The attempt by the government Essay Example for Free

The attempt by the government Essay A Slum refers to informal settlements within urban areas or cities. The informal settlements depict inadequate housing and miserable condition with reference to living standards (Meade p 43). In the slums, numerous individuals seek housing facilities within small living spaces. The slums also lack basic local authority services such as sanitation, collection of waste, water, drainage systems, street lighting, and emergency roads. Most slums also lack schools, hospital, and public places that might offer adequate environment for social amenities. The experience of France illustrates the essence of slums within the modern society (Oberti p 58). Crime and unemployment are on the rise within the slums because of the poor living conditions and inaccessibility of the municipal services. UN-HABITAT offers a clear definition of the slum household as the group of individuals who live under the same roof in a city experiencing lack of durable housing facilities, enough living space, and access to clean water, sanitation, and security of tenure to prevent evictions that are forceful in nature. Development of Slums Development of slums in France results from two factors: population growth and governance. The modern society experiences almost half the population of the world within the cities. Migration of people from the rural areas to the cities in France arises from several factors. These factors include low income in relation to agriculture, push and pull migration forces, prospects of better jobs, survival strategy for the rural households, and accessibility of transport and communication facilities in urban areas. The other factor that contributes to the development of slums in France is poor governance. This is in relation to inadequate planning and distribution of resource consequently growth and development of slums. Development of slums is a reflection of the crime and unemployment within the nation creating an opportunity for the government to stamp its authority in enhancing the living condition for the citizens (W. L p 412). Preventing of Development of the new Slums Several activities are in place in France towards prevention of further development of slums. The first measure is acknowledging the fact that urbanization would continue to occur. This addresses the infective approach that involves the development of the rural areas a way of limiting the migration of people to the cities. The government needs to put measures in place to ensure an improvement of living condition of the citizens in the cities. This involves planning effectively and efficiently to address the inadequacies within the cities. Authorities should identify the essence of free land and plan on how to erect housing facilities to serve the overwhelming population growth in the cities. This would reduce criminal activities and unemployment thus the overall growth and development of the nation (Sheuya p 303). In Thailand, the political commitment, strategic planning, and constant monitoring of the economic development are crucial factors towards prevention of slums. The presence of active civil society in most parts of the world is an element that contributes in the prevention of slums within the modern society. This is possible through adoption and implementation of slum policies. Slum Upgrading and its Importance Slum upgrading is the act of improving informal areas. The process of improvement involves formalization, incorporation, and extension of land. The authority also provides the essential services to the city dwellers in the form of safe water and effective sanitation process. Slum upgrading in France involves the provision of social, economic, institutional, and community services similar to other citizens. The main aim of upgrading of the slums in France is to develop dynamic society with elements of ownership, inward investment, and entitlement within the informal areas (Parkinson p 142). The attempt by the government to relocate the slum residents is not practical a factor that has led to the adoption of upgrading techniques. Relocation of the residents expresses elements of high economic and social costs with reference to disruptions. The main beneficial aspect of slum upgrading is that the citizens enjoy fundamental right to live under decent conditions. Slums upgrading enables the city to address crucial challenges such as legality and social protection. The act is also essential in encouraging the development of the economy. This is in relation to minimization of the unemployment elements within the urban areas. Upgrading of the slums is also noteworthy in relation to the achievement of quality life. Slum upgrading also aims at reducing the level of criminal activities and unemployment from the economy. The governments need to restructure and change social paradigms in order to maximize the outcome of slum upgrading. Conclusion Slums are hindrance to the achievement of economic growth and development. It is the duty of the government to plan effectively towards the achievement of quality life within the cities. Slums contribute towards the presence of criminal activities within the cities and unemployment hence a significant force towards the overall economic development. Upgrading of slums is vital in the process of offering economic, social, institutional, and cultural services to the city dwellers like other citizens. Works Cited Meade, Eric. Slums: A Catalyst Bed for Poverty Eradication. Futurist 46. 5 (2012): 43-45. W. L. The Factors That Create a Slum. American Journal of Economics Sociology 45. 4 (2006): 412.. Oberti, Marco. The French Republican Model of Integration: The Theory of Cohesion and the Practice of Exclusion. New Directions for Youth Development 2008. 119 (2008): 55-74. Jalivay, Nita. Look Left, Look Wright: Observations From The City Of Light. Papers on Language Literature 44. 4 (2008): 416. Sheuya, Shaaban A. Improving the Health and Lives of People Living In Slums. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1136. (2008): 298-306. Parkinson, J. , K. Tayler, and O. Mark. Planning and Design of Urban Drainage Systems in Informal Settlements in Developing Countries. Urban Water Journal 4. 3 (2007): 137-149.

