Gambling and Pathological Problem Essay Example for Free

Gambling and Pathological Problem Essay Prior to the case studies and research reports by known psychologist of our time, gambling is see as an act of passing away the time in a friendly atmosphere of playing for money. When gambling is becoming a habit for someone, gambling started to connote as an act that is bad, especially when the person involved in gambling bets his money allocated for the need of his family for food and rent. This connotation would only come in such cases that are already of the extreme. But basically gambling is seen then, as it is right now, as a way of diversion from the strain of necessity of daily living. This is one the reasons why governments allowed the buildings of casinos and the existence of other forms of gambling wherein people can bet and probably win huge sum of money. On the other hand, when is the time when one could say one is pathological gambler? This question has been an issue that has been asked and a subject of inquiry of many psychologists and scientists. Or is there really such a thing as a pathological gambler? When can we assume that a person is already suffering from a pathological disease called gambling? Gambling as a Pathology: History It is only during the advent of twentieth century when there rose an interest from the part of psychoanalysts on the act of gambling (Rosenthal, 2003). Starting in 1914, these scientists contributed enormous case studies, research reports, and speculative essays by which patients marked as gamblers were identified as gabling addicts. The most prominent of these psychoanalysts was Freud who displayed a particular interest in to why people would consciously seek for themselves a way to repeatedly engage in a self-destructive gambling behavior. He believed that these gamblers are not really for the money per se when they participate in a gambling game but they gamble for the sake of gambling itself, which psychologists term now as â€Å"the action. † It was Freud who labeled gambling as an addiction, forming a triad along with alcohol and illegal drugs (Freud, 2002). On a cursory look at the state by which gamblers go on with their habit, we can thus say that gamblers, one way or another, is a participant in the process by which they abuse themselves by going to casino everyday to lose huge money, which include probably money allocated for their rent and food. As the years went on, concern about gambling tended to give more focus on the gambler’s â€Å"personal attributes† rather on the economic and social consequences of the act. Those who are involved with gambling began to be considered as problem gamblers. If the gambler’s problem with his habit becomes chronic, the â€Å"problem gambler† was seen already as a â€Å"compulsive gambler†. This term â€Å"compulsive gambler† is the early term used to describe pathological gambler according to National Research Council (U. S. ). Committee on the Social and Economic Impact of Pathological Gambling (1999). Gambling Pathology: Effects The best definition concerning the problem of gambling that has reached wide acceptance in the world, particularly Australia, as mentioned by Hsu (2005): â€Å"the situation when a person’s gambling activity gives rise to harm to the individual player, and/or to his or her family, and may extend into community. † In Australia for example as reported by Productivity Commission (1999) there is an estimated 1% of the Australian population who has a severe problem with gambling. An additional 1. 1% have moderate problem; thus creating a 2. 1% of problem gamblers in the whole Australia. Basing from the definition cited above, the pathology of gambling can be widespread and creates a great impact on the individual. The personal consequences of having a problem with gambling according to Leseiur (1996 cited in Hsu, 2005) can be depression, insomnia, anxiety attacks, cardiac problem, intestinal disorders, high blood pressure, migraine and suicidal tendencies. He mentioned that the family of the problem gambler can also bear the cost of, in particular the financial burden. When the problem gambler gets into debt because of his/her unmitigated habit or addiction to gambling, this would mean less family expenditures, overdue bills, utilities being cut off, personal or family belongings being sold or repossessed, or on an extreme case the family is left homeless (Hsu, 2005). Gambling Pathology: Psychology Over the past several years there has been a collective effort to understand the psychology of problem gamblers. The focus of these case studies and researches focus on the role of negative effect, personality factors, concurrent disorders, sex differences and role of cognitions. The relationship of pathological gambling with the depressive mood state of the person is probably one of the most seen predispositions as to becoming a problem gambler. The studies in this area have produced somewhat conflicting results. The reason for his is because some of the case studies failed to find any connection with depression to gambling. Yet, at the same time, there are research reports that stated otherwise. These reports found that there is a co-occurrence of depression to the problem of gambling. At the same time, there are studies that discovered that there is a link between gambling and anxiety or obsessive-compulsiveness. This involves the psychological process of the person wherein he gives a lot of time developing gambling strategies and gaming behavior. Blaszczynski (2005 cited in Toneatto and Millar, 2004) discovered that problem gamblers get a high score significantly on measures concerning obsessive-compulsiveness. People with obsessive-compulsive behavior have excessive preoccupation with gambling-related thoughts. In the case of Frost et al. (2001 cited in Toneatto and Millar, 2004) they experimented with obsessive-compulsive factors in lottery and resulted to the confirmation of Blaszczynski (2005 cited in Toneatto and Millar, 2004) findings: that pathological gamblers display more symptoms of being obsessive-compulsiveness. Meanwhile, there is concluding evidence that there is a relationship between gambling behavior and one’s desire for excitement arousal. This psychological aspect of problem gamblers has received an equivocal empirical support according to Toneatto and Millar (2004). Nevertheless, there are still results that