What a Loud Sound The Noise Doom Makes in The Sound and the Fury - Literature Essay Samples

An air of doom and darkness hangs over the entirety of William Faulkners The Sound and the Fury. Utilizing the negative aspects of the South that swirled around him, Faulkner skillfully molds a familythe Compsonsout of that life. Not only does Faulkner discuss the different levels of impending doom that each of the three brothers and their maid, Dilsey, feels, he also touches on the different physical times in which they live. This is illustrated using an interesting technique: Most of Faulkners characters rely primarily on their recollections of happenings in their lives. In fact, as in most of his works, this novel is filled with almost endless incidences of remembering (Minter 190). Perhaps that is why The Sound and the Fury is commonly referred to as a stream of consciousness novel or a novel of inner monologue (Chakovsky 293). How each character perceives the present and past links to their idea of compassion and human nature, and this idea is also what illustrates their distinc tive perceptions of impending doom. When pondering which of the three brothers battles the idea of irreversible predestination the most, Jason immediately comes to mind. Indeed, so much does he seem to live by that particular ideal that he seemingly decides that in order to avenge himself and his family, it is his duty to meet the consequences of his actions. This idea is what makes Jason a truly vicious character. Although Jason subconsciously believes that his fate is already carved in stone, he still yearns deeply for power. However, because of his neurotic mindset, he cannot actually handle either one of these ideas. Jasons fight is not about his muddled view of his surroundings, but rather about his reaction to those surroundings. Perhaps it is those reactions that make him so psychologically unstable, and so able to recognize his own instability. For example, he says, Im crazy too God knows what Ill do about it just to look at water makes me sick and Id just as soon swallow ga soline as a glass of whiskey (Faulkner 298). Indeed, Jasons tone is set in the opening sentence of his section: Once a bitch, always a bitch, what I say (Padgett 4). Compassion is an emotion that Jason views as completely worthless. He does not see any logical reason for acting compassionately towards another human being, as there are no rewards for showing compassion. In other ways, too, his idea of morality is off-balance. For example, Jason is conflicted about his sisters promiscuity. He looks down upon her and thinks of her as less of a person, but the manner in which he himself degrades her does not strike him as negative in any way. In fact, he blames his sister for his actions because she is blemishing the family name. The crime that she is committing is far less of an issue. Ironically, however, there are other points in the story where Jason appears jealous of others spending time with Caddy, and ridicules them for wanting to do so: Youre not a poor baby. Are you. Youve got your Caddy. Havent you got your Caddy (Faulkner 8). Jason is always searching for validity from the other characters in the book. When there is someone whom Jason feels is far less substantial of a person than he is, he becomes angry. Jason views his brothers and sisters as wasted space, and believes that they have not taken advantage of the chances that they have been given. He believes that he was unfairly placed in the family, but still feels some degree of responsibility toward it. As far as narration is concerned, the harsh and brash attitude of Jason certainly shines through, which is exactly what Faulkner wanted. Faulkner once noted that Jason was the most vicious characterI ever thought of (Chakovsky 297). The reader is never at a loss when considering what Jasons true feelings and opinions are about another person. His father and brother died because of their own actions, his sister is promiscuous, and his brother should either be dead or in an insane asylum. As far as t elling the story specifically when compared to the other narrators, rarely does Jason get off track with other tales. Quentin, however, is far more concerned with what each new day will bring, and with the concept of time. In fact, his first memory upon waking is of his father giving him his grandfathers watch with the observation that it was, according to his father, given to him not that [he] may remember time, but that [he] might forget it now and then for a moment and not spend all [his] breath trying to conquer it (Faulkner 93). In contrast to Jason, who is at peace (yet still bitter) with the fact that there is nothing that can be done about the future, Quentin is intrigued and anxious about that same idea. This is most likely because Quentin is aware that doom is awaiting his family, and that it is only a matter of time before their particular idea of it occurs. More unconsciously, Quentin is, throughout most of his life, calculating when he will kill himself. While Quentin is, in fact, anxious about what each new day will bring, he is not killing time until something occurs. In his chapter, it is clear that he is not expecting any major occurrence to happen, but is simply using the opportunity to review his life in his mind. In doing so, he can make one last, valid attempt to ascertain knowledge as to why he must kill himself. The choice is not hisit is simply something that has to be done. No matter what, there is nothing that could happen that could change Quentins mind against suicide. When he tries to destroy his watch (a method of time), he is attempting to escape from the framework that has become his life. Like Jason, Quentins relationship with Caddy is also one that is very unique. In fact, according to Faulkner, the source of Quentins horror is Caddy (Yarup 3). In his head, he and she have both already gravely sinned. But rather that shunning his sister, Quentin wishes to be linked to her for eternity. He is already determined, though, th at that eternal place in which they will be together is hell. Only when he feels that a permanent relationship is established is he able to find true closure, and can truly be at peace with himself. The idea of impending doom is also how Quentin can live so calmly throughout the entire day in which he plans to kill himself. His calmness almost causes readers to wonder, is he secretly or subconsciously yearning for an eternal hell? Or, does he truly believe that hell is an inevitable end? What seems ironic, when thinking about the idea of hell, is that although Quentin never talks to God or prays, he is familiar with the Bible, quoting verses throughout the book. Quentin views humankind in a much simpler fashion than Jason does. Children are initially pure, grow faulty and prone to sin, and are damned. If people can survive to a point in their lives without sinning too greatly, then they have reached a sort of salvation. If not, then redemption is not an option. The latter is what Quentin believes has happened to him: He had an impressionable and sinful childhood, and could not get past it. However, he does not necessarily think that he and his siblings are to blame. In his eyes, they were just living the lives that they were randomly given. Thus, the easiest thing to do is to kill himself. With his suicide, however, the feeling of doom only descends further on his family, digging their hole of despair even deeper. Benjy is the one character that does not necessarily view his whole existence as doomed since he does not live in a structured world, as the rest of the narrators and his family do. Although his section is written in an almost incomprehensible (at first) dialect, later on, the reader comes to appreciate Benjy and his optimism. Benjys life does not take place at any given time, but is viewed as a cocktail, of sorts, of what has happened, what is happening, and what will happen. Benjys family does not realize that he is disabled until after he ha s gone through his toddler years. Perhaps, this is the beginning of the concept of impending doom for the Compson family. His mother wears his disability like a badge for all to see. He is the last son, and is born during a time in which the Compsons are no longer prospering financially. Benjys mother thinks that Benjys disability is appropriately placed, since it matches what is going on in the family. Thankfully for Benjy, he does not live a life full of worry about what will happen to him or his family. This is because Benjy has no real sense of past, present, or future. His future is not bleak, because Benjy has no real future. If he does, however, he is unsure as to when it will occur. The same idea applies to him when concerning morality. Since Benjy does not know what is morally right or wrong, does that mean that he is exempt from society and their ideals from it? Most readers would like to think so, even though the rest of the world has to abide by those rules. After all, he does not seem to adhere himself to any other standardsmoney, romantic issues, or natural progression. Progression, in fact, is another issue in itself, because it seems as though Benjy is what is making the Compson family, ultimately, unable to prosper. At the very least, he is making things progress much less quickly. For them, he symbolizes a huge hurdlesomething that no matter how hard they try, they simply will never be able to conquer. Like his two brothers, Benjy has his own, unique relationship with his sister. At one point in the novel, she is his constant. It seems as though Benjy is happy to have Caddy near him, and that his impulse is to freeze moments of happiness and shut off Caddy and himself from the entire world. Yet she belongs to that other world (Chakovsky 292-293). However, since he lives in three different worlds (the past, present, and future), she is often able to be three things at once to him, depending on where he is. She can be promiscuous, but not; she can be good, but not. His mixed feelings make him very confused about her destiny, as well as about their relationship. However, unlike his brothers, Benjy does not concur that his sister is evil and that she will live in eternal hell for the sins that she has committed. Thus, there is again a definite air of hope surrounding Benjy, making him a refreshing addition to the other two Compson brothers. What is truly heartbreaking to the reader, though, is that what he is left with in the end is what he has in the introduction: a fading memory of tenderness and love through association with Caddy. Here, Dilsey said, Stop crying, now. She gave me [Caddys] slipper, and I hushed (Yarup 2). Benjys order in the novel is cleverly and purposely placed. When first reading the novel, it seems as though Benjy is hard to decipher because he is, in fact, retarded. However, when delving further in the work, the reader realizes that Benjy cannot be defined by his disability. The concepts and e vents that he discusses and analyzes are surprisingly complex. His chapter, therefore, signifies the conclusions to the stories that will later leave us irresolute. Although Benjy does not personally bring on an air of doom in the beginning of the novel, he is aware of it because of all the other characters that he encounters. He is, in his own way, very aware of what is happening. He simply cannot take what he knows and put it in a logical, communicable, form. If Benjy can be seen as a bright light in a bleak world, than so is Dilsey. She is the novels central sympathizing, yet alienated, witness (Wadlington 422). Throughout the chapters of other people, she seems to be the only constant, logical character. This same idea is true within the fourth chapter. Dilsey narrates from a present time, and everything takes place in one day. She does not spend a lot of her chapter remembering,in contrast to Quentin and Benjy. Furthermore, unlike Jason, she does not blame the past for any of the difficulties now facing her. While the other characters seem not to fight their supposed destiny of going to hell, Dilsey is certain that she will ascend into heaven. She tries to help the children by offering them ideas of salvation. When it becomes clear to her that no one in the family (except possibly Benjy) is interested in a form of grace, it bears greatly upon her soul. This is her own contribution to the idea of doom. She thinks that if she can get the Compson family to come forth and live in today, as she does, then perhaps they can gravitate toward a brighter future. Of course, no one does so. Dilsey remains the only character who is not always and completely concerned with days and occurrences passed. The most substantial relationship that Dilsey has is with Benjy. His innocencen and openness makes him the one character in which Dilsey feels that is able to feel the grace of God. Even though she is ridiculed for bringing him to Easter church with her, Dilsey is con tent and at peace with his company. Upon reading the complete novel, we as readers are pleased that Dilsey is the character who has seen the beginning and the end. She is the character who has taken something pureher faithand turned it into a clean energy that is vital to the order of the Compson house. Dilseys chapter is the last, adding to the novels parting atmosphere of doom. Although it is the last chapter, and the one that brings us the closing and lets us know what has happened, it is not the one that we, as readers, believe as the prominent view of the world. Upon believing the world of the other three, though, we also believe that the Compson family truly is a family with no chance. Doom is definite for themand it almost seems that is the way they want it. Works CitedChakovsky, Sergei. Word and Idea in The Sound and the Fury. Book! Ed. Doreen Fowler and Ann J. Abadie. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi. 1983.Faulkner, William. The Sound and the Fury. New York: Vintage Books, 1990.Minter, David. Family, Myth, and Religion in Faulkners Fiction. Book! Ed. Doreen Fowler and Ann J. Abadie. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 1981Padgett, John B. The Sound and the Fury: Commentary. William Faulkner on the Web. 11 Apr. 2005. Ed. John B. Padgett. U of Mississippi. 16 May 2006. .Wadlington, Warwick. The Sound and the Fury: A Logic of Tragedy. American Literature Vol. 53, Issue 3. November 1981. Retrieved 12 May 2006. Yarup, Robert L. Faulkners The Sound and the Fury. Explicator, 00144940 Vol. 55, Issue 1. September 1996. Retrieved 14 May 2006.

