anything to do with genetic inheritance. They think that everyone is born normal and that lived experiences affect if we will commit crime in are life time or not. Certain area’s that might affect why people will commit crime are: Low family income- they might have any money so they have might have to resort to crime because they will want to buy things that everyone else have, like the latest toys and because they cant afford to pay for them they might steal the instead. Poor child-rearing techniques- if their parents don’t bring their child up right they might know what is wrong and they might think that stealing is acceptable. Large families- that could many reasons like if they had a large family they might not have enough money to provide for them, or they might commit a crime because they don’t get much attention so they do it to get attention, etc. Low educational achievement- that is because they will have no qualifications, so they will not be able to get a job so they won’t have any money to pay for anything which might make them resort to crime. My own view My own view on the biology would be that I agree with the nurture theory because I don’t think that people are born the way they are. I disagree with the nature theory because in some families the parents have never committed a crime and they have a child and that commits crime. It shows that it is nothing to do with being born in a certain way. I think that people commit crime because of people who are around them who can influence them. I think it is all down to influences. Sociological Theories of Crime In this I am going to be looking at different theories. The theories that I am going to be looking at are: Functionalism Marxism Labelling Theory Chicago School Functionalism This is a theory which was developed from Emile Durkheim (1858-1917). Emile Durkheim theory was all based his own theory that people want to be able to live and work, they need to have a strong sense of social order. This means that there has to rules and regulations, and there is always either a right or wrong answer. He thought they needed rules because people will abide by them, he thought that if there wasn’t any rules or anything everything would break down. Crime is universal and normal Durkheim has come to the conclusion that crime is normal because it happens everywhere in every country, all over the globe. He thinks that it is normal because it has always happened and probably will always happen. Crime is relative: This is where the rate of crime is changing all the time. It will change because crime depends on certain factors. Factors that it depends on are things like time, culture, society, and etc. culture might affect the amount of crime because some cultures are more into crime than other cultures. Crime is functional and necessary Durkheim also thinks that crime is necessary in some ways because when people are committing crimes, the government are making new laws to try and punish people when they do commit that crime. This will show criminals that are thinking of committing a crime will not want to because they know what the punishment. It sets boundaries for people and if they commit crimes they will be punished. Functionalism and anomie: This is where there is a major change in society. This will affect people in different ways it all depending on what changes. An example of this is depression, they will lower their sights and expectations but if there is a boom people will react completely different and they will set their sights higher. This will affect functionalism because it will affect the way people live and work. It will either make it better for them or worse. My own view When it comes to functionalism theory I think that some of the aspects of the theory are right but some aren’t. I agree with the fact that we need rules and regulations to live are lives and that if there wasn’t any, everything would break down. I also agree with bringing in laws to stop people from committing offences. I think that if someone has committed a crime that they should be punished for it. So that I agree with basically all of the aspects of the theory. Merton’s strain theory This is another theory that Durkheim came up with. This theory is all to do with where they took the anomie theory further and developed it. This theory is all to do with anomie and how it encourages people to do better. It encourages for people to strive for wealth. The only thing that it won’t be the same from person to person. It all depends on the person. Not everyone will strive to achieve the same thing. Durkheim came up with this theory in 1938. This theory breaks down into five sections. He talks about 5 different ways in which people are able to adapt to the change when the strive comes. Conformity- this is where they accept what they have been given and get on with it. An example of this would be in work, they have been given a task to do and they accept that they have to do it and just get on with it. Innovation- this is the opposite of ritualism. Innovation is where they will accept the cultural goals and they will stick to them but the way in which they achieve it like the traditional way, they will reject it and achieve them in their