come up with contrary findings regarding the aspect of desire for an aroused state. The explanation to these conflicting results is that sensation seeking level of every gambler differs across gambling activities. One more thing is that since gambling is not a homogeneous activity, the desire for an arousal of sensation may be more prominent or greater in some types of gambling activities than others. Moreover, sensation seeking on the part of the gamblers may be a state rather than a trait. On the other hand, the hypothesis of there is an association between impulsivity and disordered gambling follows with natural ease from being included in the list of pathological gambling among the list of impulse disorder as stated by Toneatto and Millar (2004). There are research reports that demonstrated that pathological gamblers get higher score on indices of impulsivity as compared with research control subjects. Petry (2001 cited in Toneatto and Millar, 2004) stated that impulsivity could be conceptualized and measured as a multi-faceted construct that take into account the such behaviors as orientation to the present, decreased in the ability to delay gratification, behavioral disinhibition, too much risk and sensation seeking, proneness to boredom, and lastly poor planning abilities by the problem gambler. There are also results from other significant research reports that identify relationships between gambling pathology and mental health disorders, particularly those of substance use disorders, mood disorders, personality disorders and ADHD. Petry (2001 cited in Toneatto and Millar, 2004) discovered that subjects who have a history or background of substance abuse and had gambling problem reported increased levels of somatization, obsessive-compulsiveness, paranoia and interpersonal sensitivity. In the meantime, according to a more recent case study performed by Ladd and Perry (2003 cited in Toneatto and Millar, 2004) stated that problem gamblers with history of undergoing treatment for substance abuse has reported to be suffering from depression, hallucinations, suicidal ideation and attempts. They also have difficulty controlling violent behavior as compared with pathological gamblers who had no previous history of being treated for substance abuse. Conclusion The study on the issue of a problem gambler just started during the advent of the 20th Century and this subject has been the favorite subject of psychoanalyst. Freud (2003) labeled it as a form of addiction and part of the triad which includes alcohol and illicit drugs. This addiction would later be termed as compulsive gambling which will later on evolved into a more specific kind of behavior called pathological gambling. The are case studies that tried to explain the psychology of a pathological gambler and experts discovered that these individuals exhibit certain degree of obsessive-compulsiveness and other personality behavior. Another point that must be understood is that these person are usually seeking sensation arousal when they commit themselves to gamble. References: Freud, S. (2002). The Psychopathology of Everyday Life. Penguin Group, New York Hsu, C. (2005). Casino Industry in Asia Pacific: Development, Operation, and Impact. Haworth Press, Binghampton National Research Council (U. S. ). Committee on the Social and Economic Impact of Pathological Gambling (1999). Pathological Gambling: A Critical Review. National Academy Press, Washington, D. C. Productivity Commission (1999). Australia’s Gambling Industries. Vol. 1-3 Rosenthal, R. (2003). Dual Dianosis. Brunner-Routledge, New York Toneatto, T. and Millar, G. (2004). Assessing and Treating Problem Gambling: Empirical Status and Promising Trends. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. Vol 49 (8), 417-525

What Is Whistle Blowing Philosophy Essay

What Is Whistle Blowing Philosophy Essay Whistle-blowing is a disclosure by organization members of illegal, immoral or unethical practices under the control of their employer, to persons or organizations that may affect action. Immoral practices can be violation of law, violation of public interest such as fraud, violation of health/safety, corruption etc. the organizations that may affect this action can be media, public interest groups, enforcement agencies etc. TYPES OF WHISTLEBLOWING: Internal whistle-blowing: To report misconduct to a fellow employee or senior management within the company. External whistle-blowing: Report misconduct to outside entities or general public. ETHICAL ISSUES RELATED TO WHISTLE-BLOWING: The generally prevailing view of the whistleblower within business on the part of the management and colleagues is that this person is the traitor to the organization. (Richard DeGeorge) Employees have both moral and legal obligations to be loyal to their employees. (Beauchamp and Browie) Whistle-blowing is a conflicting matter in terms of employee loyalty. On one hand it may be seen as loyal and on another, disloyal. It is assumed that employees have a vow to protect the dealings of the organization. External whistle-blowing is wrong because an employee has a contractual duty to be loyal to corporation he is working in. Whereas Ronald Duska says: One does not have an obligation of loyalty to a company, even a prima facie one, because companies are not the kind of things that are properly objects of loyalty. This means it is impossible to associate loyalty with a company because it is an abstract entity. Because company does not have a mind of its own, instead, it is made up of people working towards the same goal. A whistle-blower is not disloyal in reality. We can make an argument that a whistle-blower shows greater loyalty as compared to the person who ignores any malpractices in the organization. Whistle-blowing is a brave act of conscience and a person who blows the whistle may carry heavy personal costs. One should do what is right, lost income can be replaced but lost self-esteem is difficult to retrieve. IS THERE A RIGHT TO BLOW THE WHISTLE? Nobody can answer whether blowing whistle is good or bad because the problem is that it has effects, good as well as bad. Sometimes whistle-blowing causes more problem than good. If there is an issue that has to be addressed to the top authorities then it should be channeled through right authorities. If a whistle-blower starts talking to his co-workers about some malpractices, the office