Does the European Union Have a Democratic Deficit?

Does the European Union Have a Democratic Deficit? Critically discuss whether the European Union suffers from a Democratic deficit. In your answer refer to the past and present situations and to the possible future under the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe. Introduction This paper evaluates the democratic credentials of the European Union, considering the popular criticism that the Union suffers from a so-called â€Å"democratic deficit† in its legislative processes. The past, present and possible future state of the Union is analysed so as to determine the truth behind this concern and to analyse the way in which the Union has evolved to mollify its critics in this respect. The proposed Constitutional Treaty is most unlikely to be adopted in its present draft in the short-medium term given its rejection by France and The Netherlands at national referenda in 2005.[1] However, this paper considers the ways in which the draft Constitutional Treaty proposes to address further the problem of the Union’s democratic deficit.. The Changing Face of Europe: One Common Concern In 1957 the Treaty of Rome[2] was signed with the aim of creating a deep economic relationship between six European states: France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, The Netherlands and Luxembourg.. The architects of the European Economic Community, including Schumann and Monnet, were fearful of the threat of a devastating third war on the European continent and keen to encourage European states to associate more closely together to reduce that risk. In those early days, that was the ostensible extent of political ambition.. The Treaty of Rome was not intended to have a constitutional perspective or scope and did not concern itself with issues appropriate to that form of measure.. However, the Single European Act[3] brought into effect a conscious and determined scheme to bring the member states of the EEC closer together. The range of policies under the auspices of the EEC began to grow significantly and the European Commission, led by the famous Jacques Delors[4] became extremely proactive in the law making process.[5] Criticisms of the way in which EEC law was made had been laid against the Community by Euro-sceptic politicians, academic commentators, journalists and the public at large for years prior to the mid 1980s, but it was at around the time of the passing of the Single European Act that those criticisms and concerns really gained force. The EEC institutions were criticised as operating under what was called a democratic deficit. This is shorthand for the allegation that the EEC institutional and legislative systems were allowing unelected, faceless bureaucrats to create law that would have binding effect across the Community, rather than preserving that task for national representatives elected by direct universal suffrage. The common public and media perception that the EEC was not an effective democratic entity became quickly entrenched as the Commission began producing more and more law for application in the member states. It is submitted that the matter would not perhaps have attracted such concern if EC law took second place to national law but in fact criticisms of the democratic deficit were sharpened and polarised by the principle of the sovereignty of EC law, which dictated that law issuing from this body of dubious democratic credentials took precedence over the highest forms of national law created by ancient democracies: see Costa v ENEL[6] In terms of a personal critical appraisal it is asserted that there is little doubt the â€Å"democratic deficit† criticism was originally well made and well founded.. The European Assembly was no more than a talking shop, with very few powers, until the passing of the Single European Act and the bureaucratic Commission was without question the legislative engine of the EEC. Perhaps the best evidence of the extent of the democratic deficit is to be found in observation of the considerable efforts of the Community to address the issue in more recent times. For example, the Single European Act itself, in a subtle move, renamed the Assembly the European Parliament, presumably to give the institution a more democratically-positive and authoritative (sounding) title. The new Parliament was also allowed some marginal new powers in the law making process of the Community. This gesture did nothing to silence those critical of the EEC lack of democracy. Commonly known as the Maastricht Treaty, the Treaty on European Union[7], was signed in 1992 and the EEC became the EC, which in turn became one part of the European Union. Alongside other massive changes, again the law making powers of the European Parliament were strengthened and developed, this time quite substantially so, in an attempt to re-balance the legislative processes of the Union. It was hoped that this would further mollify those critical of the Union’s democratic deficit. It is submitted that the fully elected Parliament now had a real and effective part to play in the EU law making regime, but criticism of a democratic deficit still persisted given the huge influence and power that the unelected Commission still retained over the process. The Treaties of Amsterdam and Nice followed. These were largely aimed at reorganising the EU law and institutions so that the Union could operate more effectively and smoothly after its intended enlargements. This enlargement has now taken place and on 1 January 2007 the Union expanded to embrace 27 member states with the accession of Bulgaria and Romania.[8] It was hoped that a new EU Constitution could have been adopted prior to the recent enlargement phase in order to better equip the expanded Union for its future operation and growth. The Constitutional Treaty The first step towards the establishment of an EU constitution was the signing of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe in October 2004.[9] Inter alia, the draft Treaty provides that seats in the European Parliament will be distributed on a degressive proportional basis and that the Commission (which lacks any democratic authority) will be reduced in size from 2014, so as to make the number of Commissioners equivalent to two-thirds of the number of member states. Addressing the democratic deficit head on, the Constitutional Treaty’s default law making procedure would be one requiring the joint adoption of measures by the Council and the European Parliament.