on way. They might resort to illegitimate ways or illegal ways. Ritualism- this is where they will reject the cultural goals that are there but they will accept and comply with the means of completing something. This would be the traditional ways of achieving things that they have to do. This would be known as bureaucrat. This is where they will do the job to what it is worth they will not put any more effort than what is needed to complete the task. Retreatism- this is the less extreme form of rebellion. They will not accept the social goals, aims and method. They will not comply with them. They will be a drop out of society. Rebellion- this is where they will not accept any of the social goals, which means that they will go by their own rules and do what they want. They will do what they want, not what other people tell them to do. An example of this would be terrorists because that is going against the social goals and rules. When it comes to relating this to crime. You can relate it because he came up with within the theory that people who are in lower classes are more likely to commit crimes because they have more of a strain than people in higher class. They also came up with a theory that working class is more likely to commit crime. The only thing that also he could not find out when it comes to crime is that is nothing to do with finance and people in classes. They can not explain why people are killed and assaulted when it isn’t anything to do with money. He also found out that not everyone has the same goals; it all depends on a lot of factors like living, finance, religion and many more. Merton could not explain why people will choose one adaption other another one. My own view I agree with the theory, the only thing that I don’t agree with is that I don’t think that people are split into some many groups. I think that there should only be three groups. The three groups that I think there should be are conformity, ritualism and also rebellion. Marxism This is a theory that Karl Marx came up with in (1818- 1883). This theory includes information about the new criminology, Critical criminology, Radical criminology, Left realism, Conflict theory. His theory wasn’t much to do with crime, it was more so to do with economics and ownership are the power influences in society. Examples of this that the more land you own the more powers you have. They will employee people to work on the land. Which also help with the theory that they will have more power than the people working on the land. The Bourgeoisie are the owners of the means of production. The Proletariat are the working classes. He believes that there is always a conflict between classes which will lead to social change. It is basically a conflict between bourgeoisie and proletariat. Bad behaviour was seen as things someone does that the people in power do not approve of. The people in power will bring in laws if they think that the people who are behaving in a bad way are at risk of taking over. Crime comes from the unfairness and also the corrupt nature of the society. The way in which working people were treated. The reasons why working people committed crime was because they were fighting against the repression. The bourgeoisie decided what should be laws and what shouldn’t be. The proletariat listen and just thought they were normal. The reasons why the bourgeoisie brought in the laws was to make sure that the proletariat don’t try and take over and take their place. Crimes of the Bourgeoisie Crimes of the Proletariat tax fraud benefit fraud embezzlement theft pollution assault corporate crime vandalism This table shows the different types of crimes that both categories are most likely to commit. The bourgeoisie group are most likely to create pollution because if they own factories as their own business. They will have fumes coming out and if there are too many they will be polluting the surrounding area and the earth. The proletariat group are most likely to commit crimes like theft because they don’t get paid much money for doing jobs for the bourgeoisie. This means that they may not be able to provide for their families properly which might force them to commit crimes. The two group’s crimes are so different, the bourgeoisie will do because they know they can get away with it and save more money but the proletariat might do it so they can live properly and provide for their families. Labelling Theory This is a theory that a theorist called Becker came up with. His theory was completely different to the other theory because they blame crime on society where as in this theory it is all to do with people who label people. This is where people label an act as a criminal offence. If people didn’t label them people wouldn’t think they were a criminal thing or a wrong thing to do. It won’t be a crime till we say it is. In this theory they say that it is not the criminal who is responsible, it’s the society. He pointed out that most people have committed a crime in their life at some time, big or small. Most people have been caught for doing it so they haven’t been labelled. The only difference between people and criminals is that they have been caught for it and labelled as a criminal. My own view I