environment gets effected. And also the claims of whistle-blower are not always genuine. As a result other employees get dragged into it unnecessarily and company gets involved in lawsuits. By the time the company proves its innocence it has already suffered a loss of thousands of dollars. Whistle-blower should approach the internal authority prior to externally blowing the whistle. Because sometimes the top management is not aware of the problem and employees make the situation worse by blowing the whistle. An employee has an ethical obligation to blow the whistle. It is beneficial for him to act ethically and show loyalty by not only obeying the rules and regulations of the company but also reporting genuine wrongdoings that may affect the public at large. ETHICAL PERSPECTIVES ON WHISTLE-BLOWING: DEONTOLOGICAL ETHICS: For example, a company is making unsafe consumer products in order to save some money. An employee working in that organization sees this as immoral and reports the media about it. A whistle-blower would do this according to Kants duty-based ethics. Moral obligations have nothing to do with consequences. RIGHTS THEORY: Whistle-blowing is not morally required according to rights theory. Everyone has a welfare right to make income and support themselves and their family, so they cannot do this without a job. By blowing the whistle he/she may get fired so it is better to ignore any malpractices in the organization. UTILITARIANISM: Utilitarianism is based on principle to predict the consequences of an action. Utilitarianism is more clearly understood by cost-benefit analysis. Whistle-blowing has many moral venues. On one side the welfare of employees must be considered and on the other side the consumer. Utilitarian simplify whistleblowing by pleasure versus pain issue. If whistle-blowing will generate less pain than pleasure then it is a good act. If not, then it is wrong and unethical THE FORD PINTO CASE: In the Ford Pinto case it is a well-known fact that before the production of this car Ford engineers were aware of Pintos potential for catastrophe. They had a crash test at a top secret site and every test at 25mph resulted in ruptured gas tank of the car. Ford employees under the oath denied this fact and this car flooded the market for about eight years. An internal cost-benefit analysis illustrated that it was not profitable for the company to make changes sooner. Thus, they placed monetary worth on human life. Total benefit was $49.5 million and total cost was $137 million. Therefore, none of the employees blew the whistle because they had a fear of being fired from the job. ISLAMIC PERSPECTIVE: Prophet Mohammad PBUH said: Discussions are confidential (not subject to disclosure) except in three places: shedding unlawful blood, unlawful cohabitation and unlawful accumulation of wealth. (Abu Dawud) Prophet of Allah (P.B.U.H.) said: He who saw Munkar (wrongdoing) amongst you should prevent it with his hand, if unable to, then with his mouth (i.e. whistle blowing), if unable to, then (dislike it) in his heart and that is the least of faith. (Abu said al khudri) These sayings of Prophet Muhammad proved that whistle-blowing is also encouraged by Islam. Richard De Georges Theory of Whistleblowing The philosopher Richard DeGeorge proposed that external whistleblowing is morally permissible when three conditions are fulfilled. Whistleblowing is termed as acceptable by DeGeorge when following three conditions are met: If any product or policy cause serious harm for the general public. If an employee realizes an intense danger to the consumer of a product he or she should report it to his supervisor. Therefore manager responsible for the manufacturing of the product should be aware of its threat. If an employees immediate supervisor does not take the moral concern regarding the product into account, thus the internal chain of command has been exhausted. The firstcriteria explain the intensity of issue. The explanation of harm can be assessed in terms of physical, emotional or financial harm. The second and third criteria can be interpreted that employee tried hi level best to address via internal means. DeGeorge holds that whistleblowing becomes morally required when in addition to the previous three conditions the following two conditions are met: There is sufficient accessible documented evidence available to convince an impartial individual. The employee must have valid and strong reason that by going public, necessary changes will be brought. Moreover, benefits of whistleblowing must be worth the risks one takes and the dangers to which one is encountered. WORLDCOMS WHISTLEBLOWER Cynthia Cooper Case: In March 2002, when WorldCom was struggling tocoordinate and integrate the complex mess created by the 65 companies it had acquired, World-Coms highly respected chief financial officer,Scott Sullivan, moved $400 million from a reserve account and recorded it as income in the companys public financial reports. Alerted to this, CynthiaCooper, the perfectionist head of WorldComs internal audit department, began to secretly examinethe companys books. She  soon discovered that Scott Sullivan and David Myers, for years had publicly reported billionsof dollars as capital expenditures when they were in real the operating costs. Uncollectible receivables were ignored, and reported as  income what were reallyreserve funds, and did all this with the help of ArthurAndersen, the companys auditor and accounting firm. Though angrily threatened by Sullivan, andrisking her job and career, on June 20, 2002, Cynthia Cooper courageously met with the auditcommittee of WorldComs board of directors and   toldthem what had been going on. On June 25, World-Coms directors announced the company had  inflatedits profits by over $3.8 billion-an amount later  roseto $9 billion-is the greatest accounting fraud in history. Sullivan and Myers were arrested; WorldComs shareholders lost $3 billion; 17,000 WorldCom workers lost their jobs.It was the biggest fraud in U.S. corporate history. WorldCom declared bankruptcy in July 2002, after its stocks value had declined by $180 billion and its founder; Bernard Ebbers had left the company. CynthiaCooper was later recognized as one of the three Persons of the Year by Time Magazine. Analysis Based on Kantian Ethics Philosopher Immanuel Kant is renowned for his ethical theory which is categorized under