A Guide to Homeschooling in North Carolina

If youre considering homeschooling, learning the requirements of your state is one of the first steps. Homeschooling in North Carolina isnt complicated, but its important to understand how to get started and how to follow the law.   Making the Decision Deciding to homeschool your child is an incredibly significant decision and one that will certainly change your life. People decide to homeschool their children for many different reasons, some of which include: dissatisfaction with the public school system, desire to train their child within a specific religious framework, frustration with their childs current school situation, in order to meet a child’s special learning needs or wishing to keep a close family bond throughout the early school years. If you live in North Carolina, one or more of the other 33,000 families in the state who have already decided to homeschool one or more of their children may also influence your decision. Most everyone in North Carolina probably knows at least one family who has chosen to homeschool their kids. These families are wonderful sources of information and support as you make this important decision, and they can give you an honest appraisal of the ups and downs of committing to the homeschool journey. Following the Laws to Homeschool in North Carolina Homeschooling in North Carolina is not overly regulated, but there are a few edicts that everyone must follow. North Carolina does not require you to register your child as a homeschooler until he or she reaches the age of seven. Depending on the age your child is when you begin homeschooling, you may complete one or two grades before you even formally register your school. Approximately one month before your child reaches the minimum age, or one month before you plan to begin homeschooling an older child, a parent or guardian sends a Notice of Intent to the North Carolina DNPE. This Notice of Intent includes choosing your schools name and certifying that the primary supervisor of the homeschool has at least a high school diploma. Besides the requirement to file the Notice of Intent, North Carolina has the following other legal requirements for homeschooling in the state: Operating on a regular schedule  at least nine months out of the calendar yearMaintaining immunization records and attendance records for each child being schooled at homeAdministering a nationally standardized test to each child at least once per school yearMaking attendance, testing and immunization records available to the DNPE for examination each yearNotification to DNPE when deciding to terminate your homeschool A 180-day school year is recommended but not required. Deciding What to Teach The most important part of choosing what to teach your child is understanding exactly who your child is. Before you begin perusing curriculum catalogs and internet curriculum reviews, it is wise to find out how your child best learns. Learning style inventories and personality quizzes are abundant in most homeschooling resource books or on the internet, and these are wonderful for understanding how your childs mind works, and therefore which type of curriculum would be best for him or her. Families new to homeschooling quickly discover a dizzying array of choices when it comes to selecting a homeschool curriculum. There is no more popular discussion on the web than homeschool curriculum reviews by homeschool families. After sifting through the reviews, most parents end up mixing and matching homeschool curricula, trying to create the best match for their child. For families with more than one child, choosing a homeschool curriculum can even be more problematic. What works for one child may not work for another. What works for one subject may not work on the next. Experienced homeschooling families will tell you that there is actually no single, best homeschool material. Rather than feeling torn between homeschool resources, parents should feel free to select a diverse blend of materials and activities. Locating Resources Making the decision to homeschool your child and choosing the curricula you want to begin with are just a part of the homeschooling experience. The homeschool community has grown exponentially, and the resources available to homeschoolers now can seem endless in scope. Some common resources to investigate are: Online Homeschool mega-sites, such as NHEN or About Homeschooling for researching specific homeschool informationOnline homeschool forums and Facebook groupsHomeschooling magazines and newslettersOnline homeschool articles and blogsLocal or regional support groups, often including curriculum and resource sharing, as well as group field trips and outingsBooks about homeschooling from your favorite bookstore or local libraryStatewide homeschool organizations, such as NCHE, HA-NC, and NCAA whose goals are to support the rights and resources of those choosing to homeschool in North CarolinaHomeschool programs available through your local library, YMCA, 4H-Club, or Parks and Recreation Department Many museums, state parks, and businesses offer special classes and discounts for homeschool students. Check your local resources for opportunities available to you as a homeschooling family. Keeping the Dream Alive When your homeschooling adventure begins, everything is new and exciting. Your homeschool books smell like they came straight from the printer. Even lesson planning and record keeping seem more fun than a chore at first. But be prepared for the honeymoon phase to ebb and tide. No one has a perfect homeschool year, month or even week. It is important to intersperse your daily curriculum with field trips, play dates and  hands-on activities. North Carolina is full of  educational destinations  that are an easy day’s drive. Also, take advantage of your city’s visitor’s center or website to discover treasures in your own town that you might have overlooked. Whether you chose to homeschool from the beginning or came upon homeschooling accidentally, you are bound to experience slumps. It is almost certain that over time your homeschool will relax into something more familiar and predictable, but that is also the time when you usually notice that  this homeschooling thing  is more than just a passing phase. You have become one of the over 33,000 families in North Carolina who are proud to call themselves homeschoolers!

God People - Philosophy Dissertation - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 29 Words: 8758 Downloads: 7 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Statistics Essay Did you like this example? When God died, what happened to the people? Therefore neither can an animal move about in the closed as such, no more than it can comport itself toward the unconcealed. The animal is excluded from the essential domain of the conflict between unconcealedness and concealedness. The sign of such an exclusion is that no animal or plant has the word. (Heidegger: 1992:159-60) The concealed in Heidegger is that which conceals from us its being. What emerges in Heidegger, in his pursuit of this clearing, is the slim line the slippery border, between human and animal. The animal in Heidegger cannot see the sun as it rushes towards it: it can never dissocial the sun as a being. It is at once open and non-open, or rather, it operates in an ambiguity between the two fields. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "God People Philosophy Dissertation" essay for you Create order Man in Heidegger becomes that which is produced precisely at this border: at the moment of caesura and articulation between human and animal: it is this that passes for man, and it is this than expresses well the relationship of man to language. Man is never outside language: language is always already expressed as a radical exclusion of that which is not which operates as a fundamental category of exclusion(Agamben: 2004a: 91) The last century and a half have been full of attempts to move outside of language: to pass into new notions of subjectivity that move outside of what it is to be human. Nietzsches attempt to destroy traditional notions of subjectivity stands out as a crystallisation point in a process that sees Delouse, Foucault and Derrida, to name the three philosophers this dissertation will discuss, move outside notions of the human trapped within language and the creation of the subject. In doing so they criticise a notion of the subject trapped within binary constructions and the hierarchical notions of the subject that one finds in Hegel; in doing so they echo the criticism of Christianity that Nietzsche made. This dissertation will analyse the reasons for which Nietzsche attempts to destroy the traditional notion of the subject and replace it with a particularism notion of the subject: forever in astute of becoming that escapes binary configurations. We will evaluate to what extent he was successful in his enterprise, and what type of subjectivity was brought forth. In analysing the ways in which Deleuze,Foucault and Derrida take up his project, we will analyse a genealogy of thought that attempts to successively move beyond what we understands human. These three methods open up a series of liberating possibilities to philosophy and politics, and the configurations of these possibilities we be analysed. However, in the radical indeterminacy of Derrida, in the pessimistic, frantic activism of Foucault, and in the schizo-analysis of Delouse we can detect the same problem that we find in Nietzsche: at work in him is that oblivion (or as Bataille would term it, that excess) which lies at the foundation of the biologist of the nineteenth century and of psychoanalysis and what produces monstrous anthropomorphization of the animal and a corresponding animalization of man (Heidegger: 1992:152). Heidegger still believed, as none of the philosophers considered in the dissertation do, in the possibility of a good project of the polis; that there was still a good historical space in which one could find a historical destiny grounded in being. He, later in life, realized his mistake. In this, he comes toe point where his criticism of Nietzsche becomes most pointed. Nietzsches eulogisation of man is that which pre-empts the emptying out of value we find a man at the end of history. Nietzsche is blind to what the caesura of naming man as such might mean: in doing so, and in asserting the gelatinisation of the truth of the polis, the ambiguous border between man and animal collapses. It is precisely the essential border between the mystery of the living being and the mystery of what is historical (Heidegger: 1992:239) that is not dealt with by Nietzsches work and it is thus constantly exposed to the possibility of an unlimited and groundless anthropomorphization of the animal that places the animal above man and makes a super-man (ibid:160) of it. Life becomes reified over and above the precise condition of its existence; that very condition which makes it always already in dependency on those very grounds of its existence. We will find this same problem repeated in Foucault, who in his criticism of the construction of the subject in modernity illustrates the way in which modern notions of sovereignty act directly on the bios of modern man; this is where modernity begins to act on animal life(this time where equivalence has rendered the possibility of time null)and what is at stake in the construction of the subject is the possibility of his life. Yet, Foucault, like Nietzsche, illustrates this genealogy of dependence without being able to elucidate its historical specificity, which is in its construction of a zone