Blog Post for Phenomenon of Globalization -myassignmenthelp.com

Question: Write about theBlog Post for Phenomenon of Globalization. Answer: Climate change is the burning topic for the multifaceted implication that it has on the world today and at this juncture being alarmed about the crisis is not sufficient enough. Climate change has impacted in multiple aspects started from rise in the levels, disruption in military warfare, food shortages due to drought, dearth and improper farming consequently impacting the entire ecological balance (Dalby 2014). The artificiality that has invaded into the world is partly responsible for the unnatural upturn of events leading to global warming and unpredictability in climatic pattern. In this context it is essential to take into consideration the phenomenon of globalization which has increased the technological advancement, urbanization, war and use of weapons therefore intervening with the natural balance of the earth . This transformation has threatened the natural stability of the earth. As per environmentalists, this scarcity can affect human beings not only on a materialistic level but also on a personal level. According to Feminist analysis of environmental conflict, it is rather insensitive to forget women and security that are often at the brink of violation in the face of environmental conflicts (Detraz 2009). Like an increase in population rate can result in severe scarcities, rules and regulations that are imposed in order to deal with that scarcity can become threatening as well. The negative side of environmental degradation and its effects on human beings can assume larger proportions if went overlooked for long (Detraz 2009). Eco-feminists in this sphere urge to respect the human-nature dichotomy to develop a sustainable method for the protection of life forms in its entirety that deals with environmental conflicts and climate transformations. Bibliography list: Dalby, S., 2014. Rethinking geopolitics: Climate security in the Anthropocene.Global Policy,5(1), pp.1-9. Detraz, N., 2009. Environmental security and gender: Necessary shifts in an evolving debate.Security Studies,18(2), pp.345-369.

The Heresy Of Galileo Essay Example For Students

The Heresy Of Galileo Essay ? THE HERESY OF GALILEOGalileo was condemned by the Inquisition, not for his own brilliant theories, but becausehe stood up for his belief in Copernicuss theory that the earth was not, as the Church insisted, thecenter of the universe, but that rather, the universe is heliocentric. Galileo was a man oftremendous intellect and imagination living in a era dominated by the Catholic Church, whichattempted to control the people by dictating their own version of reality. Any person whopublicly questioned Church doctrine ran the chance of condemnation and punishment. If mancould think, man could question, and the Church could lose its authority over the masses. Thiscould not be tolerated in the 17th century, when the Church had the power to dictate reality. Copernicus probably avoided a similar fate by confining his opinions to his students and theuniversity milieu, and in fact his theories were not published until the time of his death. We will write a custom essay on The Heresy Of Galileo specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now To be tried by the Inquisition was something that nobody could take lightly. Although inGalileos time the Inquisition was becoming more and more lenient, it was known to have usedtorture in the past and to have sent many heretics to burn at the stake. As late as 1600, this fatehad befallen the Italian thinker Giordano Bruno, a one-time Dominican friar who had adopted apantheistic philosophy of nature. From the summer of 1605, Galileo was private tutor of mathematics to young PrinceCosimo de Medici, son of the Grand Duke of Tuscany. Teacher and pupil became sincerelyattached to each other by mutual affection and deference, and this bond lasted to the end ofGalileos life. Galileo remained a good friend of the Grand Duke as well. In the summer of 1611,the Grand Duke invited Galileo to a dinner party at his court. The Duke liked to gather greatscholars around him, especially when he had illustrious guests, to hear them talk about issues ofinterest to the learned world. At this dinner the discussion centered on floating bodies. Galileomaintained that bodies can float only if their specific gravity is less than that of water. Among thedinner guests there were, however, some followers of Aristotles philosophies, and they arguedthat bodies float if their shape is wide and smooth so they cannot cut through the resistance of thewater. Floating bodies were a topic on which Galileo was especi ally knowledgeable, as he hadbeen interested in the subject since, when as a student, he had read Archimedes. He was able tosupport his point so brilliantly that one of the guests of honor, Maffeo Cardinal Barberini, sidedwith him. Years later, Cardinal Barberini became Pope Urban VIII and turned against Galileo,becoming one of his bitter enemies, but at that moment he was as congenial as one could be,sincerely admiring Galileos dialectical skill. Perhaps to please the Cardinal, the Grand Dukeasked Galileo to put his argument into writing, which he did. The result was The Discourse onFloating Bodies. Galileos