agree with this in some ways but I don’t agree in others. I agree that some crimes should be labelled because some people might look at it and think that it isn’t a crime but it actually turns out to be. I don’t think that some crimes don’t need labelling because everyone morally knows what is right and what is wrong. So everyone knows that killing someone isn’t right so I don’t think crime with seriousness of that doesn’t need labelling. Chicago School This is a theory that was made by the Chicago school developed. It all came about in the 1930’s in America. It relates to Robert Park’s theory where he talked about urban ecology. They looked at the people and what happen when there are ecological changes in the environment. This could result in people competing for space, invasion of territory and also dominance of other groups of people. This pictures shows where crime is more likely to happen. It is based on a concentric zone theory where different zones and Burgess points out that more crime will be committed in ‘the loop’ and the zone ‘in transition’. (Criminology_theories and effects on portal in crime and its effect on society folder.) My own view I agree with this theory in the fact that the area that people live can affect people to commit crime, but I think it is to focused around that one aspect why people commit crime. An example of this would be peer groups, family etc. Psychology Theories of Crime There are two different parts of psychological. The two different areas that I am going to be looking at are: Psychoanalytical theory Social learning theory Psychoanalytical theory Psychoanalytic theory which is also known as Freudian theory is where they think that people are being dominated by unconscious forces and driven by sexual and aggressive desires. The theory also says that we are not free and we aren’t in charge of ourselves. So something else does everything for us. Freud came up with three state of the mind: The id: the childlike demanding side of a person The ego: the rational logical side The super ego: the moral part of our personality He came up with the theory that if parents do not socialise with their children enough, they will not be able to develop the super ego properly which might result in them not being able to control their ID. Which means that it can lead to bad and also destructive behaviour. My own view When it comes to this theory I don’t agree with it in the sense that it is all to do with sexual and aggressive drives. I think it is just to do with thoughts not sexual or aggressive thoughts. I also disagree in some ways with if the parent don’t show enough attention to their children they would stay in the ID stage. I think that they might slightly be affected but not to the extent that he says it will be. Social learning theory This is all about behavioural psychology. Behavioural psychology is where they people learn behaviour and they are able to maintain it by rewards and also sanctions. When this comes to crimes, they say that crime has either been learned or it is a failure of socialisation process. This is where they were never taught what was right or wrong. They say crime is a learned behaviour, which doesn’t differ from any other learning experience. Criticism of the social learning theory The criticism that was made was that people are very different and no-one is the same and that you don’t know how someone will react to punishment. Someone might be happy but some people might not. All depends on the person. The theory assumes individuals are passive and unquestioning. It neglects the influence the influence of media and wider culture Other contributing factors to crime There are other factors that affect why people commit crime than the ones that I have covered. The other factors that might affect people are: Family Farrington and West (1990) they found that a small amount of people will commit crime because of their family. They account for the large proportion of criminal activity. Families account for a small amount of it though. (UK most crime committed by 10% of the population). Economic factors this shows that people from low economic are more likely to commit crime or involved in criminal activities. Benyan (1994) and Harrower (1998) looked into this theory and found that the nature been poverty and crime will never be a rock solid evidence to prove why people commit crime. Peer pressure this is where friends and also peer groups influence people to commit crime. They might do it because they want to be in a group. Or they feel like an idiot if they don’t do what everyone else is doing. This would normally happen in gangs. Education a poor education can affect it because if they don’t like it. They might not go which might turn them to committing crime because they have nothing else to do. My own view I think that these all contribute to crime in a major way. I think that normally most contributes to crime would be peer pressure because you will be with your friends and other peer so they affect a lot of different things you do and also how you live your life. I think that family is close behind because they will teach you what is right and wrong when you are younger so that you know for when you are older.