of exclusion at the basis of ontology itself (this can be seen in Foucaults error in treating bio power as a modern phenomenon). This same problem is manifest in the differ and of Derrida, and in Deleuzes notion of the organs without a body: each in turns finds itself the symptom of the radical historicism. Each proclaims this symptom a cure, without realising that the cure they offer is precisely that which is the symptom. In all these theorists what this amounts to is misunderstanding of the nature of language. Thus, while Nietzsche manages to destroy stable notions of the subject, the unstable notion he replaces them with, while apparently liberating, exists within the same binaries he seeks to destroy, and moreover, allows for the exactly the same herd instinct that he seeks to overcome. I. Why I needed to kill God I.I We see ourselves in every mirror What, in all strictness, has really conquered the Christian God? () Christian morality itself, the concept of truthfulness taken more and more strictly, the confessional subtlety of the Christian conscience translated and sublimated into the scientific conscience, into intellectual cleanliness at any price. To view nature as if it were a proof of the goodness and providence of a God; to interpret history to the glory of divine reason, as the perpetual witness to a moral world order and moral intentions; to interpret ones own experiences, as pious men long interpreted them, as if everything were preordained, everything a sign, everything sent for salvation of the soul that now belongs to the past, that has conscience against it. In this way, Christianity as a dogma was destroyed by its own morality. (Nietzsche: 1969:160) Nietzsches Genealogy of Morals outlines the way in which Christianity formulates its notion of the subject. The Christian super-ego is posited as salvation, as the point towards which one works. Thus, the Christian subject exists as, first and foremost, alack: it is not what it wishes to be. Yet, as Nietzsche points out, this lack is a condition and construction of the subject within Christianity: one resembles oneself and yet in order to find deliverance must become more of oneself and in doing so one finds justification for the present order of things. The Christian superegos to be found in God, and then, surprise, surprise, the Christian ego can be found placed in the soul of the body. This parallels the analysis that Foucault makes of the subject (1999, 1975). The law construct the subject as normal (and in doing so sets up an exclusion of the abnormal, or that which is not: that which has no voice icon-human) and in this process creates a desiring-subject, who desires what the law has not given it. Yet these desires are what are created by the notion of the subject placed upon one: one is created absent, oars not that, not this, but always awaiting a day when one can be called by a proper name. It is this awaiting a proper name that Nietzsche attacks most strongly, and in this theory of language we shall see Nietzsche allows no place for such a proper name. A proper name relation, Nietzsche argues, is always a relationship between a creditor and a debtor; it is always typified by the dependence or lack, and as such prevents the possibility that of morality to be free and joyous. Nietzsche though, and is not commented on very much, reserves some tender thoughts for Christianity. It is a primal Christianity, a Dionysian Christianity, that Nietzsche can endorse. As much can be seen in the quote that started this section: Nietzsches criticism of Christianity should not be seen to be limited to Christianity. Rather, it extends to all relationships of debt and obligation to a structuring super-ego. It was not Nietzsche, he claims, that killed Christianity, it was Christianity itself, and Nietzsche loathes the nihilism that replaces it just as much. We can discern three criticisms of Christianity/nihilism in the quote that started this dissertation. Nietzsche elaborates that one of the structures of Christianity is the idea of a puritanical truthfulness, which has been sublimated into scientific consciousness. Nietzsches primary criticism of this truthfulness is that is relies upon a correspondence theory of truth: it requires an external state that can be matched in some way to an internal state (which then requires a subject to have such an internal state). For Nietzsche, consciousness created in such a way in simply ashram, an intentional lie: consciousness lies free and unbounded it has no centre around which it can orientate itself. Furthermore, the mapping between a real world of existent things (Kants ding an such)and a subjective world of language is not possible. It is not possible because language only ever refers to itself. To use Saussures(1995:12) terminology, a sign can only have meaning within another setoff signs; it has no essential relationship to the world that is signified. A correspondence theory of truth attempts to hold up astatic a world that is in constant flux and in doing so negates the possibility of human freedom, which Nietzsche opposes to belief. The importance of this critique of the Christian subject will be returned to later in the dissertation when we consider Nietzsches theory of language. The second crucial critique of Christianity made in the quote that begins this dissertation is of history as possessing meaning, as divine providence being read into history as if it were a series of signs. This resembles the structural properties of psychoanalysis that Delouse(1983a, 1983b, 1984) was so devastatingly to criticise. One can read ones entire life as a history of redemption, as Benjamin (1986:112)comments. In this reading, every moment of ones life in which one fails, feels regret of guilt because one is not conterminous with the notion of the subject given to you, can be read as a sign of messianic moment to come: it is to deny the contingent and necessary existence one has in favour of a reified notion of being that removes life from life. Nietzsche realises that such a realisation about life is scary, and he realises that people will cling onto a Christian notion of belief even if it has no rational foundation: that is why in Thus Spoke Zarathustra (1969) he attempts to convince people through rhetoric rather than argument. Several elements of Nietzsches thought here are important to note. While he attacks Christianity, in the long quote we started the section with he already observes that the technological-scientific paradigm replaces Christianity while adopting all of its tenants. As Nietzsche(1974:108) comments: after Buddha was dead, his shadow was still shown for centuries in a cave a tremendous, gruesome shadow. God is dead; but given the way of men, there may still be caves for thousands of years in which his shadow will be shown. -And we- we still have to vanquish his shadow, too. Science is this shadow: it refuses an engagement with the world in favour of a mystified detached observer who can sit back and observe the world rather than engage within its context. This DE contextualisation actually ends up relativizing the world. This is a radical historicism that believes the role of the pasties to come to the rescue of the future: temporality is shortened tallow only a present, an immediate pro cess of desiring-lack and sustenance. It allows for the feigned equivalence of all men, as they are all equal as subjects, and as all in this equivalence all notions of importance and goals are emptied of meaning by an effectively moribund set of values that deny life in favour of a search for authentic experience. This search for authentic experience is termed active nihilism in Nietzsche: it is an attempt to confront the emptiness of value categories with frenetic action: this is what Size (2001:48) calls the passion for the real: the passion for frenetic experience that ultimately culminates in its simulacrum. It culminates in its simulacrum because the passion for the real (as opposed to the empty appearance people inhabit) eventually becomes the passion for the real without risk for one only risks if there is something one is willing to die for: for Nietzsche the chance and contingency of the eternal return and thus we see the Nietzsche an concepts of passive and active nihilism end up, in late modern capitalism, becoming one. We can see that the co-existence of what we could term the correspondence theory of truth and the history as destiny theory (where everything is able tube reconciled to the present) inevitably end up in this structure of nihilism. Both of these theories rely on several underlying structures of thought that Nietzsche was also quick to criticise in Christianity. Innis analysis of the origins of Christianity, he notes (1956:112):Christianity was from the beginning, essentially and fundamentally, lifes nausea and disgust with life, merely concealed behind, masked by, dressed up as, faith in another or better life. Christianity was always underlined by a series of binary logics: this is not the right life: this one is better; hate: love, God: Satan. It is this binary thinking that comes in for a huge amount of criticism from Nietzsche. It is these binaries that ignore that the world is in astute of becoming, that it is forever in a state of flux. Nietzsche notes (1966:12): it may be doubted, firstly whether there exists any antithesis at all, and secondly whether these popular evaluations and value anti-thesis, on which the metaphysicians have set their seal, are not perhaps foreground valuations, merely provisiona l perspectives. Therefore, Nietzsches criticism is not simply of our values, as we have seen in the previous paragraphs, but of the way in which our values are constructed. Nietzsches theory of language illustrates that each of the terms in binary series is dependent on the other. Butler (1990,1993) undertakes similar enterprise inspired by Nietzsche when she investigates the dependency of the category women on the category man and vice versa. Power is exercised, Nietzsche understands, in the formation of the very categories themselves, not merely in the ascription of certain people to good and certain people to bad. It is a mistake to fight for the category of lack, because the detestable thing is the very category: by fighting against the lack (e.g. of women for rights) one is accepting the terms of the herd mentality; that one must accept the givens of the situation and its binary categories. This is why a genealogy of morals is necessary, to (Butler: 1990:ix)investigate the political stakes in designating as an origin and cause those identity categories that are in fact the effects of institutions, practices, discourses with multiple and diffuse points of origin. Such pursuit unseats the claim of a binary logic to an objective reality: they show them as temporal formations that constitute a world for the subject. However, such a world is always shot through with lack. One can illustrate this using Alcans (1981) theory of mirrors, which he derives from Nietzsches view of the subject. In Alcans view, one is never identical to the role one has been assigned in life. The social formation of life (which is an appearance) is full of inconsistency and incompleteness. As Christina Wolf (1980:151) comments in her novel: Nelly couldnt help it: the charred building made her sad. But she didnt know that she was feeling sad [my emphasis], because she wasnt supposed to feel sad. She had long ago begun to cheat herself out of her true feelings.Gone, forever gone, is the beautiful, free correlation between emotions and events. It wouldnt have taken much for Nelly to have succumbed to an improper