sharp, almost sarcastic wit made him especially suited to arguments and debates,of which he was to have many in the following years. Some of these resulted in famous writingsthat added to his lasting glory; many antagonized people of his time and turned many of them intoenemies. The Peripatetics at the Grand Dukes table were not very dangerous as potential enemies,but his next adversary was. Even before the Discourse on Floating Bodies was published in1612, Galileo was engaged in a conflict with an astronomer whose name he did not know and wasnot to find out for over a year the Jesuit father Christopher Scheiner (1575-1650). In 1610,Galileo had claimed to be the first discoverer of sunspots; so had Father Scheiner, and the twohad entered into a bitter dispute. Father Scheiner had communicated his opinions on hisobservations of sunspots in several letters to Mark Welser, a German patron of science. Perhapsto avoid direct criticism, Scheiner wrote under a pen name. Mark Welser published Scheinersletters and sent them to Galileo for comment without revealing the name of the author. .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842 , .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842 .postImageUrl , .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842 .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842 , .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842:hover , .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842:visited , .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842:active { border:0!important; } .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842 .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842 { 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; } .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842:active , .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842 .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842 .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842 .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842 .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; } .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842 .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842 .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u84a6b80062d5037f48a4f7d0c24b7842:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: The Geography of Art EssayGalileo replied in three Letters on Sunspots addressed to Welser (in Italian, whichScheiner could not read and had to have translated, while Scheiner had not written in his nativeGerman, but in Latin). In his letters, Galileo severely criticized Scheiners views. The greatest significance of these Letters on Sunspots, as far as the Church wasconcerned, was that for the first time in print Galileo had openly endorsed Copernicuss theory asa reality and not as a mere hypothesis, and that he had used his own discoveries as proofs in favorof Copernicanism. Just as important, he had unwittingly antagonized a Jesuit, the first of many. The Jesuits were powerful in the Church, and in particular they were advisers on educationalmatters. It was unfortunate indeed that so many of them sooner or later should withdraw theirprevious friendship, respect, or even indifference toward Galileo to pass into the enemy camp. The trouble, however, initially came from other quarters. In 1613, Galileo learned fromFather Benedetto Castelli, one of his most beloved pupils, that in the course of a discussion at thecourt of Tuscany, the dowager Grand Duchess, Christina de Lorena, had taken the stand that theearth could not move because its motion would contradict the Holy Scriptures. Galileo decided that the time had come to explain his views on the relations betweenscience and faith. He did this in his Letter to Castelli, which he sent, in manuscript copies, notonly to his pupil Castelli, but also to several friends. Soon afterward, in his Letter to the GrandDuchess Cristina, he elaborated what he had written to Castelli. It was lofty and solemn andshowed that Galileos faith in nature and its laws went side by side with his faith in God. Itcontains passages which are among Galileos most beautifulToday, these views are widely shared and officially recognized by the Church. In fact, in1893, Pope Leo XIII wrote a paper which presented the churchs official point of view concerningthe relationships between science and scripture; this statement cannot be distinguished fromGalileos. Even in Galileos time, the highest authorities of the Church did not call his letters toCastelli and Cristina into question; but some in the Church did criticize them. To these few whohad l ittle understanding of new developments in science, Galileos writings seemed an outsidersinterference in religious matters. A Dominican friar denounced the Letter to Castelli to theInquisition. Another Dominican, Father Tomaso Caccini, who had once been disciplined for beinga scandal-maker, preached a sermon against Galileo in the popular church of Santa MariaNovella in Florence. He concluded by saying that mathematics was an art of the devil, thatmathematicians were the source of all heresies and should be ousted from all countries. Shortlyafterward, he too testified against Galileo before the Inquisition. Although there was secrecy surrounding the Inquisition, Galileo became aware