Deontological ethics. According to his theory it can be assessed that it is the intention behind an action rather its consequences that make an action good. Deontological Moral system is based on the categorical imperative. According to Kant to act from a good will is to act from a duty. The act of Cynthia Coopers whistleblowing fits into this categorical imperative of duty to do the right thing. The sole motive of the action is report financial crime; there are no monetary gains or self-interested motives. A Kantian view justifies Cynthia Coopers whistleblowing as reporting financial crime is morallyright thing to do, thus moral obligation has nothing to do with consequences. Since Kant believed that every action has a maxim, we need to ask what would happen if the principle (maxim) of an action were a universal law (one that everyone acted on). Would a world where everyone acted on that principle be possible? If it can, then the decision to act would be morally permissible (Bowie, 1999). Therefore the proposed act of whistleblowing passes Kants test of universizability. If whistleblowing were a universal principle, all would benefit from the transparency and investor confidence would be maximized; therefore, according to Kant, the act of whistleblowing is morally permissible. Analysis based on Kohlbergs Moral theory of Development   Kohlbergs theory is useful because it helps us understand how our moral capacitiesdevelop and reveals how we may mature in our understanding of our own moralstandards. According to Kohlberg Cynthia reached the sixth stage of moral development: Universal Moral Principles Orientation. This is because at thisPost conventional stage, right  action  comes  to be defined  in terms  of moral  principles chosenbecause of their reasonableness, universality, and consistency. Cynthia believed that manipulation of financial accounts is a universal crime and therefore she reported the misconduct based on the moral principle orientation. Cynthia Cooper justified her choices on the basis of moral principles and obligations as during the interview with Times Magazine she said: There is a price to be paid. [But] it comes back to the values and ethics that you learnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦..The fear of losing my job was secondary to the obligation I felt. WHISTLE BLOWING IN PAKISTAN Whistle blowing internal and external is usually not practical for employees in Pakistan because they dont posses the resources either within the firm or within the civil society. They lack strong moral beliefs, confidence, will power and commitments and are scared of the consequences. Today, media especially journalism is acting as a whistleblower to the public. The current political environment in Pakistan threatens whistle blowers in a corporation from upholding their voices against illegal practices of their organization. Employees who blow whistle are refrained from doing so and observe difficulties and barriers such as life threats, political insecurity, risk of career and family insecurity. In our country, unsafe medical practices and unethical behavior is at such a high level and widely spread that blowing a whistle to alarm the authority would be simply inaudible. Health care fraud is very common in Pakistan. False claims, patients required paying illegal fees, absence of staff and refusing to see patients in government hospitals and referring them to private clinics are violating ethical spheres. 95% of the population in Pakistan holds the view that our health sector is corrupt. The fear of been victimized, loosing the job and career, is the main concern very often trainee doctors keep quiet and do not raise their voice against their seniors. RICHARD BARLOWS CASE Richard Barlow  is an  American  intelligence analyst and a former senior member of the  Central Intelligence Agency. He lost his job and was charged of being disloyal to CIA. Barlow learned that the top US officials were allowing the sale of the F-16 fighters to Pakistan in 1989. It was against the 1985  Pressler amendment of the  Foreign Assistance Act  which prohibited the sale of any  material or armaments which might assist in the development or manufacturing of nuclear weapons. He also found that the officials were concealing this information from Congress since telling the truth would have legally obligated US government to restrain from giving military aid to Pakistan at the time when it was being provided, through Pakistan, to Afghanistan against Soviet Union. Barlow therefore blew a whistle without considering the consequences. As a result he was asked to prove himself before Congress and court. He was charged of being a traitor and an adulterer. He lost his job. It was life altering experience for him which damaged his marriage, career and left irreparable dents on his character. He is quoted as saying: They smeared my name in truly extraordinary ways that no one had ever seen before If he had been listened to, many people believe that our country would have never got its nuclear bomb. ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS KANTIAN ETHICS: Immanuel Kant is the founder of deontological ethics. He states that ethical behaviors are those which are duty oriented. A person must perform what is his duty, not whats good. The act of Richard Barlow is justified on Kantian grounds. Sacrifice of self interest for the greater interest of the society was the act performed by Barlow. LOYAL AGENT ARGUMENT: Loyal agent argument reduces an employee from being human to just being an organ of the organization. Loyalty does not imply that we have a duty to refrain from reporting the immoral actions of those to who we are loyal. An employer who is acting unethical is not acting in his own best interests and an employee is not acting disloyally in blowing the whistle. LEGAL PROTECTION TO WHISTLE BLOWERS One of the early laws that protected whistleblowers was the 1863 United States  False Claims Act  (revised in 1986), which tried to counter fraud by the US government during the  Civil War. Under the 1st and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, state and local government bureaucrats are prohibited from opposing whistleblowers. Boards like Civil Service Reform Act are created Whistle blowing has gone high tech; therefore steps are taken to ensure safety of them. There are different websites available which guide employees