[10] The Treaty would have required the Council to convene in public when making law and required that national parliaments would receive information relating to new EU legislative proposals in sufficient time to allow them to instruct ministers as to how to cast their vote in Council. Furthermore, the Treaty would have given national parliaments the power to return proposals to the Commission for reconsideration if they believe the matter at issue lies outside the competence of the European Union and the Treaty proposed to give the principle of subsidiarity the important status of a fundamental legal principle of the Union. In addition, the Treaty would have established a so-called citizens’ right of initiative, which would require the Commission to consider proposals for legislation that gained the support of at least 1 million citizens of the EU. That said, it is debatable precisely what force and effect this might have had in practice, given that consideration may merely result in the Commission saying â€Å"No†, or rather â€Å"Non†. In combination these reforms would have gone some way to counter persistent criticisms that the EU labours under a democratic deficit.[11] However, it is submitted that Avbelj overstates its potential effect when he somewhat tenuously suggests: ‘The EUs formal democratic deficit is not as a big problem as it is portrayed, and the new Constitution in its present form can remedy most, if not all of it.’[12] In rebuttal, Irish Party Sinn Fein has observed: ‘The Constitution does not effectively redress the democratic deficit issues identified in the Laeken Declaration. Instead it shifts the balance of power and control yet further from the sovereign national parliaments and towards the EU.’[13] In particular, it is stressed that the European Commission would remain the sole initiator of legislative proposals under the draft Treaty. Other bodies, including the European Parliament, the Council and lobbying blocks of millions of citizens can merely ask the Commission to consider drafting a proposal.[14] Concluding Comments In conclusion it is submitted that the European Union does and always has suffered from a democratic deficit. This stems from the very foundations of the European Economic Community, when the European Commission was given largely unrestricted bureaucratic powers to administer what began in effect as little more than an economic club. The essential problem has been that the EEC quickly outgrew its initial parameters and objectives, soon becoming the European Community (dispensing with the word â€Å"Economic† because now its horizons were much broader)[15] within a greater EU, but the Commission has stayed, incongruously it is submitted, at the very heart of the law making process throughout this period of rapid growth and evolution. In simple words, the EEC began with a massive democratic deficit but it did not become controversial until it began to develop its powers. Since the mid 1980s the democratic deficit has gradually been whittled away, largely through successive Treaty amendments which have slowly given more power and influence to the elected European Parliament.. It is true that the draft Constitutional Treaty would have continued this process, introducing further reforms to address the democratic deficit. However, the Commission, which lacks democratic credentials, will still cling tightly to the law making process even if the implementation of the Treaty proposals ultimately takes place.. In order to banish the spectre of the democratic deficit completely from the European Union and its processes it will be necessary drastically to re-assess the role of the European Commission. The Commission will need to be reduced in status to that of an ordinary national civil service, and the European Parliament must assume full responsibility for law-making, before the EU can hope to assert full democratic authority. This will be a bitter pill for the Commission to swallow: it has always jealously and vociferously guarded its role and power. However, if the EU is to mature into a deeper union this policy must at some point be implemented. BIBLIOGRAPHY Consolidated version of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2006/ce321/ce32120061229en000103 31.pdf. Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (2004): http://europa.eu.int/constitution/index_en.htm Avbelj M., Can the New European Constitution Remedy the EU Democratic Deficit? (2005): http://www.eumap.org/journal/features/2005/demodef/avbelj. The European Union: Balancing Democratic Deficit? (2005/03/10): http://www.eumap.org/journal/features/2005/demodef. Foster, EC Legislation (2006-2007), (2006) Blackstone’s Statutes (London) Kent, Law of the European Union, (2001) Longman Report from the Presidency of the Convention to the President of the European Council (18.07.2003) see: http://european-convention.eu.int/bienvenue.asp?lang=EN Steiner and Woods, Textbook on EC Law, (2003) Blackstone Straw sees no point in EU vote, June 6 2005: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4612021.stm Cases as footnoted. 1 [1] Straw sees no point in EU vote, June 6 2005: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4612021.stm [2] Consolidated version of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community: http://eur-lex.europa..eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2006/ce321/ce32120061229en000103 31.pdf. [3] The SEA entered into force in July 1987. [4] President of the European Commission 1985 1995. [5] See for context Margaret Thatcher’s statement to the Hanover European Council, July 30 1988: Hansard HC [136/525-35]http://www.margaretthatcher.org/speeches/displaydocument..asp?docid=107281. [6] Case 6/64. [7] Foster, EC Legislation (2006-2007), (2006) Blackstone’s Statutes (London). [8] See: http://europa.eu/pol/enlarg/index_en..htm. [9] See for detail: http://europa.eu.int/constitution/index_en.htm. [10] Report from the Presidency of the Convention to the President of the European Council (18.07.2003) see: http://european-convention.eu.int/bienvenue..asp?lang=EN. [11] The European Union: Balancing Democratic Deficit? (2005/03/10): http://www.eumap.org/journal/features/2005/demodef. [12] Avbelj M., Can the New European Constitution Remedy the EU Democratic Deficit? (2005): http://www.eumap.org/journal/features/2005/demodef/avbelj. [13] Ireland and the EU Constitution: http://www.sinnfein.ie/pdf/EUConstitutionPamphlet.pdf, p10. [14] Can it really be argued that EU laws can be described as national governments acting at EU level when the European Commission has the sole right to propose those laws? [15] See: Kent, Law of the European Union, (2001) Longman, p.9.