of whatwas going on in Rome and decided his presence was needed there. He was warmly welcomedand stayed at the Villa Medici, the Tuscan embassy, on the Grand Dukes order. Although hisfriends strongly advised against it, Galileo immediately resumed his campaign in favor ofCopernicus through intense talks and discussions with almost everyone of importance in Romeand through several new writings. In fact, several cardinals did their best to persuade him to keepquiet in public about Copernicus, regardless of his private belief, but Galileo could not bedeterred. Ultimately, the Inquisition never really questioned the theological views that Galileo hadexpressed in his letters; and he was able to clear himself of charges of heresy and blasphemyconcerning the nature of God. The Inquisition, however, did denounce Galileo for his defense ofCopernicuss theories, and on order of the Pope, admonished Galileo that he was not to hold,teach, or defend the condemned opinion of Copernicus. A few days later, Copernicuss book, DeRevolutionibus, which had been dedicated to a Pope, and which the Pope had accepted, and withwhich the Church had found no fault until Galileo had started to present it as reality, wascondemned and prohibited until it should be corrected. Yet, the Roman Catholic Church hadtaken no action against Copernicuss books or his ideas until Galileo undertook his campaign toconvert the theologians. At the hands of Galileo, the heliocentric system threatened thegeocentric and, much more serious, Gods creation was becoming an object of direct humanobservation which could be interpreted without the help of the Scriptures or of religion. In short,Galileo was condemned because he could not keep his opinions to himself and could not resist thetemptation to expose the ignorance, deceit, and manipulation of the powerful religious leaders ofthe time. .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d , .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d .postImageUrl , .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d , .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d:hover , .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d:visited , .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d:active { border:0!important; } .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d { 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; } .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d:active , .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d .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; } .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .ub2222b04f945ed9c76d5a9fb3ad9310d:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: Essay about The Secret Life of Bees Movie Review EssayHistory Essays The Heresy Of Galileo Essay Example For Students The Heresy Of Galileo Essay ? THE HERESY OF GALILEOGalileo was condemned by the Inquisition, not for his own brilliant theories, but becausehe stood up for his belief in Copernicuss theory that the earth was not, as the Church insisted, thecenter of the universe, but that rather, the universe is heliocentric. Galileo was a man oftremendous intellect and imagination living in a era dominated by the Catholic Church, whichattempted to control the people by dictating their own version of reality. Any person whopublicly questioned Church doctrine ran the chance of condemnation and punishment. If mancould think, man could question, and the Church could lose its authority over the masses. Thiscould not be tolerated in the 17th century, when the Church had the power to dictate reality. Copernicus probably avoided a similar fate by confining his opinions to his students and theuniversity milieu, and in fact his theories were not published until the time of his death. We will write a custom essay on The Heresy Of Galileo specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now To be tried by the Inquisition was something that nobody could take lightly. Although inGalileos time the Inquisition was becoming more and more lenient, it was known to have usedtorture in the past and to have sent many heretics to burn at the stake. As late as 1600, this fatehad befallen the Italian thinker Giordano Bruno, a one-time Dominican friar who had adopted apantheistic philosophy of nature. From the summer of 1605, Galileo was private tutor of mathematics to young PrinceCosimo de Medici, son of the Grand Duke of Tuscany. Teacher and pupil became sincerelyattached to each other by mutual affection and deference, and this bond lasted to the end ofGalileos life. Galileo remained a good friend of the Grand Duke as well. In the summer of 1611,the Grand Duke invited Galileo to a dinner party at his court. The Duke liked to gather greatscholars around him, especially when he had illustrious guests, to hear them talk about issues ofinterest to the learned world. At this dinner the discussion centered on floating bodies. Galileomaintained that bodies can float only if their specific gravity is less than that of water. Among thedinner guests there were, however, some followers of Aristotles philosophies, and they arguedthat bodies float if their shape is wide and smooth so they cannot cut through the resistance of thewater. Floating bodies were a topic on which Galileo was especi ally knowledgeable, as he