Legal Education In The Us :: essays research papers

Legal Education In The US There is no undergraduate law degree in the United States; thus, students cannot expect to study law without first completing an undergraduate degree. Basic admissions requirements for American law schools are a Bachelor's degree in any field and the Law School Admissions Test (LSAT). The American law degree is called the Juris Doctor (JD) and usually requires three years of study. The JD program involves courses in American common and statute law as well as international and business law. Overseas students who are considering an American JD should note that this program focuses on preparation for US legal practice. Undergraduate Preparation for Law School No particular subject or major field of study is required at the undergraduate level. Law schools are concerned that applicants have taken courses which develop communication and analytical skills, and that they have exposed themselves to a variety of disciplines. The Prelaw Handbook (Association of American Law Schools) suggests students study some or most of the following fields but stresses that "well-developed academic ability" is preferable to intense specialization in any one field: economics, social sciences (sociology, psychology, anthropology, political science), computers, accounting, and the sciences. Most pre-law students earn their undergraduate degrees in one of the social sciences, rounding out their general preparation with courses from other disciplines. All these subjects may be studied at virtually any university. Law schools in the US do not require that students complete their Bachelor's degree in America, but because of fierce competition for places in law schools, few students are accepted from overseas universities. At the beginning of the final year of undergraduate study, JD applicants should take the LSAT. No knowledge of law is needed to do well on this exam; it is a standardized test of academic aptitude in the areas of reading comprehension and analytical and logical reasoning. Legal Education Students thinking of law study soon discover that the programs of most law schools have a great deal in common. The choice of one school over another is not easily made on the basis of catalog descriptions of the teaching methods, course offerings, and formal requirements. The similarity is natural, since most American law schools share the aim of educating lawyers for careers that may take many paths and that will frequently not be limited to any particular state or region. Although many lawyers eventually find themselves practicing within some special branch of the law, American legal education is still fundamentally an education for generalists. It emphasizes the acquisition of broad and basic knowledge of law, understanding of the functioning of the legal system, and

Alternative Ending To Catcher in the Rye Essay

Anyway, I really did go home after the carrousel. First, Phoebe and I walked out of the park and took the bus to Grand Central, to get my god dam Gladstone’s out of the strong box there. Though it had stopped hammering down, I was still pretty wet. Boy, it really came down like a madman. I still had ‘Phoebe’s’ red hunting hat on, it was soaking wet though. I didn’t care though. â€Å"I’m glad we’re both going home now, Holden†, she said. â€Å"I’m just ready to get this over with†, I said, â€Å"Mom and dad will cry.† â€Å"Don’t worry, Holden. It’ll be okay†, Phoebe said. She squeezed my hand which she was holding and smiled. It just about killed me. We had most of Phoebe’s Christmas dough, so we got my Gladstone’s, and took the bus to 72nd street. There were a bunch of kids at the back of the bus. They were all horsing around, laughing and all. We sat next to them. We took up a lot of room, since we had my two suitcases, plus my old suitcase with Phoebe’s stuff in it. I heard some kid say, â€Å"Phoebe, your brother found you!† I looked across the bus. It was that kid I met in the park yesterday, the girls who roller skates I’d tightened and all. â€Å"Holden’s coming to see me in the play†, she said to the girl. She tugged my arm, â€Å"This is my brother Holden, Holden, this is Susie. She’s in the play too!† â€Å"Yes†, Susie said, â€Å"It should be really great†. She was so polite. I really liked her. I usually like Phoebe’s friends when I first meet them. Phoebe and Susie helped me get my mind off of how I was about to face my parents. I was worried about my mom. I tried not to think of how hysterical she’d get. Phoebe said mom and dad were coming home at around 7. It was 4 now. We got off the bus at 72nd street, said goodbye to Susie and all, and then walked home. â€Å"How are Mr. and Mrs. Antolini?