Existence Precedes Essence Essay

Existence Precedes Essence Essay Existence Precedes Essence According to metaphysics, essence precedes existence. This means that any object, if it has to come into existence its idea should exist in the mind of the creator. For example, if we want to build a house, an idea of how the house will look like, its features and location must take place in our mind; its essence should be there before it can come into existence. However Jean Paul Sartre implies that existence precedes essence in human beings. Sartre believes that the self or body or in other words, the existence comes into being first and then after the human being has entered this world; he defines or makes up his essence or nature by his interaction with the surroundings, people and opportunities around him. According to Sartre, every human being is defined or made essentially by development of his character through his time and interaction with the world and its people. Sartre also argues that because each human being is free to interact and make their own choices, the onus of these choices comes in the form of radical freedom and responsibility. Every human being is responsible for their own actions and its consequences through the decisions that have been made by him. Behavior, whether good or bad cannot be justified by making it a part of a human beings nature or essence (Cline, n.d). People make their own choices and decisions and act accordingly and therefore any results that their actions might bear are the sole responsibility of the qualities that have been developed by that person. According to Sartre, the proverb, as you sow, so shall you reap; defines his main idea of existentialism The implication for this comes to the fact that individually we are responsible for our own actions but collectively as a mankind our actions shape the world around us and the future generations will learn from these and shape their characters or nature. Friedrich Nietzsche also believed that people can only be truly free when they free themselves from religion and faith in God. His famous remark ‘God is dead echoes this ideology. The Christian church preached that all human beings were equal and that the after world was essentially of more importance than the present world, this according to Nietzsche undermined a human beings ability to excel and placed him in the same line as a common individual. He was highly influenced by Darwins theory survival of the fittest and believed that this kind of preaching undermined human beings true potential. According to Nietzsche anything that gave power to man and the will to power to deliver those actions was good and any form of weakness which according to him came by being moral and faithful was bad. In this case, since Christianity instilled in its believers moral values and the spiritual way of living, Nietzsche declared that the only way to achieve true potential and endure pain in t he real world and truly live life was to detach from God (Crowell, 2004) Abraham Maslows hierarchy of needs which consists of five levels namely physiological, safety, belonging, esteem and self actualization which is also the highest level of needs a person can achieve (cited in Burger, n.d). This relates to Sartres thesis that human beings exist and then define themselves by developing their nature and interacting with their surroundings. Maslow is essentially saying the same thing that a person who exists in this world moves towards fulfillment of his personal goals through decisions at varying levels of what he needs from the society in terms of food, shelter and a place among friends and family which helps him achieve the last stage of fulfillment of self actualization where he is able to give back to the society in terms of his experiences and the knowledge and development of ethics and character that has led him to lead a successful life essentially and give back to mankind. References Burger, D. (n.d.).Phenomenological perspectives on change. Retrieved March 22nd, 2010 from http://www.themanager.org/Strategy/Phenomenological_Perspectives_on_Change_-_Daniel_Burger.pdf Cline, A. (n.d.).Existence precedes essence: themes and ideas in existentialist thought. Retrieved March 22nd, 2010 from http://atheism.about.com/od/existentialistthemes/a/existence.htm Crowell, S. (2004). Existentialism.Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved (2010, March 22) from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/existentialism/