hadbeen interested in the subject since, when as a student, he had read Archimedes. He was able tosupport his point so brilliantly that one of the guests of honor, Maffeo Cardinal Barberini, sidedwith him. Years later, Cardinal Barberini became Pope Urban VIII and turned against Galileo,becoming one of his bitter enemies, but at that moment he was as congenial as one could be,sincerely admiring Galileos dialectical skill. Perhaps to please the Cardinal, the Grand Dukeasked Galileo to put his argument into writing, which he did. The result was The Discourse onFloating Bodies. Galileos sharp, almost sarcastic wit made him especially suited to arguments and debates,of which he was to have many in the following years. Some of these resulted in famous writingsthat added to his lasting glory; many antagonized people of his time and turned many of them intoenemies. The Peripatetics at the Grand Dukes table were not very dangerous as potential enemies,but his next adversary was. Even before the Discourse on Floating Bodies was published in1612, Galileo was engaged in a conflict with an astronomer whose name he did not know and wasnot to find out for over a year the Jesuit father Christopher Scheiner (1575-1650). In 1610,Galileo had claimed to be the first discoverer of sunspots; so had Father Scheiner, and the twohad entered into a bitter dispute. Father Scheiner had communicated his opinions on hisobservations of sunspots in several letters to Mark Welser, a German patron of science. Perhapsto avoid direct criticism, Scheiner wrote under a pen name. Mark Welser published Scheinersletters and sent them to Galileo for comment without revealing the name of the author. .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd , .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd .postImageUrl , .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd , .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd:hover , .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd:visited , .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd:active { border:0!important; } .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd { 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; } .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd:active , .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd .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; } .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u12c803ecc4125c2cb358d23337f654bd:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: Respect EssayGalileo replied in three Letters on Sunspots addressed to Welser (in Italian, whichScheiner could not read and had to have translated, while Scheiner had not written in his nativeGerman, but in Latin). In his letters, Galileo severely criticized Scheiners views. The greatest significance of these Letters on Sunspots, as far as the Church wasconcerned, was that for the first time in print Galileo had openly endorsed Copernicuss theory asa reality and not as a mere hypothesis, and that he had used his own discoveries as proofs in favorof Copernicanism. Just as important, he had unwittingly antagonized a Jesuit, the first of many. The Jesuits were powerful in the Church, and in particular they were advisers on educationalmatters. It was unfortunate indeed that so many of them sooner or later should withdraw theirprevious friendship, respect, or even indifference toward Galileo to pass into the enemy camp. The trouble, however, initially came from other quarters. In 1613, Galileo learned fromFather Benedetto Castelli, one of his most beloved pupils, that in the course of a discussion at thecourt of Tuscany, the dowager Grand Duchess, Christina de Lorena, had taken the stand that theearth could not move because its motion would contradict the Holy Scriptures. Galileo decided that the time had come to explain his views on the relations betweenscience and faith. He did this in his Letter to Castelli, which he sent, in manuscript copies, notonly to his pupil Castelli, but also to several friends. Soon afterward, in his Letter to the GrandDuchess Cristina, he elaborated what he had written to Castelli. It was lofty and solemn andshowed that Galileos faith in nature and its laws went side by side with his faith in God. Itcontains passages which are among Galileos most beautifulToday, these views are widely shared and officially recognized by the Church. In fact, in1893, Pope Leo XIII wrote a paper which presented the churchs official point of view concerningthe relationships between science and scripture; this statement cannot be distinguished fromGalileos. Even in Galileos time, the highest authorities of the Church did not call his letters toCastelli and Cristina into question; but some in the Church did criticize them. To these few whohad l ittle understanding of new developments in science, Galileos writings seemed an outsidersinterference in religious matters. A Dominican friar denounced the Letter to Castelli to theInquisition. Another Dominican, Father Tomaso Caccini, who had once been disciplined for beinga scandal-maker, preached a sermon against Galileo in the popular church of Santa MariaNovella in Florence. He concluded by saying that mathematics was an art of the devil, thatmathematicians were the source of all heresies and should be ousted from all