on ethical issues like national whistle blowing centre(NWC) Federal (equal employment opportunity) laws also have protection provisions for whistle blowers. If you observe a  prohibited discrimination  against employees you may report the concerned authorities. Consumer Rights Commission of Pakistan has stated the unavailability of protection to whistle blowers and lack of transparency as the major causes of corruption in our state. Therefore, it has created an interface in the form of Freedom of Information Bill 2008. Summarizing: Whistleblowers not only provide the initial stimulus for improving organization efficiency and effectiveness, but also they are often the source of solutions to organization problems (Miceli et al., 1991). Whistle blower observes a dilemma between serving as a loyal agent and preventing social harm. This implies that he should reconcile his own interest with the general interest of the organization. Utilitarian considerations therefore cannot furnish a definitive guide in this context. Whistle blowing must be institutionalized. This means that there must be a set of procedures for employees to report the fraud internally before they raise the matter in the outside world

Dishonesty in The Great Gatsby Essay -- The Great Gatsby Essays

Lies are a treacherous thing, yet everyone tells a few lies during their lifetime. Deceit surrounds us all the time; even when one reads classic literature. For example, F. Scott Fitzgerald makes dishonesty a major theme in his novel The Great Gatsby. The falsehoods told by the characters in this novel leads to inevitable tragedy when the truth is revealed. Jay Gatsby, one of the main characters in the novel, fails to realize that when one tells a lie, it comes back to bite you. For example, he initially tells his neighbor, and potential friend Nick, that he had inherited his redundant sums of money from his family. One night, the night Gatsby reunites with Daisy, he and Nick are admiring his substantial house. During the conversation, Gatsby slips out, â€Å"It took me just three years to earn the money that bought it† (Fitzgerald 90). By this, one can see Gatsby lie about how he acquired the wealth he has. When Nick questions his inheritance of the money, Gatsby automatically stutters with another lie- that he lost his family fortune in the panic of the war and had to earn all the money again by himself. Gatsby may have not realized he let this lie slide out from under him due to the rush of emotions connected with the reunion of his long lost love. Nevertheless, he did lie to Nick about his past, along with many other people , including Daisy. When he and his love first meet, he lies to her and comes off as a rich, stable man, she would be lucky to fall in love with. This is not the case, however. He is not as innocent as to have just inherit the wealth he gloats. Fitzgerald states, â€Å"He might have despised himself, for he had certainly taken her under false pretenses. I don’t mean that he had traded his phantom millions,... ...of events, leading to many deaths. On the other hand, because Gatsby was lying and deceiving people to try to reach a goal, should his actions be considered ambitious? Since Tom and Daisy were not truly in love, and simply did not want to hurt the other, should their actions be considered thoughtful? Maybe there is a good intention behind the lies, but never a good outcome. Works Cited Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. 1925. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 2004. Print. Hermanson, Casie E. "An overview of The Great Gatsby." Literature Resource Center. Detroit: Gale, 2011. Literature Resource Center. Web. 24 Feb. 2011. Sutton, Brian. "Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby." Explicator 59.1 (Fall 2000): 37-39. Rpt. in Twentieth-Century Literary Criticism. Ed. Linda Pavlovski. Vol. 157. Detroit: Gale, 2005. Literature Resource Center. Web. 24 Feb. 2011.

Night Falls Fast Undertanding Suicide By Kay Redfield Jamison :: Essays Papers

Night Falls Fast Undertanding Suicide By Kay Redfield Jamison â€Å"Encompass’d with a thousand dangers, Weary, faint, trembling with a thousand terrors....I...in fleshy tomb, am Buried above ground.† -William Cowper Suicide has long been interpreted, studied, and at many times ignored. The existence of suicide and its whereabouts are not actually known. For the fact that no one knows the first person who intentionally walked into a blizzard knowingly that they will not return, or the first person who jumped off a cliff with intentions of not surviving. Nor do we know the first person who had the sudden urge to commit harm to oneself. We do not know this for the fact that the human mind is one piece of work and creation that is still being misinterpreted today. These facts and many more are what Kay Redfield Jamison, author of â€Å"Night Falls Fast, Understanding Suicide†, try’s to convey and express to the reader. She directs her facts and studies towards teenagers and young adults who seek the knowledge of why people do such harm to themselves. Jamison expresses how the fact that what we do not know is what actually kills, also how suicide is one of the most unpublicized deaths, and the varieties of mental illness that plague the minds of so many to commit suicide Jamison brings up the notion of how much we can determine about a person through heredity. We can determine if mental illness exists, if there is a history of impulsive and/or violent temperament and also the social class of a person. As stated â€Å" It should not be necessary, at the end of a century so rich in literature, medicine, psychology and science, to draw arbitrary lines in the sand between humanism and individual complexities†. We do know though, what can drive a person to commit themselves to kill themselves to a certain extent. Such as romantic failures, economic and/or job setbacks, trouble with law or authority, illness, a situation that may seem to humiliate one, and so on. But the true meaning of why a person takes their life is only known to that person. As much history is known and as much of the personality of the person that is found out, the person dies leaving behind many who suffer throughout life not knowing why, and that is why what we do not know is what actually kills. Murder, homicide, shoot outs, drugs, and accidents all contribute to the world wide effects of News.