† she asked me. â€Å"They’re doing pretty good†, I said. Of course I would never tell her what really happened. I still couldn’t believe it. Had he always liked me in a flirty way? We got home, and I took my suitcases into my room and I lay down on my bed. I was pretty tired. All of a sudden i got to thinking about Pencey. I wondered what they were all saying about me back there. I started thinking maybe I was wrong, leaving so suddenly after that god dam little tiff with Stradlater. He’s really not a bad guy. In fact, I sort of missed him. I’ll give old Jane a bell tomorrow, if it’s not too crazy here. So I unpacked a few things in my room, and smoked all of my cigarettes. I was so god dam nervous. Around 7 o’clock, mom and dad walked in together. At the time, I was right there in the hallway, so they saw me right away. I really didn’t care if they yelled at me. I felt numb and empty inside. I was really hungry, but too worried to eat. If you want to know the truth, I was in pretty bad shape. Even though I changed and washed before mom and dad came home, I felt that I must have looked a state. I hadn’t shaved in a few days. Anyway, they looked all dressed up and nice when they came through the door. â€Å"Holden! What’s going on? What are you doing here? Its’ Tuesday†, my dad said. I took a deep breath, and then started coughing all over the place. Christ, what a time to have a coughing fit ey? I finally cleared my throat. â€Å"Well†, I said, â€Å"I†¦I got kicked out again. I’m really sorry† â€Å"Damn it, Holden! I can’t take it anymore!† Dad yelled. Mom had already started sobbing. I felt awful. Seeing Mom cry really killed me. â€Å"Holden, what the hell is wrong with you!? I paid a ton of money to send you to these schools and all you do is get kicked out every god dam time! I know you’re not stupid! You can pass these classes! I know it’s that you’re not applying yourself!† Boy was he mad. His face was all red, and all these veins were sticking out in his neck. I was kinda scared that he would hit me. We’re a pretty non-violent family. I was thinking about Allie the whole time Dad was yelling at me. I don’t know how long the whole thing lasted. â€Å"Damn it, Holden, you’ve really pushed my buttons this time! Look at how well DB and Phoebe are doing. Can’t you follow their lead?† Mom was just sobbing the whole time that the argument was going on. I started drifting off again, I thought about Mr. Antolini. I could be there now, having an intellectual conversation with him, smoking a cigarette. I kept thinking about him patting me on the head. Does he look at me as another son figure? Or does he have feelings for me? Or was he just really drunk? It didn’t seem right at all. When I got there, he should have noticed how tired I was and just let me sleep. So, Dad was kept on yelling at me and sent me to my room. I walked into my room, shut the door, and lay down on my bed again and lit a cigarette that I found in my hounds tooth jacket pocket. I hardly ever see Dad this mad. I heard my mom crying in their bedroom, and my father trying to comfort her. I started thinking of the military school. I knew I’d hate it there, even more than the other schools I’d been to. The next thing I knew, I was sort of crying. Normally I’m not a huge crier, but here I was, crying my god dam eyes out. I heard a little knock at the door, and old Phoebe came in. â€Å"I heard you crying, don’t worry Holden, everything will blow over†. She sat on the side of my bed and hugged me. Trust Phoebe to do something phony like that, but all the same, it was kinda cute. Phoebe went to bed at around 9 o’clock and I was still awake by 11. I couldn’t sleep. I felt kinda weak, and I kept coughing like a madman. That’s about it, that’s all I’m gonna tell you. I could go on and tell you about the military school and Phoebe and all. But I think I told too much already.

Terrorism Essay Example

Terrorism Essay Example Terrorism Essay Terrorism Essay Terrorism Name: Course: Institution: The contention encompassing terrorism has been prevalent over the past few years, especially within the international community. Much of the controversy involved in this topic arises from the legal definition of terrorism and the prejudices behind it. In the legal sense, terrorism does not possess any legal requisite. With that said, it is apparent that terrorism is undefined under criminal legislations. Regardless, terrorism has garnered various definitions based on its effects on society as well as social or political motivations. For instance, terrorism refers to violent activities devised to exude fear from people, carried out for ideological, religious or nationalist reasons, and intentionally ignore the safety of civilians. Nonetheless, such definitions are partial since other organizations engage in the same tactics but do not fall under terrorist groups. Regardless of these contentions, terrorism is indeed a recurrent factor in the contemporary age. Researchers have developed various assumptions or hypotheses that establish the motives behind various acts of terror in different parts of the world. Motives for Terrorism Ideological Terrorism: Baader-Meinhof in Germany Ideological terrorism focuses on promoting or furthering a specific belief system by committing acts of violence and terror against governments and civilians. Specifically, it involves certain factions that engage in acts of terror in order to impose their political principles on other system. This form of terrorism arose from revolutionary terrorism, which was mostly in the form of guerrilla warfare. Nonetheless, ideological terrorism originated from anti-colonialism. This type of terrorism arose from the ideology within urban terrorism and urban guerrilla. According to White (2012), such ideas derived from Frantz Fanon. Fanon alleged that the Western influences dehumanized non-Western people leading to