emotion: compassion. But healthy German common sense built barrier against it: anxiety. The character Nelly feels the dissonance between the world she is in and the world she experiences: she experiences anxiety over it. Such anxiety is the mark of the problem of binary categorisation. This categorisation does not resemble the world, which is in flux, but it places over it a series of categories that are power relationships designed to constitute you as a subject. We can perhaps draw a parallel here between what Nietzsche analyses in his philosophy of language as the productive power of the grammar of an age and what Laplace(1989:130), following Alcan, calls the source-object of drives. These unconscious formations are an encounter between an individual whose psycho-somatic structures are situated predominantly at the level of need, and signifiers emanating from an adult. Those signifiers pertain to the satisfaction of the childs needs, but they also convey the purely interrogative potential of other messagesand those other messages are sexual. These enigmatic messages set the child the difficult, or even impossible, task of mastery and symbolization and the attempt to perform it inevitably leaves behind unconscious residues. I refer to them as the source objects of the drives. What one must be careful to do here is to distinguish between the early Nietzsche and his later work. In early work such as the Birth of Tragedy (1956), Nietzsche can still talk about an essential essence that the Christian or Apollonian reasoning hides. In his later work he fully endorses the view that consciousness is but surface: a radically anti-essentialist position that refuses the possibility of an outside of language or of consciousness. There is then, no real that one can break through the appearance to get to, as one might in psychoanalysis. However, that does not necessarily mean the psychoanalytic reading were doing here is incorrect. Laconia analysis departs from the Freudian analysis that Delouse criticizes in its conception of the subject. For Nelly, the character in Wolfs novel, the state fore-anxiety might be referred to as true, but a sense of what it is would be to call it uninhibited: free from the strictures of power. In the later Nietzsche, the ability to escape the possibility of the subject is ambiguous. What Nelly asks for is not an absolute escape, as Laplace does not ask that the child can master the symbolization of his parents and escape the drives. Rather, what is inferred is continual tension and thrust against that which claims to be objective and masks desire, put in a Delusion idiom: it is the consistent schizoid refusal to stasis. As such, it parallels the construction of the subject in Foucault. Like Nietzsche and Butler, Foucault performs a genealogy. Like the later Nietzsche, Foucault realizes the impossibility of breaking through language. One is always already constructed as a subject: any attempt to break out of this trap relies on an exterior moral framework that simply replicates the binaries of an existing power discourse. Foucault (1979:178) notes that discourse creates the object of which it speaks. Discourse gives rise to a subject, and an attempt to break out of the subject through a call to a value (such as revolutionary purity, truth) falls into the same power trap as existing political discourse. What Foucault and Nietzsche both call into question is the notion of valorisation itself: that which always assumes a dichotomousbinarisation. However, rather than placing their project within an appeal to the real outside of language, both claim the most one can does attack language through language. This task means to constantly reveal that which appears as objective as actually a temporally structured mask of power. Thus for Foucault (1984:217): The real political task in a society such as ours is to criticize the working of institutions which appear to be both neutral and independent; to criticize them in such a manner that the political violence which has always exercised itself through them will be unmasked, so that one can fight them. This task has no end or limit: indeed, an end or limit is part of the notion of the structure of power; that there is this goal that you must attain, that you are not this, though at a certain point you may indeed attain it. We can see such notions of end goal rely on the interpretation of history as divine providence (or in the secular historicist version, history being called to the rescue of the present)that Nietzsche was so quick to criticise as ignoring the contingency and chance of existence. Both of these parallel Deleuzes criticism of hierarchical structure as that which inhibits desire and presses it into the service of power. What this entails is not simply the refutation of God at the centre of the world, defining the notion of our being. It is a refutation of a centre of the world. Secularism simply replaces God with man, and declares that the self-autonomous mains that which defines our values, when we do not act in a way accorded to by the hegemony, then it is us who ar e lacking. Thus, Nietzsche(1962:346) makes a comment much like Marx when he says we now laugh when we find Man and World placed beside one another, separated by the sublime presumption of the little world and. Thus, in Nietzsche it is not simply Christianity but its zombie replacement rationality that needs to be criticised. Foucault continues this task in The Order of Things (1994), attacking the Human account of causality and truth than requires a one to one mapping between things and their referents. This criticism is possible because, as Nietzsche notes (1968:616) the world with which we are concerned . . .is not a fact . . . it is in flux, as something in a state of becoming, as a falsehood always changing but never getting near the truth: forthere is no truth. This is the strongest statement of Nietzsches project. He wants to undermine the notion of truth and reveal it for a set of power constructions and particularities. With the notion of truth, the notion of the proper name (the proper place for the human subject) becomes impossible, and what opens up is decentred multitude of consciousness like that which Delouse (1980:332) outlines in Mille Plateaux. This project would have what is productive as that which is nomadic, which refuses all forms of hierarchy in favour of that which is additive. To carry out such project it is necessary to destroy the possibility of belief. I.II Our beliefs are our weakness If there is today still no lack of those who do not know how indecent it is to believeor a sign of decadence, of a broken will to livewell, they will know it tomorrow. (Nietzsche: 1990:3) For Nietzsche, belief requires something outside of oneself. Indeed, belief can be understood as the opposite to freedom in Nietzsches thought. To believe in something is to believe in what that thing has made you into: it is to believe that one has something internal (belief) that can be referred to the world. As Nietzsche notes (ibid:347): Once a human being reaches the fundamental conviction that he must be commanded, he becomes a believer. Conversely, one could conceive of such a pleasure and power of self-determination, such a freedom of the will that the spirit would take leave of all faith and every wish for certainty, being practiced in maintaining himself on insubstantial ropes and possibilities and dancing even near abysses. As we have noted above, it is not enough to simply get rid of God. What happens to the people after we get rid of God? They run together, as a herd, scared, into other formations of command, such as nationalism. It is interesting to note here Foucaults comment, that the challenge of nationalism (1994:228) was to establish a system of signs in congruence with the transcendence of being. It was to believe in a new grammar that replaced the old certainties of life with new certainties: the certainty of the glory of the death of the unknown soldier for the transcendent nation. That is why Nietzsche says,(1990:15): we are not getting rid of God because we still believe in grammar. Nietzsches real challenge is almost a challenge against language: it is an attempt to consistently run up against the limit of language and refute its hegemonic possibilities (e.g. in the distribution of tenses) at every turn. A grammar forces one to give lie to a reality: the only such lies Nietzsche thinks are acceptable are innocent lies, those lies that enable communication in contingent fashion, that are not totalising and do not exceed the moment of their own expression. What happens with the new certainties is that they still rely on a concept of will. They ask one to partake in a world in which one is necessarily excluded (you are not this, yet). For Nietzsche (1924:14),to believe in the will is to believe every individual action is isolate and indivisible . Thus runs counter to the idea of flux Nietzsche takes from Heraclitus. Actions are not simply formed but are always already part of a social world that means individual isolatable action is impossible. As is thinking. Thinking (Nietzsche: 1968:477)as epistemologists conceive it, simply does not occur, it is a quite arbitrary fiction, arrived at by selecting one element from the process and eliminating all the rest, an artificial arrangement for the purpose of intelligibility. This process of intelligibility constructs a world in which one is dependent on the process of selection: thought, like and will, becomes a tool to be used: a means-end relationship that requires the a priori separation of subject and object, thought and world, that Nietzsche so convincingly refutes. He notes (1990:54) that the man of faith, the believer of every sort is necessarily dependent mansuch as cannot out of himself posit ends at all. The believer does not belong to himself, he can be only a means, he haste be used, he needs someone who will use him. In the hands of God, or secularism, agency is always placed outside yourself in the objective world that you lack. The weak believer who does not think that he wills(which is already a mistake) at least (ibid: 18) puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already (principle of belief). To change this it is not enough to attack reason (as Adorn and Horkheimer do in The Dialectic of Enlightenment [1972]) but to attack the notion of the instincts. Instinct, while normally associated with that which is most natural, is in Nietzsche a product of discourse and habit over centuries, it is an unthinking subjectivity masquerading as the natural order of things. It is given by the law, and (Nietzsche:1990:57) the authority of the law is established by the thesis: God gave it, the ancestors lived it. To free habit, as we noticed earlier, requires not an attack on reason but an attack on habit, on unreflexive action: we need to liberate man from cause and effect. This task requires that man be liberated from the notion of the name. As Nietzsche (1956:20) claims: The lordly right of giving names extends so far that one should allow oneself to conceive the origin of language itself as an expression of power on the part of the rulers: they say this is this and this, they seal everything and event with a sound, as it were, take possession of it This feat requires a liberation from language. Here Nietzsche is at his most powerful, for he realises that it is in the very nature of language itself that the origin of power lays. Indeed, there is strong correlation between the attack on the sovereign in Nietzsche and Foucault and Saussaurian linguistics. In both the argument relies on the non-relation between signs