Genetic Engineering: Genetic Criticism :: Literature Essays Literary Criticism

Genetic Criticism      Ã‚  Ã‚   Source study is a unique approach to a work of literature because it seems to have little to do with the completed work itself. Source study, or genetic criticism, has as its focus all of those things that influenced, or may have influenced, a literary work. By this branch of criticism, Wilfred Guerin explains, "... we mean the growth and development of a work as seen through a study of the author's manuscripts during the stages of composition of the work, of notebooks, of sources and analogues, and of various other influences (not necessarily sociological or psychological) that lie in the background of the work" (292). A genetic critic hopes to find clues as to the author's intention by noting and examining the choices an author has made during the production of a work. One of the assumptions made by these critics, Guerin adds, is that such research will lead to "a richer, more accurate appreciation of the work" (292). In practice, the light of appreciation , accumulated from such research, shines most brightly on the artist, while the work itself fades into the background.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Perhaps this focus on the writer is not such a bad thing. Chauncey Sanders writes that the study of a writer's sources leads to a clearer understanding of an artist's originality or lack of the same (165). While it may be useful to spot literary robbery, Sanders believes that genetic criticism has a more important role: "It should not be confined to the discovery of such plagiarisms . . . but rather it should involve the analyzing of a piece of literature with a view to discovering whence came the inspiration, the material, and the technique whereby the work came into being" (162). Again, though, it is the artist who is the main subject of this type of research. "We must learn and study the sources of a Chaucer or a Shakespeare," writes Sanders, "in order to appreciate the nature and extent of his originality" (364-365). Any greater understanding of the work would result only indirectly from this approach to literature, an approach which seems especially susceptible to becoming a mere celebration of the artist.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   John Holmes' analysis of Robert Frost's composition of "Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening" illustrates how genetic criticism tends to reveal more about the poet than the poem.

Othello †Trust Between Lovers Essay

Our topic is trust between lovers. What is trust? When your friend is spreading some rumor about your lover and your other friend, who would you trust, your lover or your friend? Trust is to believe in someone and give trust to him or her. You put your whole soul and belief to trust them. Trust is like a paper, once it is crumble it will not be perfect again. Trust plays an important role in Othello, because it started as trust and ends with trust. In Othello, the author used handkerchief as a symbol of trust. Every time the owner loses the handkerchief and another lover has the handkerchief, the other couple bonds a strong trust within the circle. Their relationship becomes better and firmer. The trust between Othello and Desdemona collapses when the handkerchief is missing. Meanwhile Emilia and Iago become closer and have a strong trust because of the handkerchief. Othello and Desdemona are the first main couples in the play. They got married at the beginning of the play, which gave rise to the hatred and envy towards Othello. Therefore, their relationship is doomed to be transient. The couple slowly breaks up when their trust slowly collapses. Before their trust slowly collapses, Othello promised Brabantio that he would not harm his daughter. If he does then he will kill himself. â€Å"Look to her, Moor, if thou hast eyes to see. She has deceiv’d her father and may thee. † â€Å"My life upon her faith! † (Act 1, Scene 3, line 289-291). This has proven that Othello trust Desdemona with heart and soul that she would not cheat on him. This scene shows that the couple’s love is starting to collapse because of the handkerchief, and Othello feels suspicious about Desdemona cheating on him. Fetch me the handkerchief. † â€Å"My mind misgives. Come, come; You’ll never meet a more sufficient man† (Act 3, Scene 4, line 85-87). This line also shows that Othello feels anxious because of the lost of the handkerchief that has a magic history involving his parents. The handkerchief proves of lover’s loyalty within each other. Iago and Emilia are the second main couples in the play. Their relationship is not as strong as Othello and Desdemona’s relationship at the beginning. Another big difference is that Iago and Emilia bond a stronger trust when Emilia found the handkerchief. â€Å"To have a foolish wife. † â€Å"O, is that all? What will you give me now for that same handkerchief? † â€Å"What handkerchief? † â€Å"A good wench! † Give it me. † (Act 3, Scene 3, line 306-308) (Act 3, Scene 3, line 316) The trust between Emilia and Iago contribute to this tragedy, because Emilia chose to trust Iago and pretended to know nothing about the handkerchief, which leads to betrayal towards Desdemona. However, if Emilia chose the right way and told the truth to help Desdemona when Othello was questioning her, the tragedy might not happen. Near the end of the play Emilia and Iago’s trust broke when she revealed the truth, everything in the play started with trust and ended with trust. She give it Cassio! No, alas, I found it and i did give’t my husband. † â€Å"Filth, thou liest! † (Act 5, Scene 2, line 227-229) It makes us wonder how can the trust between lovers be broken so easily and rebuilding the trust can be so hard. Sometimes to suspect someone can lead to death, and sometimes to trust someone can also lead to death. It becomes too difficult to decide whether to believe in him or her or not. In conclusion, you cannot just trust your friend or your lover because both your friend and your lover are important to you, and losing either one would be painful.