The Reign Of Terror Essay -- History Historical Terror Essays

The Reign of Terror   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  History is said to be written by the winners, but is it possible to rewrite history? In a way, the French, like many who have preceded them, and many who will proceed them have done the impossible, rewriting history. From trivial folklore, such as George Washington chopping down a cherry tree, to the incredibly wrong, the African slave trade; people's views of history can be shaped and molded. The French have done a superb job of instilling all of us with the concept that their Revolution was a fight for liberty, justice and the good of all Frenchmen everywhere. Their glorification of the Bastille with it's depictions in painting and sculpture and how the Revolution was the beginning of a new age pales to some of the events during this period. In fact, the storming of the Bastille was merely a hole in the dike, and more would follow. The National Guard, the Paris Commune, the September Massacre, are all words that the French would prefer us not to hear. These events were a subtle dà ©nouementto an climax that was filled with both blood and pain. The Reign of Terror, or the Great Terror, was a massive culmination to the horror of the French Revolution, the gutters flowing with blood as the people of Paris watched with an entertained eye. No matter what the French may claim, if one chooses to open his eyes and read about this tragedy, they are most certainly welcome.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The revolution begins quietly in the fiscal crisis of Louis XVI's reign. The government was running deeply into bankruptcy, and at the urging of his financial advisors, he called the Estates General. The governing body had not been called for almost two centuries, and now it's workings seemed outdated. A small number of people said that the Third Estate, that which was drawn from the towns, should have power to equal the other Estates. Clubs of the bourgeoisie, the middle class, were formed, proclaiming, "Salus populi lex est." It was a simple cry meaning "the welfare of the people is law." To these people, the Estates General was like a pair of shoes that no longer fit. Reformed seemed iminent, the phrase, "The Third Estate is not an order, it is the nation itself" began to circulate.1   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  With much fanfare and circumstance, the three estates were called together. However, on trying to meet, the Third Estate found the doors to t... ...al depiction of man at his worst. The sad truth is that events of this nature have occurred with amazing regularity. Perhaps if the Reign of Terror was just one appalling moment of human cruelty, the world would be a different place. With such things as the Gulag, the Holocaust, the African Slave Trade, and even returning back to ancient times of the Assyrians and the Crusades, man has been known to slaughter his brethren wholesale. We are a race, bred with violence coursing through our veins, and we can do little about it. Perhaps my speculations are wrong, but if such tragedies have occurred over and over, can we truly ever change. The Reign of Terror is just the culmination to the bloodiness and the atrocities of the French Revolution. It is quite ironic that a Revolution based on the ideals of Reason and the fight for the people, would kill over thirty thousand of their countrymen. In conclusion, the Reign of Terror was the climax of this terrible Revolution. The violence and paranoia of the sans culottes, the lust for political power in the convention, and the petty differences of one person to another finally reached a head, exploding into a mass execution.