the destruction of their cultures and substituting them with Western standards. As a result, the people began experiencing exasperations from their perpetual identity predicament. This predicament asserted that for them to succeed, it was vital to reject their heritage. One of the modern terrorist groups practicing ideological terrorism is the left-wing terrorist group, the Baader-Meinhof. The Baader-Meinhof faction was one of the significant European leftists during the 1970s. At this time, most European leftwing groups as well as the nationalist factions adopted the Marighella Model based on the South American revolutionary leader, Carlos Marighella. The Marighella Model provided specific tactics for engaging in acts of terror based on the practical proposals of Marighella himself. Based on the model, Marighella sought to relocate violence to the urban centre from the rural areas. This strategy focused on initiating a terror campaign via small factions comprising urban guerillas. As such, violence was urban-based. Marighella focused on this strategy in order to reveal the oppressive and exploitive nature of the government to the unaware public. The Baader-Meinhof received inauguration in 1970. The perpetrators of this group were its founders, and they comprised Andreas Baader, Gudrun Ensslin, Horst Mahler and Ulrike Meinhof. Also known as the Red Army Faction (RAF), the group portrayed itself as a communist urban guerrilla faction fighting against fascism in Germany. The main objective of the Baader-Meinhof gang involved eradicating the anti-imperialistic and conservative role that the German government played at that time. Furthermore, most German citizens expressed dissatisfaction with the government based on problems such as racism, sexism as well as anti-imperialism, which the government failed to address during the 1970s. Such reasons led to the terrorist attacks against government officials and conservative big heads from 1970 to 1998 leading to 34 deaths including secondary personnel. However, in 1998, the leftist group ceased its operations after delivering a communique to the press announcing its disbandment. Religious Terrorism: Iran’s State-Sponsored Religious Terrorism Religious terrorism embraces most aspects of ideological terrorism. This is because religious terror groups use religion as an ideology to perpetrate such acts. Nonetheless, there is still significant disparity between both classes of terrorism. Religious terrorism is the performance of acts of terror or violent acts against civilians and governments because of motives and objectives that possess a domineering religious temperament or influence. Specifically, religious terrorism is a category of political aggression influenced by an unconditional belief based on the assumption that a greater power has commanded such acts for the magnificence of the faith. Usually, violent behaviors based on faith will receive forgiveness from the greater power and may even incur gratification in another life. In the real meaning, a person’s religious faith justifies violence as long as the act expresses the will of the person’s deity. One of the main examples of religious terrorism involves state-sponsored religious terrorism. The sponsorship of terrorism is unlimited to facilitating ethnic or ideological movements. It also inculcates the funding of religious radical movements. An example of this is the case of Iran. In 1979, the republic of Iran assumed the role of a religious terror sponsor after overthrowing Shah Muhammed Reza Pahlavi’s monarchy and creating the Islamic Republic of Iran afterwards. The country has sponsored several factions famous for engaging in terror attacks. For instance, the Revolutionary Guards Corps’ member, Qods Force, endorses Islamic revolution globally and the emancipation of Jerusalem from Islam non-believers (O’Hern, 2012). Additionally, the officials of Iran have insinuated the creation of martyrdoms specifically designated for suicide terror acts against Israelis and Americans. A significant illustration of the nation’s support for politically sensitive factions comprises the benefaction and aid Iran provides for the Hezbollah Movement. The relationship between Hezbollah and Iran is vital since the faction played a crucial role in the political surroundings within the region. As a Shia movement, Hezbollah (Party of God) arose in order to support the Shia populace in Lebanon. The organization originated at the time of the Lebanon Civil War and the 1982 incursion of Israel as a sturdy symbol for Lebanon’s independence and a justice platform for the Lebanese Shia (Fattah Fierke, 2009). The group is accountable for numerous political terror acts in the 1980s and 1990s comprising kidnappings, suicide attacks and terror acts against Israelis. Iran also sponsors other terror groups in other regions such as Palestine in order to attack the Israelis dwelling in the West Bank and Gaza. Such groups comprise religious movements such as Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and Hamas (Islamic Resistance Movement). Nationalist Terrorism: The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam Nationalist terrorism is the use of violent acts because of motives based on nationalism. Usually, nationalist terrorists attempt to search