countries. Shortlyafterward, he too testified against Galileo before the Inquisition. Although there was secrecy surrounding the Inquisition, Galileo became aware of whatwas going on in Rome and decided his presence was needed there. He was warmly welcomedand stayed at the Villa Medici, the Tuscan embassy, on the Grand Dukes order. Although hisfriends strongly advised against it, Galileo immediately resumed his campaign in favor ofCopernicus through intense talks and discussions with almost everyone of importance in Romeand through several new writings. In fact, several cardinals did their best to persuade him to keepquiet in public about Copernicus, regardless of his private belief, but Galileo could not bedeterred. Ultimately, the Inquisition never really questioned the theological views that Galileo hadexpressed in his letters; and he was able to clear himself of charges of heresy and blasphemyconcerning the nature of God. The Inquisition, however, did denounce Galileo for his defense ofCopernicuss theories, and on order of the Pope, admonished Galileo that he was not to hold,teach, or defend the condemned opinion of Copernicus. A few days later, Copernicuss book, DeRevolutionibus, which had been dedicated to a Pope, and which the Pope had accepted, and withwhich the Church had found no fault until Galileo had started to present it as reality, wascondemned and prohibited until it should be corrected. Yet, the Roman Catholic Church hadtaken no action against Copernicuss books or his ideas until Galileo undertook his campaign toconvert the theologians. At the hands of Galileo, the heliocentric system threatened thegeocentric and, much more serious, Gods creation was becoming an object of direct humanobservation which could be interpreted without the help of the Scriptures or of religion. In short,Galileo was condemned because he could not keep his opinions to himself and could not resist thetemptation to expose the ignorance, deceit, and manipulation of the powerful religious leaders ofthe time. .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70 , .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70 .postImageUrl , .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70 .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70 , .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70:hover , .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70:visited , .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70:active { border:0!important; } .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70 .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70 { 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; } .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70:active , .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70 .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70 .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70 .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70 .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; } .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70 .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70 .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u4dfabe5f3e5a9bb0caabe2c091585a70:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: Job Satisfaction at Infosys and Its Implications for Motivating Employees at Infosys Sample EssayHistory Essays

Baryons essays

Baryons essays All particles can be classified into two broad categories: leptons and hadrons. The main difference between the two is whether they interact through the strong interaction. Hadrons are particles that interact through all four fundamental interactions of nature, which include, strong, electromagnetic, weak, and gravitational interactions. Hadrons, the strongly interacting particles, can be further subdivided into two classes based on their internal composition: mesons and baryons. Originally, mesons and baryons were classified according to their masses. Baryons were heavier than mesons, and both were heavier than leptons. Today mesons and baryons are distinguished by their internal structure. Baryons have masses greater than the proton mass. All hadrons are composed of two or three fundamental particles, which came to be known as quarks. A quark is always combined with one or two other quarks. According to the original model proposed by Murray Gell-Mann and George Zweig in 1963, there were three types of quarks indicated by the symbols u, d, and s. These were given the arbitrary names up, down, and sideways (now referred to as strange). Associated with each quark is an anti-quark, which are the antimatter equivalents of quarks, opposite in electric charge. Later evidence allowed theorists to propose the existence of several more quarks: charm(c), top (t), and bottom (b). These six quarks species are paired with their flavors: up and down, top and bottom, and charm and strange. A baryon is a "heavy" subatomic particle having strong interactions (a hadron) which either is a nucleon or can transform or decays into a final state of stable particles including a single nucleon plus eventually some additional electrons, photons, neutrinos and/or nucleon-anti-nucleon pairs. This definition is only suitable if the quality characterizing a baryon is conserved in all involved reactions or decays and this ...