and what they represent, and yet the continued claim of signs to be coterminous with what they represent, taking possession of it. Against this, Nietzsche wants to liberate us from names (1990:8). That no one is any longer made accountable, that the kind of being manifested cannot be traced to a cause prima, that the world is a unity neither as sensorium nor as spirit, this alone is the great liberation. This flux of things, clearly prevents the emergence of a subject: consciousness here, and for Nietzsches thought as a whole has, has no predetermined pattern. What we need to fight, for Nietzsche, is the giving of the pattern, the idea that the whole is no longer whole(1974:22). What is the sign of every literary decadence? That life no longer dwells in the whole. The word becomes sovereign and leaps out of the sentence, the sentence reaches out and obscures the meaning of the page, the page gains life at the expense of the wholethe whole is no longer a whole. I.III The Grammar of the Age, or how I learned to love the Word Life (Nietzsche: 1990:11) is a continuous, homogenous, undivided, indivisible flowing. For it is not the world that is simple and exact(what one could call the assigning of the world to the word: or to its lieu proper), rather through words we are still continually misled into imagining things as being simpler than they are, separate from one another, indivisible, each existing in and for itself. When Nietzsche writes this, he has abandoned the distinction between the apparent and the real world. There is no ideal for (ibid: 6): with the real world we have also abolished the apparent world. Such a world allows no notions of predestination, and no correspondence theory of truth. Anyone who speaks of such things is a liar (ibid: 38): One must know today that a theologian, a priest, a pope does not merely err in every sentence he speaks, he liesthat he is no longer free to lie innocently, out of ignorance. The priest knows as well as everyone that there is no longer any God, any sinner, any redeemerthat free will, moral world-order are liesintellectual seriousness, the profound self-overcoming of the intellect, no longer permits anyone not to know about these things. What do we replace this met discourse with? We cannot replace it with a singular subject: a new revolutionary ideal or perfect subject, for this would be to become but another priest. Nietzsche (1968:490)argues: the assumption of one single subject is perhaps unnecessary; perhaps it is just as permissible to assume a multiplicity of subjects, whose interaction and struggle is the basis of our thought and our consciousness in general? . . . My hypothesis: the subject as multiplicity. . . The continual transistorizes and fleetingness of the subject. This is precisely what Delouse echoes half a century later when he claims (1983a: 5): production as process overtakes all idealistic categories and constitutes a cycle whose relationship to desire is that of an imminent principle. This multiplicity, one might ask: how does one get there, and what does one do when one is multiple, when one is the Dionysian figure who Nietzsche claims (1956:45) is in constant state of becoming, who is the nom inal I that is always becoming and his intoxicated state sounds out the depth of Being. In one sense for Nietzsche this is an idle question: one cannot assume multitude is something in itself, indeed (1968:560): that things possess a constitution in themselves quite apart from interpretation and subjectivity is quite an idle hypothesis: it presupposes that interpretation and subjectivity are not essential, that a thing freed from all relationships would still be a thing. Thus, the task for Nietzsche is one of a continuing freeing: of making morality (1966:228)something questionable, as worthy of question marks. However, the process with which that is done is problematic for Nietzsche. It is not problematic for Nietzsche because it leads to nihilism, as we have seen, nihilism is a problem that relates to those paradigms of thought that refuse life, that are drawn from a disgust at life (e.g. the moral Puritanism of Christianity and the detached removal of Science).Rather, it is a problem of how to achieve a freeing from subjectivity from within subjectivity. To return to our theses at the start of this dissertation, this is where Nietzsche makes his biggest mistakes. He fails to understand that part of the creation of the subject is precisely the recognition and foreclosure of that element which is silent and refuses to disclose being. Nietzsche claims the way we can free ourselves from this subjectivity is through the notion of the eternal return: to choose every action as if it was the eternal return of the same. The thought of the eternal return means ones leaves nihilism and embraces the contingency and necessity of life: one should understand it as an event: as a mode of being which offers up the world ones own uncertainty. As Heidegger (1991:32) comments on the eternal return, Nietzsche refuses to have life come to a standstill at one possibility, one configuration; I will allow and grant life its inalienable right to become, and I shall do this by prefiguring and projecting new and higher possibilities for it, creatively conductin g life out beyond itself. But though this is a step that seems to embrace becoming, it paradoxically only does so through an act of the will: the very thing Nietzsche criticised. It is this will to power that spreads from the moment: it has no objective truth, but reaches out from the moment. Thus, it is not simply the assertion that everything turns in a circle, as easy readers of Nietzsche might have it. Rather, the eternal return doctrine preaches that there is a dual movement in which the act and the doer, and thought and thinker are recoiled and drawn together at the same moment. It is a step towards immanence: it is against transience and all that passes because it offers itself up as precisely that moment: the eternal return of the same. Yet, this eternal return seems flawed in two important senses we will briefly explore here. Agamben (2004b:8) notes that for Nietzsche, the doctrine of the eternal return is designed to overcome the will to powers inability toaster the past, the it was that names the wills gnashing of teeth and most secret melancholy , the fact that the will cannot will backwards. In Nietzsches voice, there is a vitalise that all his later statements on the impossibility of the real are unable to efface. It is in this form that we must understand contingency in Nietzsche: its only in this form that we can understand what might have been: where the present moment of being-in-itself is effaced in terms of what is. Every that happened then becomes, I have willed it: this is Nietzsches way out of the problem of the past. At this moment Nietzsches promising project collapses: for though he decries truth, it is at this moment that he says yes to truth, to a whole history of potency and will that his work had previously rejected. For what Nietzsche did motto was to say yes to what had not been. In this way, Nietzsches doctrine would have broken with the notion of the will and embraced areal of pure potentiality. This is a problem that Foucault, especially Foucault, Delouse and Derrida cannot quite avoid. II. Why I write Such Good Books, or why others then joined me. II.I We do not Lack for Anything Nietzsches task is to transmit something that does not and will not allow itself to be codified. To transmit it to a new body, to invent body that can receive it and spill it forth; a body that would be our own, the earths, or even something written. (Delouse: 1970:142.) Delouse sees Nietzsche as the prophet of DE territorialisation. Delouse, who aims his guns at Hegel, asks Nietzsche to triumph over the dialectic. He does this, Delouse claims, through the doctrine of the eternal return. This doctrine is most explicitly analysed in Difference and Repetition (1995). Chance and necessity are united in the doctrine of eternal return: what has happened, must have happened. This is not dialectical resolution of the situation, but a resolution of them in their constitutive difference. The doctrine of the eternal return constitutes a model of repetition, which of course for Delouse is precisely where one locates the production of difference (Deleuze:1994:37). The constitutive difference here is between the affirmation of becoming and the affirmation of the being of becoming (1983a: 24).Will to power here becomes simply a force, a differential element simply expressed as difference. Delouse uses Nietzsches doctrine to foreground all of his work with Guattari. Delouse argues for a politically militant unbound desire. Allot Anti-Oedipus (1984) is written under the sign of Nietzsche. It compromises an attack on the slave mentality of the day: that of psychoanalysis and the twin pillars of lack and excess in capitalism that finds its structural parallel in Nietzsches attack on Christianity and Reason. Delouse and Guitar also want to free desire from repressing structures. They find that scientific knowledge as non-belief (1984:111) is truly the last refuge of belief, and as Nietzsche put it, there never was but one psychology, that of the priest. The desiring machines of Delouse and Guitar pick up the theme of Libidinal economy and ask for desire to be set loose, nomadic desire that is prefigured in Nietzsches Der Wanderer (1924).Time after time in Mille Plateaux, they return to their theme. This reoccurrence is neither accidental nor repetitive, for Delouse and Guitar understand it to be constitutive of difference: this is the path of enabling positive flow disavowing power at each step. To what extent are Nietzsches children successful in their enterprise? They do not make the mistake of Nietzsche, asking the over-man to become a ritualistic cure, but there treatment of the eternal return is noticeably uncritical. Nietzsche sets up the teaching of eternal recurrence as a teaching of immanence, the ability to eternalise with a single act of will. This is why Heidegger (1966:95)detects in Nietzsches thought a residual subjectivism that means all his attempts to free himself of the subject ultimately founder. Delouse has no act of will in his ontology; instead, he has set up a plane of pure immanence. This plane of immanence resembles the particularism of Nietzsche: on its, all relationships are entirely contingent and relational. On such a plane, there is no possibility of subject-object relations; it is anti-state thinking in its purest form. That is why they quote Nietzsche so approvingly (1987:376) when he says private thinker, however, is not a satisfactory expression, because is exaggerates interiority, when it is a question of outside thought. Thought with no outside; action with no time, both Nietzsche and Delouse attempt to actualise a plane of immanence that means no conception of the subject is possible outside of flow. In doing so they both fall prey to the same two sets of problems. For Nietzsche, writing against God: the free could only seem wonderful. Was not it his kindred spirit Dostoevsky who wrote: If nothing is true, everything is permitted. It took us until Alcan(1981:35) to reverse the motto and realise: If nothing is true, nothing is permitted because it lacks any basis for possible action. Nietzsche failed to understand that the herd instinct that was undermined in Christianity and Science would fail to find its freedom in freedom, in the absence of any restraint. Instead, that very freedom was taken by hegemonic power as a matrix for further domination. Now, rather than people told one cannot do that (while secretly being extolled to do so, as in classic Superego relationships), one is extolled to do something (within secretly modified limits). The space outside of belief (the non-belief in science that Delouse alludes to) is not the space of freedom. Rather it is the space of what Nietzsche calls passive nihilism: the space where every possibility of action is foreclose and people sit and wait for the end. It is what is called the end of man in Keeve (1980:158). The end of history presupposed by the immanence of the eternal return leads not to the liberation of a new form of values but the value of non-value: the violence of a society where conflict is forbidden (Baudrillard: 2004). This indicates the extent to which Nietzsche failed to consider the critical question of the animal, as we remarked in our introduction. By failing to consider the bounds of language properly, he made the mistake of assuming an act within the Aristotelian logic of will could break through that which continues (transience). Thus, man was reduced to what is animalistic, and that which is past, that which is redundant, simply became an excess with no use. Do we not find the same problem in Delouse? Jean-Jacques Encircle notes what might happen if a yuppie reads Delouse on the train: The incongruity of the scene induces a smile after all, this is a book explicitly written against yuppies. Your smile turns into a grin as you imagine that this enlightenment-seeking yuppie bought the book because of its title. Already you see the puzzled look on the yuppies face, as he reads page after page of vintage Delouse Yet, what we find is precisely the opposite of this occurring. Those very concepts Delouse uses, such as the intensity of affect, we find today in modern capitalism. Modern capitalism undermines all limits, runs through a process of equivalence all differences (is this not nightmarish version of Deleuzes difference as repetition?): so that you may purchase a McDonalds burger in 10 different yet identical forms in ten different countries. The decentred capital flows of the net, without agency or subject, the slowly greater inclusion of more-than-human forms of sex within pornographic capitalism; all these indicate the extent to which Delouse has provided us with a mirror image of capitalism today. The difference between the two is that one decentres within a structure of power (and power does not abhor difference, it merely wants to structure its flows), while the other exists on a purely immanent level. Today, desire seeks to realise itself as the actual limits of possible expression (that which is left as natural) and at the same time remove itself from being a goal within the horizon of capitalism itself. We can see at this point that the body-without-organs, that moment of absolute foreclosure of desire(what for Delouse and Guitar is a sort of living death), resembles the organs without bodies. It is here we see the doctrine of eternal return most prominently displayed: it is in the unrestrained emphasis on immanence as a solution to hegemony that we can find the emergence of a hegemony founded on that very immanence. For both Delouse and Nietzsche, the problem remains that of time; how to find a way out of time without calling on a tradition that desires its own repression. II.II We lack only an eternal struggle Derrida takes up and uses Nietzsche extensively in his concept of the differ and. He attacks the notion of plat in contemporary philosophy at stemming from that same emphasis on productive action and will(which we noted earlier that Nietzsche founders on) that turns play into something where a subject manipulates an object, thus playing into all the dichotomies we have observed Nietzsche wanted to avoid. The space of play then becomes dominated my meaning. What Derrida does it to take up Nietzsche to show that play is a permanent property of any set of dichotomous categories. As Nietzsche notes in Ecce Homo, he is at once (1992) his mother, his father, a Pole, Julius Caesar and Alexander. He is beyond opposition and to be found in the play between them. As Nietzsche notes (1966:34): it is no more than a moral prejudice that truth is worth more than appearance; it is even the worst-proved assumption that exists Indeed, what compels us to assume there exists any essential antithesis between true and false. This play, for Derrida, is what we should be engaged in. It is this Difference that prepares us for venturing beyond binary thought(1973:154) that is for a difference so violent that it refuses to be stopped and examined as the epochality of Being and ontological difference, is neither to give up this passage through the truth of Being, nor is it in anyway to criticise, contest, or fail to recognize the incessant necessity for it. Derrida here assumes a more subtle position than Nietzsche does. Whenever fails to recognise the necessity for a subject, though he recognises that it is empty. He claims (ibid: 146) the speaking or signifying subject would not be self-present, insofar as he speaks or signifies, except for the play of linguistic or semiological difference. However, in his later work (1997:287) he outlines a reversal of Nietzsche that space does not allow us to go into here. He notes The Superman. To be sure, he is awaited, announced, called, to come, but contradictory as it may seem it because he is the origin and the cause of man. Derrida, using his strong links to Levin as, returns from the notion of a man-beyond-man to the centrality of interlocution, of man as man, to find a stable way to break with hegemonic subject: he construes the subject precisely as the difference that emerges in the co-substantiality of being. III. I am the Messiah: or why Life still awaits Redemption This dissertation has shown that Nietzsche does a powerful job of destroying the traditional morality of Christianity. However, his project founders on his inability to carry through a notion of human praxis that escapes the notion of will he so rightly criticises. This failure is bound up with the problem of how to relate to the past. The immanent ontology of Delouse and the eternal return of Nietzsche allow for no messianic other than that of the will, which proclaims, I did it. This allows them to foreclose the realm of the symbolic (that which, as Alcan notes, breaks with the appearance) in favour of asserting the totality of a decentred consciousness. The eternal return becomes like dialectics imp standing (Benjamin: 1987:118): it would allow final resurrection of the past no place apart from as a project of an imminent will: and as such, repeats the problem of a Christian notion of eschatological time. Nietzsche offers us a new form of expression; he is, in Malrauxs words, a great teacher, but the task of finding thought beyond the human founders here. To exist in language without being called there by any Voice, simply to die without being called by death, is, perhaps, the most abysmal experience; but this is precisely, for man, also his most habitual experience, his ethos, his dwelling. . (Agamben: 1991:160) It also founders on an even more foundational issue, which we noted at the start of this dissertation, and has been running as a leitmotif through it. Nietzsche finds his legacy of self-made morality in the world today: and yet he finds docile herds, paralysed by comfort and an absence of barrier. They are beings-without-centre. That Nietzsche did not appreciate this is because he did not seriously consider the exclusion of silence that lies at the heart of the human experience: rather, he assumed, being talks too much, it is an inexhaustible muttering of Dionysus or the learned whisper of Apollo. Without considering the emergence of a tradition as the emergence of a radical space of exclusion of the animal, he failed to see the principle question of ontology. If we analyse the word we understand what is at stake: the meta that forecloses the animal physics (Agamben: 2004a: 79).Nietzsches refusal of metaphysics looked to a new humanity: it should have looked at how is what made as such, the paper bridge he placed over this caesura is where Nietzsches scheme fails. VI. Bibliography: Adorn, T. Horkheimer, M. 1972 Dialectic of enlightenment. London: Allen Lane. Agamben, G. 2004a: The Open: Man and Animal. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Agamben,G. 2004b: Interview with Giorgio Agamben Life, A Work of Art Withoutan Author: The State of Exception, the Administration of Disorder andPrivate Life. German Law Journal No. 5. Agamben, G. 1991: Language and Death: the Place of Negativity. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press. Baudrillard, J. 2004: The Violence of the Global. Benjamin, W: 1986: Reflections. New York: Schocken Books. Butler, J. 1990: Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge Butler, J: 1993: Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of sex. New York: Routledge. Delouse, G.1994: Difference and Repetition. London: Athlone Press. Delouse, G. Guitar, F. 1987: A Thousand Plateaus: capitalism schizophrenia. London: Athlone Press. Delouse, G. Guitar, F. 1983: Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism Schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota. Delouse, G. 1984: Nietzsche and Philosophy. New York: Columbia University Press. Delouse, G. Guitar, F. 1980: Capitalisme et Schizophrnie, tome 2 : Mille Plateaux. Paris: Editions de Minuit. Delouse, G. 1970: Nomad Thought. In, The New Nietzsche: ContemporaryStyles of Interpretation (Ed. Allinson, D.). New York: Delta Books. Derrida, J. 1976: Of Grammatology. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Pres. Derrida, J. 1973: Speech and Phenomena: and Other Essays on Husserls Theory of Signs. Evanston: Northwestern University Press. Foucault, M. 1999: History of Sexuality, Vol. 1: The Will to Know. Penguin: London. Foucault, M. 1994: The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. Vintage: London. Foucault, M. 1986: On Human Nature. In The Foucault Reader (Ed. Rabinow, P.). Berkeley: University of Berkeley Press. Foucault, M. 1975: Discipline and Punish. Penguin: London. Heidegger, M. 1992: Parmenides. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Heidegger, M. 1991: Volume Two: The Eternal Reccurence of the Same. London: Harper Collins. Heidegger, M. 1977: The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays. New York: Harper Row. Keeve, A. 1980: Introduction to the Reading of Hegel. New York: Cornell University Press. Alcan, J. 1981: The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis. New York: W. Norton. Laplace, J. 1989: New Foundations for Psychoanalysis. Oxford: Blackwell. Encircle, J. 1996: The Pedagogy of Philosophy. Radical Philosophy. No. 75, pp. 44. Nietzsche, F. 1992: Ecce Homo. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books Nietzsche, F. 1990: Twilight of the Idols. New York: Vintage Books. Nietzsche, F. 1991: The Anti-Christ. New York: Vintage Books Nietzsche, F. 1989: On the Genealogy of Morals. New York: Random House. Nietzsche, F. 1974: The Gay Science. New York: Vintage Books. Nietzsche, F. 1973: Beyond Good and Evil. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Nietzsche, F. 1969: Thus Spoke Zarathustra. London: Penguin Books. Nietzsche, F. 1968: The W ill to Power. New York: Vintage Books. Nietzsche, F. 1956: The Birth of Tragedy and The Genealogy of Morals. Garden City: New York. Nietzsche, F. 1924: Der Wanderer. Freiburg: C.F.Kant. Saussure, F. de. 1995: General Course in Linguistics. London: Gerald Duckworth. Wolf, C. 1980: A Model Childhood. New York: Farrar. Size, S. 2001: Welcome to the Desert of the Real. Verso: London.