for self-determination, which ranges from attaining significant autonomy to the creation of a fully independent and sovereign state. Based on this reason, nationalist terrorists also gain definition as ethnic separatists. Furthermore, nationalist terrorists frequently resist the notion of imperialism and other unlawful powers embraced by the government. Nationalist terrorism originates in the form of national, racial, devout or other classifying groups that feel that the government is oppressing them or denying their privileges, especially the privileges usually awarded to other people within the same state or nation. Based on such reasons, nationalist terrorists usually deem themselves as freedom fighters. They justify their acts of violence against the immediate government as acts of liberation especially for the minority or the larger populati on that possesses limited recognized national rights. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam is an illustration of nationalist terrorism. Materializing from a history of violence sponsored by the state and ethnic discrimination, the LTTE are at the front of the modern Tamil nationalist movement. Their objective for this focuses mainly on the development of a segregated state within the eastern and northern regions of Sri Lanka. Based on their commitment towards armed struggle, the Tamils taking part in the faction receive a description by the state of Sri Lanka as terrorists. Regardless, the LTTE is indeed one of the most violent nationalist factions in South Asia. This is according to the considerable attacks it has committed against the Sri-Lankan government. In 1991, the LTTE assassinated the Prime Minister of India, Rajiv Gandhi, in 1993 and 1994; the group also assassinated the state’s President, Ranasinghe Premadasa and the former Prime Minister, Dissanayake respectively (Hussain, 2010). The group is also responsible for the deaths of other prominent military and political persons. The LTTE is also a result of the ethnic dispute between the minority ethnic tribe, Tamils and the majority populace, the Sinhalese. Because of the government actions that encouraged violations of the privileges of Tamils from 1948 and 1977, a significant pool of unemployed and educated youth retaliated in 1972 under the leadership of Velupillai Prabhakaran (Hussain, 2010). The Tamil militant factions and the Tigers recognized the significance of developing a unique and separate Tamil northern province. This region would be significant based on security provisions and an unchallenged platform for supporting and directing LTTE attacks in the island. Additionally, the 1983 Sinhalese-Tamil riots polarized both tribes forcing half a million Tamils to seek refuge in Western nations and India. Because of this, the LTTE became able to support one of the most successful international terrorist networks. The Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis Usually, the main assumption for terrorism involves whether terrorists are born or created during their lifetime. This assumption simply outlines terrorists are born and not configured by society. As such, the motives for their acts arise from the influence of natural endowments such as wealth. Nonetheless, the general hypotheses originating from terrorism allege that the society creates terrorists. Based on this, there are various hypotheses that seek to answer the reason behind the actions portrayed by different terrorists. One of the main hypotheses applicable to these cases is the Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis. The Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis is one of the most extensive approaches towards understanding terrorist acts. Ted Robert Gurr reformulated the proposition in 1970 based on the Relative-Deprivation hypothesis. Additionally, the assumption underwent reformulation in 1973 by J. C. Davies based on the effect of the gap between increasing expectations and satisfaction of needs (Hudson, 2010). The Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis asserts that most incidences of frustration originate from a certain type of aggression. Based on this assumption, the theory assumes that the aggressive acts are a way of relieving the exasperated individuals from their frustrations to a certain extent. The primary concept of the hypothesis is that aggravations and tensions upsurge to a point that the individual cannot contain them. Therefore, in order to release such tensions, the individual channels them in a satisfactory way that relieves them of their vexations (Whitley Kite, 2010). As mentioned, the hypothesis originates from the Relative-Deprivation hypothesis. This theory surmises that individuals consistently compare what they possess and what they do not possess as they select their interests and standards. Additionally, they also compare their needs and wants with the actual or the imaginary (Connor, 2009). As such, they note the disparity between their inequalities, which leads them to express frustration based on this sense of injustice according to them. The Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis argues that violent acts of terror arise from the exasperation arising from insufficient gratification of needs by political or economic systems. Simply, the