Hephaestus, the Master Craftsman

Hephaestus, the Greek god of fire, is most revered for his master craftsmanship. In works of art he is usually depicted as a middle-aged smith working in his forge, often making a thunderbolt for Zeus. Born of Hera alone, he was cast down as a baby from Olympus by his mother for his defective ugliness and fell for a whole day before he hit the ground. Nine years after he was thrown from the heavens, he returned to Olympus and became one of the twelve Olympian Gods. With Zeus’s favor, he was able to marry Aphrodite, the goddess of love, who sadly never returned the love he gave to her.Hephaestus was loved by the mortals for his kindness and he had an important role in Athens alongside Athena. Nearly every weapon, piece of armor, or building of any importance was crafted by Hephaestus. Hephaestus, rejected by his mother for his ugliness, helped countless mortals and gods, married Aphrodite, and rose to Olympus to become the master craftsman honored by all. Hephaestus is the god of fire but only in its positive and useful aspect. This also includes everything that is accomplished by fire. Therefore, any fire that destroys or damages is not attributed to him (Berens 73).He, being a smith, is the protector of smiths, both goldsmiths and blacksmiths and jewelers. Also as a master builder he is the god of builders, masons, and carpenters (Graves 15). He is also considered to be the god of volcanoes because this is where it was believed his forges were located. Inside his forges, he uses Cyclopes as his helpers because they have a natural talent for forging (Bolton 178). Not only is Hephaestus a smith, he is also an architect, craftsman, and an artist (Bulfinch 13). In fact, he is known as the master craftsman (Hansen 185).He makes nearly everything that the gods want from their weapons and armor, to their homes, palaces and chariots (Hamilton 36). Hephaestus is an ugly god. He is often illustrated with grotesque facial features and malformed legs but with massi ve upper body strength. Usually he is shown wielding a hammer and working on a weapon or object of some kind (Berens 76). In other depictions of art, items often associated with work, such as an axe, a mule, and a pilos, otherwise known as a workman’s hat, are used to represent him (Hansen 186). Hesphaestus is also represented by the quail.This bird’s strange dance in the springtime is seen as similar to how Hephaestus hobbles when he walks (Graves 15). Several stories exist on how Hephaestus was born. While all stories agree that he was born to Hera, the goddess of marriage, they differ on when he was born and whether he had a father at all. Some say that he was born to Hera, alone, because she wanted to give birth to a child by herself after Zeus solely gave birth to Athena (Martin 88). However, this is contradicted by the story that it was Hephaestus that helped Zeus give birth to Athena by splitting Zeus’s head open to allow Athena to pop out.Therefore, Hera could not have been jealous of Athena’s single parent birth since Athena hadn’t been born yet (Berens 21). This leads to the rumor where Hera had Hephaestus long before being married to Zeus (Martin 88). But the easiest explanation is that Zeus was indeed his father, and he was born before Athena (Bulfinch 15). After Hephaestus was born, Hera realized that he was ugly and crippled, and to rid herself of such an embarrassment, she threw him off Olympus (Graves 86). He plummeted into the sea, and immediately he was saved by the sea-goddess Thetis.Thetis took him to an underground cave where she and an oceanide Eurynome took turns caring for and raising the young god (Hansen 183). For nine years he remained hidden in his secret, underground home. By the end of the nine years he was already an expert craftsman. He made elaborate items of jewelry, much to the delight of his caretakers (Martin 89). He also made useful objects like clasps, pins, and cups (Hansen 184). While Hephaestus was living with Thetis in the underwater cavern, she told him stories of his birth mother, Hera. After hearing these stories, Hephaestus desperately wanted revenge on his mother for throwing him off Olympus.He began to work non-stop in his forge, leaving only for ambrosia and nectar. Some time later he emerged with a shining black and gold throne, his first masterpiece. Displayed across the entire throne were different scenes depicting the stories of the gods. He requested that Thetis take the throne to Hera up on Mount Olympus as a gift. When the throne was placed in front of Hera, she admired it for a long time. After she sat down, she realized that she could not move. Invisible bands of force held her in place. She yelled frantically, trying to escape but with no success.The other Olympians quickly came to her aid but none of them could release her either. They soon came to the conclusion that a god had made the throne, but they did not know who could have made it (Mar tin 89). Thetis, who happened to still be there, explained to the gods who made the throne. Ares immediately volunteered to fetch Hephaestus, and set off at once for the underwater cave. When Ares arrived, however, Hephaestus fought him off using flaming brands. Ares returned to Olympus empty handed and Hera began to fear that she would spend eternity stuck in a chair. Luckily for Hera, Dionysus decided he would give it a try.He gathered an excessive amount of wine and traveled to the cave. He made no sign that he was trying to take Hephaestus to Olympus. Instead he gave Hephaestus the alcohol and soon had him so drunk that Hephaestus couldn’t even walk. Dionysus then called upon his satyrs and donkey to escort Hephaestus back to Olympus in a grand parade of flute-playing and cymbal-smashing satyrs. Once they arrived at Olympus, Dionysus declared, on behalf of the drunken Hephaestus, that Hera could go only if Hephaestus was allowed to stay on Mount Olympus. Every god favored the agreement so Hephaestus unlocked the throne, setting Hera free.From then on, Hephaestus the smith was one of the twelve Olympians (Martin 90). Many people wonder how Olympus’s ugliest god became the husband to the most beautiful goddess. There