Business Plan - 12716 Words

Business Plan Analysis Simulation: PEGASUS TRAVEL (Pegasus Travel is not technically a business plan but rather a Business Plan Analysis Simulation. The plan is based on an undergraduate project idea and a significant amount of additional research and written input from the authors. While the case contains enough depth to warrant a robust discussion on the Pegasus strategy and future direction as a bona fide business, the real objective is to aid the students in more effectively completing their own business plans.) 643 Pegasus Travel.com: * Fasten Your Seatbelts! A Business Plan Analysis and Simulation * Boston College Professors Michael Peters and Gregory Stoller adapted this business plan and prepared this case as the†¦show more content†¦Apart from the industry itself, the target market of seniors is growing significantly. The addition of baby boomers in five years means that seniors will continue to be the fastest growing demographic group. In 2004, about 27% of all seniors will have access to the Internet. Currently, research indicates that seniors spend 8.3 hours a week online, more time than the average college student. Furthermore, seniors have more disposable income, and time on their hands, due to the lack of financial or employment commitments. Seniors spend most of their recreational budget on traveling and want to explore new opportunities that have escaped them in the past. Pegasus plans to attract and retain customers through its advertising and services. Banner ads will be placed on the top-ten senior and baby boomers web sites in order to generate traffic an d create brand awareness. Print ads in leisure and senior magazines will supplement online advertising. A direct mail campaign including promotions, discounts and upcoming tours is also planned, for seniors who have become members of the web site community. In order to start-up the business, the Company foresees that it will require $2.1 million in venture capital. The high start-up costs are attributable to the aggressive marketing the Company will undertake. The main shareholders of the group will not be drawingShow MoreRelatedBusiness Plan For A Business Essay1708 Words   |  7 Pagesbrand-new business, expand an existing company, or get financing for a business venture, you will need to write a business plan. A business plan not only lends your business a sense of credibility, but also helps you to cover all your bases, increasing your chances of success. Although writing a business plan can be a lengthy, intimidating project, it is not necessarily difficult. Here is an overview of how to write a successful business plan. What to Include in Your Business Plan Your businessRead MoreBusiness Plan For A New Venture1355 Words   |  6 PagesA business plan can be used for beginning a new business, to create a more profitable business or for consideration of new services and ideas. A business plan is a written document that gives details on a business idea or venture and present the outlook of the business over a number of years. This plan will guide the business project management and operations, assist in vital decisions and measure performance. There are many types of business plans and not one of them is considered a universal planRead MoreEssay about Creating a Business Plan1119 Words   |  5 Pagesyou must have guidelines, so to speak, to know where you are heading in the future. That is why before you can start a business you need to draw up a detailed business plan. Business plans are considered blueprints. A business plan is what is needed to get your business off the ground and to attract potential investors. A business plan is way to show that you are in the business to make money. Introduce the company and the product/service idea for the new venture. Triple S Night Club is a new companyRead MoreBusiness Plan For An Casual Dining Mexican Restaurant1804 Words   |  8 PagesThe critical analysis essay is based on the business plan of an upcoming casual dining Mexican restaurant in an upmarket locality of Benowa Gardens, Gold Coast, Queensland. The restaurant is called Burrito Bar, which specialises in modern Mexican food along with alcoholic drinks and operates on a franchising model. The business plan was made by one Mr.Paddu for the purpose of procuring a bank loan/private funding to kick-start the project. The business plan follows the general format used in the restaurant/hospitalityRead MoreRenee Business Plan5082 Words   |  21 PagesBusiness Plan for a Startup Business The business plan consists of a narrative and several financial worksheets. The narrative template is the body of the business plan. It contains more than 150 questions divided into several sections. Work through the sections in any order that you want, except for the Executive Summary, which should be done last. Skip any questions that do not apply to your type of business. When you are finished writing your first draft, you’ll have a collection of small essaysRead MoreBusiness Plan For A Business1546 Words   |  7 Pagesenterprise, especially a business, usually with considerable initiative or risk†. They are usually characterized as people with greatly valued self-reliance, with high optimism and people who who strive for distinction through excellence. I am interested in starting my own basketball business and becoming an entrepreneur. In order to start a business I need a business plan. From research, I have learned that my business plan needs to have an executive summary, identification of my business, financial recordsRead MoreBusiness Plan For A Business840 Words   |  4 Pagesâ€Å"Business plans are statement of a business goals, reason they are attainable and plans on meeting it’ (FoxBuisness, 2013). A business plan maps the course and gives a detail plan on how these goals are achievable. It is also important to establish a solid business plan for funding. Some small business use venture capital, bank loans, personal funds, and private investors as sources of funding. The business plan must therefore, sell investors. A well-written convincing business plan can buy investorsRead MoreBusiness Plan1439 Words   |  6 PagesBusiness Plan What is Blueberry Nights? Type: bar and restaurant for young people Category: II. class Service method: plate service Menu type: A’la Carte Opening hours: Sunday to Wednesday 10:00-22:00 Thursday to Saturday 13:00-05:00 No day off Target market: students, tourists and residents Location: Budapest, Margit kà ¶rà ºt Few steps from Margaret Island Easy to reach by tram Seating capacity: 120 (80+40) 1st floor: kitchen area, 80 seated restaurant, bar, armchairsRead Morebusiness plan5494 Words   |  22 Pagesbecause we as a young generation that want to open new shop sold the â€Å"Keropok Leko†. OBJECTIVE OF THE ORGANIZATION Every business opportunity begins with the existence of various customers needs and wants for particular product or service. A need is something that is basic in life such as food, clothes and shelter. Therefore, our companies take these advantages and venture a business based on food industries. Our main activity is to manufacture keropok lekor that is made from fish paste, flour, and saltsRead MoreBusiness Plan For A Business1866 Words   |  8 Pages Business Plan Buiness model in theory and practice according to Wikipedia is used for a broad range of informal and forma l descriptions to represent the core aspects of a business, including the purposes of that business, its process, target customers, of ferings, strategies , infrastructure, organizational structures, trading practice, and operational processes and policies . Below, we would look at two kinds of business model (franchise and tradition al business) , their pros and cons, o r their

Essay about Violence Children Who Own The Streets

Violence: Children Who Own The Streets nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;There are many problems facing todays society. One of the problems is the violent condition that surrounds the lives of children in America. We are awarded of the violence among our juveniles because we read, hear and see it. The newspapers, magazines, news media, and our neighborhoods testify the living proof of the chaos. Everyone tries to find explanations of the causes and consequences of street violence and other aspects of the turbulent lives of young people. Yet, the problem facing our juveniles will not be solved over night. But thats not a reason enough to ignore the problem. It will only make matters worse and keep on doubling through the years. It is our†¦show more content†¦What ever they plant thats what they will produce. In depicting family disturbance, we encountered with interviews done by the Childrens Express teen journalists. One of the interviews is on Connie a twelve year old from Indianapolis expressing herself on violence. quot; Im just a person that would try to stay out of trouble and do what is right, but I sure wish I could change all the violence and stuff that I be around and all the trouble that my family go through. Some of my uncles do a lot of drugs and the polic e is always after them.quot; ( Kozol. 4). Diamond a fourteen year old from San Francisco also tells. quot; Im fourteen years old and I usually come down the street to hang out, just talk to friends. My homes not really functional and stuff, so I try to get away from it as much as possible. My mom, shes like manic-depressive and she hasnt worked in three years, and my sister is really abusive. Shes older, so she thinks shes the boss of everything and everybody, so I dont really like to be at home.quot; (Kozoc. 9). I think in order to know whats going with juveniles, its very important to listen to what they say. Thats why you will hear their voices. On his fifth birthday, Marks father gave him a gun. And this is what Mark ( 16 yrs. old) from Massachusetts says, quot;That was his thing-----we all had to learn how to shoot when we turned five years old . He made me go to Karate and wrestling. My father was veryShow MoreRelatedA Very Thoughtful Look Into Inner City Violence And The Rules Surrounding It1718 Words   |  7 PagesPart biography, part social view, a very thoughtful look into inner-city violence and the rules surrounding it. This book describes how his personal history with violence influenced his work with youth and the programs that he has started to support youth. Geoffrey Canada describes the progression of violence that had happened in his lifetime. He also points out that there is a disturbing difference between what the streets were like in the 1960s compared to those of today. Mr. Canada is aRead MoreCode Of The Street And My Understanding1345 Words   |  6 Pages Code of the Street And My Understanding Pramod Adhikari Sociology 101 CCBC, Essex Code of the Street And My Understanding Elijah Anderson’s Code of Street is an ethnographic study of several neighborhoods in Philadelphia in the early to mid-1990s. This book is mainly focus on the criminal elements, economical, educational, social, and judicial system in the African American communities. Anderson did several interviews, field observations and researches for four years to demonstrateRead MoreJuvenile Delinquent Essay1102 Words   |  5 Pagesjuveniles who commit a crime really naturally evil as many suggest, or are they their own products of the environment/society they live in? Are juveniles naturally born evil is a question that everyone asks. According to society every juvenile that commits a crime is born with it naturally. A Biological Theory considers delinquent behavior as predisposed and revolves around the idea that children are born to be criminals (Aguilera, Juvenile Justice). Those children that experience violence during theRead MoreThe inclination to violence stems from several circumstances of life among the poor the stigma of600 Words   |  3 PagesThe inclination to violence stems from several circumstances of life among the poor; the stigma of race, drug use and drug trafficking, and lack of employment, as well as the media and, family/peer association. The Code of the Streets by Elijah Anderson, is a groundbreaking essay the social scientist wrote, taking us inside of a world that most of us only read about. Anderson shows us how a frantic search for acceptance and respect governs social relations among the African American race; primar ilyRead MoreThe Effects Of Television Violence On Children978 Words   |  4 Pagesfor all ages. Every TV show has some kind of age limit whether it’s rated G or R, it’s not always easy for parents to moderate what their children are watching. Young children are very moldable, not only by the people around them, but what is on TV. I have conducted an experiment to see how much violence and aggression are in everyday television shows that children are likely to watch. I have watched three different half hour TV shows, tallying the amount of aggressive, and prosocial behaviors thatRead MoreOnibus 174 : A Documentary Or Non Fiction Movie1493 Words   |  6 PagesBrazil. It is a film, which tries to bring awareness to several issues