Effects of Font Size in Standardized Testing Research Paper

Effects of Font Size in Standardized Testing - Research Paper Example In an experiment to determine how types of font and font sizes affect people’s ability to read as well as the time they take to read a given piece of writing, researchers reported that font size of 14 is more legible than font size of 12. Similarly, people could read faster under font size 14 as compared to font size 12 (Bernard, Liao and Mills n.p.). This identifies impacts on ability to understand and respond to written materials such as written tests and is essential in determining effectiveness of a test. A test on course content is for example effective when it is free from confounds such as font size barriers. This paper investigates existence of font size effect on standardized tests. It aims at determining existence of a significant relationship between font size in tests and students’ performance. Such a relationship will establish a basis for determination of the most efficient font size for testing potentials and will allow for accurate determination of stude nts’ abilities through written tests. Results of the research are further applicable to employers in their employee selection process. It allows them an efficient basis for determining recruiters’ accurate potentials. ... In this experiment, font size defines the size with which words are presented in tests, while students’ performance defines students’ scores from tests. The research anticipates a significant positive relationship between the variables. Methods Participants The research participants will be a group of psychology students. A sample size of 45 students will be used. Materials Research materials will include sets of examination materials; test papers with different font sizes, answer booklets, and pens. Design The research proposes a quasi-experimental design with a within group testing. The sample will form a single group that will be subjected to repeated tests. Stratified random sampling design will be applied in generating the research sample because of its advantages of generating a representative sample without inducing bias (Lim and Ting 14- 17). Procedure Ethical approval will be obtained for the research before seeking the school administration’s consent fo r implementation. Stratified random sampling method will then be used to select students from different psychology classes but who share a common unit. The sampled students will then be informed of the scope of the research, its application, and involved ethical issues before asking for their voluntary consent to participate. The participants will then be subjected to an examination, under normal test conditions, but with different font size print outs that will be randomly allocated to participants. The fonts will be 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14. The procedure will be repeated for four different tests. Quantitative analysis will be used for the data. Descriptive statistics will be generated to identify characteristics of students’ performance by

Journal writting ( refer to the attachment) Essay - 1

Journal writting ( refer to the attachment) - Essay Example The reason for trying to classify things and people is because we want to simplify things and reduce the task of processing information. Stereotypes are â€Å"beliefs about the personal attributes of a group of people† (Myers, 1999 p336) Stereotypes may be positive or negative, accurate or inaccurate (Jussim, McCauley & Lee, 1995). Stereotypes may be classified by their characteristics, appearance, activities, occupations, interests, and goals in their lives. Commenting on gender stereotypes (Iackman and Senter (1981) enumerate that people are stereotyped according to the ethnic background and nationality. For eg. Italians are amorous, British are cool and so on†¦They can also be grouped according to their race. Eg. African Americans can dance or Jews can’t dance. They can be segregated even according to their occupation- for e.g Lecturers are intelligent but absent minded or Accountants are boring. No human is perfect and as such are bound to make errors in judgment. We also hold a lot of biases because we deliberately tend to adjust information to suit these biases. â€Å"All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy† is a very famous saying that is 100% true. Both leisure and play are vital to a child’s all round development. Both learning and development takes place only through play and therefore it is inevitable that a child is given time for that. According to the children’s charter of the United Nations – â€Å"The child shall not be admitted to employment before an appropriate age; the child shall in no case be caused or permitted to engage in any occupation or employment which would prejudice their health or education, or interfere with their physical, mental or moral development† (Principle 9) While leisure provides an adult with an opportunity to boost his self esteem and self worth, play provides this platform for children. Play is

Mr and Mrs Andrews Painting Analysis