Little Jake :: essays paper

Little Jake It all started when little Jake was one month old. He quickly learned that boisterous wails would cause his grandmother, Betsy, to rush to his crib. He was well on his way to becoming a little dictator. Betsy, being a kind-hearted and compassionate woman, felt sorry for the boy because he had no father or mother to speak of. Betsy would perform on command every time the child uttered a whimper. Her doctor suggested that she let the boy cry. He further explained that, in time, the child would get the hint that no one would be coming at his every whim. Jake's rein of terror would have ended if his grandmother had taken her doctor's advice, but she ignored the suggestion. The effect was predictable: soon, Betsy was suffering from exhaustion. Is it any surprise that, by the time Jake reached his first birthday, his first word was "no"? "Jake, please don't throw your toys," his grandmother would plead sweetly. "No!" was Jake's reply as he hurled a hard plastic ball at Granny. "Eat your cereal," his Granny would say. With a sweep of his little hand, Jake knocked the cereal bowl to the floor while he bellowed another "No!". "All right, Jake," Granny replied, "If you don't like the cereal, I'll fix you something else." Filled with hope, she mistakenly thought the boy would outgrow this behavior. By the time he was five years old, Jake did not hesitate to throw very public tantrums. He once sprawled out on the department store floor, kicking and screaming because he had been denied a toy he wanted. Embarrassed by his behavior, Betsy quickly placed the toy in the shopping cart and proceeded through the checkout line. When they arrived at home, Betsy informed Jake that his behavior had been inappropriate. "We don't act like that in public," she explained. I am certain that the boy was thinking, "Why not? It works." When Jake was ten, Granny warned him that if he did not do his homework he would not be allowed to go camping with his friends the following month. Jake promised to do his homework, but a phone call from the school confirmed that he had not turned in a single homework assignment during the

Drama Comparison Essay

I am going to compare the scenes in which we have studied for She Stoops to Conquer and Guys and Dolls, I am going to discuss the similarities and differences between the two chosen sections. The sections that I am going to discuss are Act 1 scene 2 in Guys and Dolls, and In She Stoops to Conquer the section between Marlow and Miss Hardcastle as a maid. The time period that Guys and Dolls by Damon Runyon is set is in the 1950’s, New York, this is shown through the accents of the characters on stage and also through costumes. In this scene Sky would be wearing a full suit and Sarah would be wearing an old Salvation Army suit. This is vastly different then She Stoops to conquer by Oliver Goldsmith, which is set in the 18th century, in the English countryside. The period is conveyed through costume, Marlow would be wearing breeches, and a cravat, a short jacket with a tail underneath wearing a colourful waistcoat the men would have long hair tied back with a ribbon. Miss Hardcastle would be wearing a maid’s outfit in this section; this would be a long brown dress with long sleeves and a square neck front and would also be wearing a white apron. They also convey this through language, which is Shakespearian. Another difference between them is that Guys and Dolls is a Musical and She Stoops to conquer is a restoration comed y. There are some major similarities between these two sections one of these is that its between a guy and a girl, and in both the guys are going for the girls. Even though this is a major similarity the woman react in different ways. In She Stoops to conquer Miss Hardcastle is playing ‘hard to get’ so actually does like Marlow but does not want him to take her to bed, whereas Sarah just does not like Sky and does not want to talk to him. Both of the girl’s reactions are similar in the way that they are both rude and talk back to the men, both woman are supposed to come through as being innocent. Another similarity is that it is both dramatic irony this is because in She Stoops everyone knows that the maid is actually Miss Hardcastle, and in Guys and Dolls everyone in the audience knows that Sarah and Sky are going to fall in love. The guys in both performances are bold, Sky asks Sarah to go to Havana with him and Marlow implies to Miss Hardcastle that he wants to go to bed with her. Both plays are also deceiving this is because Miss Hardcastle is pretending to be a maid to Marlow, and in Guys and Dolls Sky is only talking to Sarah because he has bet that he can take her to Havana. A difference between them is movement, in She Stoops to conquer the movements are very over exaggerated this is because at the time it was the fashion in theatre to do this, the audience would find these movements amusing and made the story easier to follow. In Guys and Dolls the movements are much more naturalistic in this scene and this also helps to convey the period. An example of over exaggerating in She Stoops is that when she meets Marlow for the first time she would do a big curtsy, but over the top this would be amusing for the audience because they would be able to see that she was trying too hard to act like a maid. A similarity between them too is that they both use the whole stage this is because in She Stoops the large movements make the actors use more space and in Guys and Dolls the actors use a lot of space because Sarah is almost trying to get away from Sky. The status of the characters is different, in She Stoops Marlow thinks that he has the higher status but Miss Hardcastle actually does I would show this by Marlow sitting down for quite a lot of it, showing he has a lower level. In Guys and Dolls the status changes at the start Sarah has the highest status but when she says ‘Isaiah’ the status changes and Sky then has the higher status. The set is different in both sections because of the different periods and the contexts. In She Stoops I would set it out as in a small area I would use a similar idea as what I saw in the production ‘Othello’ were the walls fluctuated according to the mood of the play. I think that this should be a very small space this would show intimacy towards the two characters. The furniture should be set out as rich 18th century home e.g. a chez lounge chair in deep red and oak tables. In Guys and Dolls I would have this in a big space this would show the emptiness of the room and also reflect how far Sky and Sarah were away from each other in class. The design of the room would be that with 10 rows of chairs and 5 seats horizontally across the front. The use of Lighting would be very different this is because in She Stoops it is older so the light would be in sepia, or the light dimmed like it was candlelight, this would convey the period and show that it was old. In Guys and Dolls the lights would be bright at colourful to show that it was exciting and have a happy mood. The Music in Guys and Dolls is similar in the way that it tells a part of the story, in She Stoops when we acted out when the music came on we would do movement to what would be happening next. The emotional impact of She Stoops is that the audience find it very amusing and there is tension because the audience do not know weather Miss Hardcastle will pull it off. In Guys and Dolls the audience find it funny because Sky is so persistent and will not take no for an answer this is similar because for both the audiences reaction should be to find it funny. In Conclusion I think that they are very similar and different in lots of ways they both have similar ideas about a boy trying to get a girl, but the way in which the girls react is different. The way in which I would set out each of the sections would be completely different because of the time period and the intensity of the characters. Overall they both use different techniques to show that they are different e.g. making gestures big.