affecting the Brazilian society including children of the streets and their invisibility as well as the systematic violence that occurs in the country. To do this, the directors used news cover clips from the scene, interviews with different scholars who discuss the issues of the country and interviews of those who knew Sandro on a personal level. The two directors, Jose Padilha and Felipa Lacerda, did extensive research on theRead MoreCauses Of Street Crimes790 Words   |  4 PagesThere are several reasons why street crimes are increasing in our society today. Unemployment, Violent Crimes, Lack of Education, and Poor Parenting Skills play a huge role in street crimes in our society. The reason being is because they all have an extreme effect on the children in many different ways. Like for instance, not having a father in a childs life can cause children to For example, unemployment is one of the main causes because it leads to crimes such as pick-pocketing. UnemployedRead MoreEssay On Gun Violence In Memphis1462 Words   |  6 PagesWhat can we do about the increasing gun violence in Memphis? I say ban all guns, because in recent years gun violence has escalated and has become an epidemic not only in our communities, but all over the world. Something must be done to decrease the number of deaths and injuries that occurs from gun violence. For many years now Memphis, TN, the city where I go to school has been nationally known as a city that is plagued by violence ranking second to Washington D.C. when it comes to violent crimesRead More Guns and Violence Essay828 Words   |  4 PagesGuns and Violence School shootings, gang violence, drive by shootings, murder, and thousands of acts of violence are committed every day. Members of our society criticize their own people for this violence while they continue to sit back and do nothing about it. These acts of violence have many contributing factors. Violence in our country today is escalating because we dont control the distribution of the guns sold. There are not enough restrictions on guns sold legally.Read MoreGang Violence On Our Streets1514 Words   |  7 Pages Gang Violence In Our Streets Gang violence has been around for a long time all the way back to the 1800 and have greatly increased all around the globe ever since. Gangs are a group of people that fight and kill other gangs over turf,money,pride, and drugs. People usually join gangs from around the age of 8 to the age 20. Most gang members join because they have been abused by their parents or because they don t have a family. Gangs treat each other like

Reaction Paper 12 Years a Slave Example For Students

Reaction Paper 12 Years a Slave Even though I have learned about the institution of slavery, I never thought of the multitude of disturbing situations that could extend from it. The most poignant aspects of the movie that hit home for me was that of the slave women. Their situations are uniquely tougher, and as a woman myself, it is unimaginable the atrocities that they faced commonly. The first situation that was eye opening- was that of Eliza, a slave mother, being forcibly separated from her children as she begged and pleaded the white master’s to not do the unthinkable. Just recalling the scene gives me a sharp chill down my spine. The reality sinks in that slaves were traded and bought like livestock, and children suddenly separated from their mother’s in an instant based off one white man’s decision and pocketbook. Lives irrevocably changed and shattered in a human auction house, very tough to witness. I think it was important for the director Steve McQueen to include the subtle emotional response of the white preacher, Ford, had to Eliza’s pleas. He tried to buy Eliza’s daughter as well but was refused and there was little he could do about it, but it showed his humanity even as a â€Å"superior white† male amongst an institution that just â€Å"is what it is. The second side story that was heartbreaking to watch and realize, was that of slave girl Patsey. Even though she was the most efficient and quickest cotton picker on the plantation, she had to face the unbearable duality of lust/hatred of her Master Epps- who seemed to be both infatuated and disgusted with himself for his feelings towards her. Patsey not only incurred regular rape from Epps (the rape scene was particularly brutal), but she also had to deal with the wrath of Mistress Epps, for she was not blind to her husband’s infidelities and regularly encouraged him to whip her. The scene where Patsey begs Solomon to strangle her was particularly depressing, for if I were in her situation, I too would find more peace in death. My heart cried most for Patsey, for her plight echoes what I know must have been a very commonplace occurrence for slave girls. This movie overall was intensely hard to sit through, but I feel that the vicious reality of it is something that was eye opening and important for those of us in the present to reflect on and understand. What the movie does so well is put history into perspective, forces viewers to recognize the everyday horrors that was the slavery institution, which was true and real not so long ago. The film was able to stir up a storm of different emotions for me, sadness, horror, disgust- but most importantly, grateful; grateful for my freedom and for the liberties that I take for granted every single day. This film well deserved the three Oscars that it won, if not, for reminding us all that life, liberty, and freedom should and must remain a natural human right- and that history does not repeat itself in this way ever again.

Opinion On Death Penalty Essay Example For Students

Opinion On Death Penalty Essay Death by execution has existed as a punishment since the dawn of time.Yet although this has existed seemingly forever, the question of its morality has also existed for that same amount of time.Killers kill innocent people, there is no question about that, but does that give us the right to kill these killers? I do not think so. Racism is often the driving force behind crime.Yet in a justice system that preaches equality, it too is led by racism.There is a pattern of evidence indicating racial disparities in the charging, sentencing, and imposition of the death penalty according to a 1990 U.S. Government report.An overwhelming majority of death row defendants since 1977 were executed for killing whites despite the fact that whites and blacks are victims of murder in approximately equal numbers.In Texas, for example, blacks found guilty of killing whites were found to be six times more likely to receive the death penalty that whites convicted of killing whites.Of the 3,061 inmates on death row 1,246 of them are black, making 40% of death row inmates black.Compare this to the fact that blacks make up 12% of the U.S. population. Furthermore, many black prisoners on death row were sentenced to death by all-white juries after prosecutors had deliberately excluded black people from the jury pool. We will write a custom essay on Opinion On Death Penalty specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now Racism alone is not the only problem with Capital Punishment.Many inmates on death row suffer from mental retardation.The 1984 ECOSOC safeguards state that the death penalty must not be carried out on persons who have become insane, while the ECOSOC resolution 1989/64 on the execution of the 1984 safeguards recommends that UN member states eliminate the death penalty for persons suffering from mental retardation or extremely limited competence. Amnesty International has documented the cases of more than 50 prisoners suffering from mental illness or mental retardation who have been executed in the U.S. in the past decade.Humanitarian standards maintain that mentally impaired people should not be held criminally responsible for their acts.The prohibition against executing insane recognizes that killing people who cannot comprehend the nature or purpose of their punishment is not a deterrent or retribution.Despite all this the mentally ill are still being executed. Innocent people will be killed if the death penalty is kept in the same way that it is used today.Three hundred fifty people convicted of capital crimes in the U.S. between 1900 and 1985 were innocent of the crimes charged, according to a 1987 study.Some prisoners escaped execution by minutes, but 23 were not so lucky and found innocent of their crimes after they had been put to death. A U.S. Congressional report by the House Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights in October 1993 listed 48 condemned men who had been freed from death row since 1972.The report blamed inadequate legal safeguards to prevent wrongful executions and listed numerous built-in flaws in the criminal justice system.The report concluded: Judging by past experience, a substantial number of death row inmates are indeed innocent, and there is a high risk that some of them will be executed. The death penalty violates the right to life, and subjects the prisoner to the ultimate form of cruel, inhumane or degrading punishment which goes against the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Declaration, adopted by the United Nations in 1948, proclaims each persons right to protection from deprivation of life, and it also states that no one shall be subjected to cruel or degrading punishment.The pre-meditated and cold-blooded killing of prisoners in state custody violates these rights.Over half the worlds countries have abolished in law or practice capital punishment.43 nations have abolished the death penalty since 1976, the year it was reinstated in the U.S., placing us among such bastions of fairness and justice as Iran and China. .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052 , .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052 .postImageUrl , .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052 .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052 , .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052:hover , .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052:visited , .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052:active { border:0!important; } .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052 .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052 { display: block; transition: background-color 250ms; webkit-transition: background-color 250ms; width: 100%; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #95A5A6; } .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052:active , .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052 .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052 .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052 .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052 .ctaButton { background-color: #7F8C8D!important; color: #2980B9; border: none; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: none; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 26px; moz-border-radius: 3px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: none; width: 80px; min-height: 80px; background: url(https://artscolumbia.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts/assets/images/simple-arrow.png)no-repeat; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; } .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052 .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052 .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .ucd4c2e87240790c66ecce2fa7ed5b052:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: Missionaries and Education in Bengal EssayThe new evangelization calls for followers of Christ who are unconditionally pro-life: who will proclaim, celebrate and serve the Gospel of life in every situation.A sign of hope is the increasing recognition that the dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil.Modern society has the means of protecting itself, without definitively denying criminals the chance to reform.I renew the appeal I made most recently at Christmas for a consensus to end the death penalty, which is both cruel and unnecessary. -Pope John Paul II, January 27, 1999, St. LouisThe death penalty which violates these rights cannot be justified as a necessary public safety measure because detailed research, both in the U.S. and other countries, has produced no evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than other punishments.This is not surprising, most persons who murder are not thinking rationally when they commit the crime.The threat of execution at some future date does not enter the minds of killers acting under of drugs and/or alcohol, in the grip of fear or rage, or while panicking during the commission of another crime. Personally I feel that the death penalty is an immoral act of legislature which does not take into account the prejudices of the people who enforce the law.Racism exists along with the execution of the innocent and mentally retarded.This inhumane act serves the same purpose as life in jail but at a much greater cost.We should spend more money on crime prevention than the enforcement of punishments.