Mr and Mrs Andrews Painting Analysis I chose to make the comparison between Gainsboroughs Mr Mrs Andrews and Shonebares Mr Mrs Andrews Without Their Heads because although the titles are similar and the concept is similar, there are distinct differences. The fundamental differences stem from the fact that Shonebare used mannequins, whereas Gainsborough painted in oil on canvas. Shonebare has excluded the landscape whereas Gainsborough has included his beloved landscape which is an important part of his paintings. These two artists are from two different backgrounds, different races and 235 years apart. The two pieces are an ocean apart: Gainsboroughs painting is hung in The National Gallery, London while Shonebares work is installed in The National Gallery of Canada, Ottawa. Similarities The important differences in the two pieces are Gainsborough has a landscape in the background, whereas Shonebare has excluded this which alters the subject completely. For Gainsborough, the landscape was extremely important and by combining portraiture with landscape, this helped him to cover his love of landscape and at the same time earned a living, but it also gave us an historical insight into the landscapes in that period. Gainsboroughs sitters almost appear secondary, with the Andrews sitting under the oak tree and just about appearing in the portrait. The fact that Shonebare excludes the landscape is significant as the landscape depicts the wealth and status of Mr Andrews and by excluding this, Shonebare has appropriated a degree of this power and wealth. Gainsborough cursed the face business but Shonebares pieces without heads would not have worked in Gainsboroughs time for the simple fact that portraiture was popular in the mid 18th century. Portraitures were a way of indic ating to the world that a person had arrived. The face/eyes are the one thing that helps to give a human being identity it is like the window of a persons character and soul and by excluding this, there is an emptiness in Shonebares story, although one could argue that by being faceless the viewers can decide on the characters for themselves. Another significant factor in Shonebares Mr Mrs Andrew is by not having any heads, the eyes are drawn immediately to the beautiful vibrant fabrics. The Dutch Wax fabrics are important signifiers of Africa in Shonebares installation and although this is associated with Africa, it is in fact printed fabric based on Indonesians batik, manufactured in the Netherlands, Britain and other countries and exported to West Africa. This cloth has proved to be a rich and adaptable material, both literally and metaphorically, and it is vibrant and theatrical, although this particular installation is incongruous as the material does not marry up with the pe riod designs of the mid 18th century as it would have been highly unlikely gentlemen and ladies would have dressed in clothing from the sub-Continent, even though some of these materials are extremely expensive. Include in here Shonebares technique(why did he use material?)/Gainsboroughs brushstrokes (how has he managed to achieve such reality in his fabric? There is also something quite unsavoury about decapitated heads with the bodies still looking alive and I find the Shonebares mannequins quite surreal and disturbing having looked at this several times. Why however did Shonebare use headless characters? One of the reasons I expect could well be he wanted the characters to be mysterious but it is more likely that because Gainsboroughs painting is a celebration of deference and by being headless, Shonebare has somehow deflated their status. The eyes of Gainsboroughs Mr Mrs Andrews are staring straight at viewers, inviting them into their world. Expand here. In comparison to her neck, however, Gainsboroughs Mrs Andrews has extremely narrow shoulders which seems out of proportion to the rest of her body, and I wonder if this was naturally so or if it was to underscore that she was the subordinate of the two. Mrs Andrews faint smile indicates decorum although her narrow shoulders and posture reveals a degree of subjugation and possibly domination by her confident, no-nonsense husband. Shonebares Mrs Andrews posture has revealed a more confident looking woman with the shoulders being broader and the fact that the couple looks more equal has automatically transformed Shonebares mannequins into the 21st century. Gainsboroughs painting on the other hand is an anachronism of the past with the man standing next to his belongings: his wife, dog and gun and his land ownership in the background. Expand on Gainsborough here. Althou gh Shonebares installation is inside a building and there is just a plain background, he has managed to conjure up a feeling of a couple being outside of a building and the Rococo style bench could well have assisted in making this possible. When I look at Shonebares piece, I am thinking landed gentry but on looking again, my eyes tells me that there is incongruity as these bright colours would be classified as far too garish for these upwardly mobile folks in the middle of the English countryside. It shows Mrs Andrews in fine silk clothing, sitting on a Rococo style bench, sitting primly, while Mr Andrews is portrayed as a casually dressed gentleman with a dog and a gun, standing proudly before his sprawling land. Expand on both Mr Andrews clothes, figure and posture. I saw Mr Mrs Andrews at the National Gallery in late November 2009 and it is a relatively small oil on canvas, measuring 69.8 x 119.4 cms. It lacked that stiffness and grandeur associated with huge canvasses of that period. The young couple are shown in their Suffolk surroundings and it shows a distinctive style of portraiture, which does convey a degree of spontaneity and casualness, although that is not strictly true as the painting is highly organised. Robert Andrews would have been eager to display his latest agricultural advancement with the mechanical seed drill which was unusual in the mid-18 th century. Expand on Gainsboroughs landscape. Why did Shonebare not have a landscape/background? Why did he chose to have a 3-d installation? Could he have achieved a realistic landscape of that size in post-Modern Britain? Both artists are from