theory asserts that terrorist or terrorist-related behavior arises from a range of economic, political or individual requirements or objectives. Furthermore, the Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis alleges that terrorist behavior occurs because of the frustration that relates specifically to economic and political situations. These economic and political situations nurture considerable frustration, based on incessant marginalization and alienation, as such develop a desire to endorse change in a drastic way. For instance, the French Revolution of 1789 is an example of the Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis. This is because the French Revolution arose out of the people’s frustrations with the ineptitude of King Louis XVI and the deterioration of the country’s aristocracy (Gough, 20 10). As a result, there was intense social and political upheaval against the monarch. In the case of the Baader-Meinhof gang, the Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis applies significantly. As a leftist group, the Baader-Meinhof gang embraced the ideologies of the Marighella Urban Model. This is similar to other leftist groups in Europe that adopted the same representation in order to commit their acts of terror. The main ideology expressed by the Marighella Urban Model was repression by the government. Marighella surmised that violence via urban guerillas was the only way to make the public understand the authoritative and exploitive nature of the government. This was similar to the ideology articulated by the Red Army Faction in the 1970s. The members of the factions and the young public collectively disagreed with the authoritarian and oppressive structures in Germany that arose from Nazism. This is because the Nazi historical legacy separated the generations leading to amplified suspicion concerning dictatorial structures within the society. The Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis also applies to some extent in the case of Iran. Most of the reasons for the support of terrorism by Iran involve political autonomy. Nonetheless, even though the country uses such reasons to perpetrate violence, the members of these terrorist groups focus on relieving their frustrations especially with the Israeli government. Accordingly, members of terror groups such as the Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and the Hamas focus on ridding Israeli civilians within Israeli-occupied areas such as Gaza and the West Bank. This is because of numerous years of intense alienation and marginalization. Such frustrations make members of the Islamic community a significant target especially for Iran’s political motivations based on the notion of religion. In the case of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), the Frustration Aggression Hypothesis correlates with the motivations behind terror attacks committed against the Sri-Lankan and Indian government. The members of the terror group comprise the minority ethnic group, the Tamils. Because of years of breach of their rights by the government, most of them relieved their exasperations by joining the Tamil Tigers. Additionally, the Tamils felt that they received unequal treatment and benefit unlike their counterparts, the Sinhalese, who gained privileges from the government. This is an instance of the Relative-Deprivation hypothesis. By comparing their pathetic situation with the Sinhalese, the Tamils sought to expel their frustrations with the government based on the way it unfairly treated the Tamil population. In conclusion, terrorism is indeed a considerable anomaly in the modern society. However, it is evident that acts of terror also occurred in different historical periods because of specific reasons. Such reasons have transformed into ideological, religious and nationalist motives. Even though terror movements embrace such different motives in committing violent acts, the Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis proves that underlying frustrations and grievances form part of the major reasons why various people engage in acts of terrorism. References Connor, T. (2009). The criminology of terrorism: Theories and models. In Borgeson, K., Valeri, R. (Eds.), Terrorism in America (17-54). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett. Fattah, K., Fierke, K. M. (2009). A Clash of Emotions: The Politics of Humiliation and Political Violence in the Middle East. European Journal of International Relations, 15(1), 67-93. Gough, H. (2010). The terror in the French Revolution. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Hudson, R. A. (2010). Sociology and psychology of terrorism. New York, NY: Nova Science Publishers. Hussain, S. R. (2010). Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE): Failed Quest for a ‘Homeland’. In Mulaj, K. (Ed.), Violent Non-State Actors in World Politics (381-412). New York, NY: Columbia University Press. O’Hern, S. K. (2012). Iran’s Revolutionary Guard: The threat that grows while America sleeps. Washington, D.C: Potomac Books. White, J. R. (2012). Terrorism and homeland security. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Whitley, B. E., Kite, M. E. (2010). The psychology of prejudice and discrimination. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.