are several different explanations on how this happened. One story says that when Hephaestus first saw Aphrodite, he immediately fell in love with her and went straight to Zeus and Hera for permission to marry her. Since they both agreed, they became husband and wife (Bolton 178). Another story states that Zeus gave Aphrodite to Hephaestus in thanks for him forging his lightning bolts (Bulfinch 4).A different story explains that Zeus married them to keep Aphrodite out of trouble. He thought she needed a hardworking and disciplined husband, so he chose Hephaestus (Graves 16). Lastly, one theory says that Zeus set it up as revenge for when Aphrodite refused him as a lover (Bolton 178). No matter how they got married, one thing is alw ays agreed upon. Hephaestus loved Aphrodite, but Aphrodite never returned that love (Hansen 184). Aphrodite never loved Hephaestus because she thought it was shameful to have a crippled and hideous husband (Graves 17).So instead of being a loyal and faithful wife, Aphrodite had many affairs with gods as well as mortals. The most prominent affair was with Hephaestus’s brother, Ares, the god of war. When Hephaestus found out about her affair with Ares, he became especially angry (Hansen 184). Helios came to Hephaestus and told him of the affair between Aphrodite and Ares. Hephaestus’s immediate reaction was of rage and revenge (Hansen 184). He went to his smithy and crafted a pair of invisible and indestructible chains. He took the chains and laid them over top of his bed, checking to see if it was concealed.Hephaestus told Aphrodite that he would be leaving on vacation to Lemnos and pretended to depart. As soon as Aphrodite thought he was gone, she summoned Ares to come . They laid down in Hephaestus’s own bed and instantly became trapped (Hansen 185). Hephaestus then returned to his house and summoned all of the gods to come with him. There, he let them view the humiliated and trapped lovers in bed (Bolton 180). Hephaestus explained to the gods how Aphrodite hated him for being crippled and loved Ares for being attractive. All the male gods commented on the scene and viewed it without disgust.Several of the goddesses, however, did not enjoy themselves as much as the male gods did (Hansen 185). Everyone laughed though, and made fun of Ares and Aphrodite, but some mocked Hephaestus as well (Bolton 180). Finally, with some pleading from Poseidon, Hephaestus let the embarrassed lovers go (Hansen 185). Hephaestus may have had some problems with his wife, but he was very popular among the mortals. He taught them smithing and the art of metalworking (Berens 74). Aside from that, he was known for being very helpful. Orion once came to Hephaestusâ⠂¬â„¢s forge on Lemnos after being blinded.Hephaestus took pity on him and sent a guide to take him to Apollo. Because of his helpfulness, all the mortals honored him, and many of them worshiped him (Berens 73). He has temples on the volcanic Island of Lemnos and Mt. Maschylus (Graves 88). He also has a temple on Mount Etna and in Athens. To enter the temple on Mt. Etna, the mortals must pass fearsome hounds, who serve as guards. These hounds have the ability to smell if people are good or evil. With these special guards, only the clean and righteous souls can enter (Berens 76). His temple in Athens stands alongside the temple of Athena.In Athens he serves alongside Athena as the patron of handicrafts, specifically the guardian of the smiths (Hamilton 37). Hephaestus, being the master craftsman, made a great deal of objects for the good of mankind. Many times he helped heroes on their quests, such as Hercules, Aeneas, and Achilles. For Hercules, Hephaestus crafted several gifts. Fir st, he constructed an enormous pair of clappers that were somewhat like cymbals. Hercules used these to scare the Stymphalide birds (Berens 286). He made a golden breastplate on Hercules’ behalf (Hansen 185).Lastly, he sent Hercules a golden quiver as a gift for when he became famous among the gods (Berens 282). For Aeneas, he crafted an impressive set of armor at the request of his goddess-mother (Bulfinch 155). Aeneas used the armor to defeat Turnus in battle. Finally, to the hero Achilles, he gave a set of impenetrable armor after Thetis, Achilles’ mother, asked him to help her son. Achilles had lost his previous armor and needed a replacement to protect him in his search for Hector. When Hephaestus was visited by Thetis and heard her request, he set all other work aside to complete it (Bulfinch 121).Besides helping mortals, Hephaestus had other responsibilities. As the master craftsman, he solely designed and built the numerous palaces on Mount Olympus. These inclu ded the wondrous palace of Zeus and Hera at the peak of Olympus to the palaces of every other Olympian god to even the majestic thrones that sat in each (Berens 20). Again, being the master craftsman, he built many other things. For mighty Zeus, he made the shield, Aegis and constantly replenishes his supply of thunderbolts (Bulfinch 2). To Artemis he gave armor and arrows to help her on her hunts (Bolton 178).Some of his greatest works were built for Apollo, the god of the sun. These included the magnificent palace of the sun in the east, as well as Apollo’s own Sun chariot (Bulfinch 23). Hephaestus lived through his harsh and misfortunate creation to become a well respected god, loved for his kindness and honored by the humans and gods that he assisted in numerous ways. Ordinary man chose the common quail, whose springtime dance is like his limping walk, to represent him. When he was born, his ugliness caused Hera to cast him off Olympus to rid herself of the embarrassment. Thetis took him in, raised him, and he later returned to Olympus in revenge to Hera. Aphrodite became his wife although her loyalty was to Ares, Hephaestus’s brother, and not to her husband. Hephaestus was honored by having temples in Athens and on Mt. Etna. The most marvelous works known to gods or mortals were created by Hephaestus. Even though Hephaestus is the ugliest god on Olympus, he became one of the most popular in heaven as well as on earth by happily aiding humans and kindly assisting his fellow gods alike.