completely different backgrounds and eras and to understand these pieces a little better, it is important to look in further details at their lives. Yinka Shonebare MBE was born 234 years later, in London in 1962 to Nigerian parents and lived in Battersea until his parents relocated to Lagos when he was 3. His father, a lawyer, wanted him to also study law but at 17 Shonebare returned to London and at 19 he chose to study art. He received his BA from Byam Shaw (now part of Central St Martins College of Art Design) and his MA from Goldsmith College, London University. A month into his art course he became seriously ill with a rare viral infection which attacked his spine and left him temporarily paralysed. He is now partially paralysed and walks using a stick. While at art school Shonebare was questioned by a lecturer about his choice of subject matter and why was it not more African? This started his journey of using Dutch Wax fabric as an apt metaphor for the entangled relationship between Africa and Europe in his installations. It has proved to be a rich and adaptable material, with the flexibility to be used in his installations, his paintings and in other projects he has undertaken. Shonebare works across the media of painting, sculpture, photography and filmmaking and has won several prizes, shortlisted for the Turner prize in 2004 and has been awarded the commission to make a work for the Trafalgar Square Fourth plinth in 2010. In 2005 he was awarded the MBE an award he has chosen to use as part of his artistic identity and uses this wherever his name is written. Thomas Gainsborough was born in Sudbury, Suffolk, in 1727, fifth son of a cloth merchant. Having a keen interest in drawing as a child, at the tender age of 13, he was sent to London to study art in 1740. He was a founding member of the Royal Academy, but unlike his contemporary, Joshua Reynolds, he was never knighted. Gainsboroughs natural preference was always for landscape painting, but it was impossible for an English artist to make a living painting landscapes and so in 1748 he moved back to Suffolk where be became known as a portrait painter. He hated portrait painting and, like Reynolds, this was his main form of income but he felt it bounded him to the wishes of his sitters. .Nothing is worse than gentlemen I do portraits to live and landscapes because I love them, Gainsborough once said to a friend. In another letter to a friend he complained about the pressure of society portraiture, which he described as the cursd Face Business. Gainsborough was one of the most important English artists of his time. He was impressed by the natural rhythm of Dutch landscape paintings and became a dedicated admirer of Van Dyck. The focus of country life as a centre of power and privilege was faithfully reflected in Gainsboroughs art, and in Mr Mrs Andrews the landscape reflected this power and self-esteem. In this painting, his most famous, it shows Robert Andrews, Gainsboroughs childhood friend, with his wife Frances on their estate. They had been married on 10th November 1748 when he was 23 and she was 16 and it is believed that this was painted soon after their marriage. Robert Andrews inherited half of his fathers estate and the other half of the neighbouring pieces of land from his wifes father, William Carter. In Mr Mrs Andrews Gainsborough succeeded in painting both a portrait of the client and of the landscape which is natural and in fact it is possible to relocate the very tree under which the Andrews sat. Unlike the French artificial geometric gardens, he was concerned with freeing painting from any kind of stylisation although Gainsborough sometimes included his own landscape from his imagination.

My Teaching Philosophy :: Education

My Teaching Philosophy Being an effective teacher is very important to me. I have had many teachers that I will never choose to model, but I also have those who were so wonderful that I will always hope to become like them. Every educator I have had has affected my life in some way and helped me to develop my ever changing philosophy of education. As I begin my journey into the world of art education, I will take all of my experiences with me as learning tools for the future to help me become an effective teacher. I will achieve my goal of becoming an effective teacher and positive role model by developing my views on the nature of students, the nature of knowledge, the purpose of a public education, curriculum and plans for my professional development. Taking a look at my views on the nature of students, I have come to realize many things. Children are born with a natural curiosity. They are excited by discovering new things. Every child is a blank canvas that is begging to be painted upon, desiring to be shown their world. However, a child’s learning ability relies on factors than a basic human instinct to learn. These two factors are heredity and environment. I believe in multiple intelligences and there is no standard to say one child is more intelligent than another, but due to genetics, some children naturally learn more quickly than others. This has been evident in my own life. An example is the students I observed for Education 210 were divided into groups according to their math abilities. This division was not to separate smart from unintelligent students, but to allow the students to learn at a level best for them. Each child learns at a different rate; some just catch on faster than others. I believe that environment has a much stronger effect on a students learning ability than heredity does. The child who is encouraged to learn is much more likely to succeed than one who is not encouraged.