Why Evolution and Religion Can Coexist

Jason Soares 1-1 Science and Religion Can Coexist – Revision 2 For centuries science and religion have been competing with each other to reign supreme over the other. It makes one wonder just why it has come to this. After all aren’t they in many aspects quite similar? Consider the following; the theory of evolution, the big bang theory, and the Copenhagen interpretation theory all have one constant term, â€Å"theory†. Why? – All of them haven’t been proven yet as they are still mere theories.Now shifting over to religion, when reading a holy book, one finds no facts or substantial evidence of how things exist as they do today. Religion, as much of science, is merely based on beliefs. Yet billions choose to either believe in a higher being or eliminate the idea of a god altogether. No matter which side is true or false, one true statement that can be made is that one could not exist without the other. Religion is for spiritual healing and belief; w hereas, science is, in most cases, the actual embodiment of our beliefs.Science and religion can coexist because; arguably the greatest mind of them all said so, religion’s morals and values uses science to the benefit of all mankind, and perhaps God himself used science to create all that we see. Firstly, if indisputably the greatest scientist in the history of mankind, Albert Einstein – the person who set the base for modern science as we know it today – found no problem in believing in both science and religion, then why should we?Einstein did not believe in a personal God, a god who cares for us or intervenes in the lives of people, but in one that maintained and created the harmony of the universe; a god nonetheless. That may seem quite odd as many beliefs render science and religion incompatible. Yet, many scientists, according to surveys, say that there is no conflict between their faith and their work. Joel Primack, a professor from the University of Cal ifornia, Santa Cruz, co-developed the cold dark matter theory that seeks to explain the formation and structure of the universe.He also believes in God and that God and science can exist in harmony. He claims that â€Å"in the last few years astronomy has come together so that we're now able to tell a coherent story† of how the universe began, Primack said. â€Å"This story does not contradict God, but instead enlarges [the idea of] God. † (National Geographic News website) This is one example of how clearly science and religion go hand in hand. Secondly, most religions in this world teach three basic steps in being able to enter the â€Å"eternal life† that most of them offer: respect one another, love your neighbour and be kind to all.Not a bad list on which to base a whole religion on. In fact it sounds quite noble. Think about it, many lives are based on the above list due to a strict enforcing of religion from family or a community, and if even a small port ion of those people grow up to be doctors and scientists, we can say with ease that the future of our technological advancements is bright and it is in the right hands. After analyzing the upbringing of these theoretical people, we can come to a conclusion that religion helped a great deal in steering their science-filled future in the right direction.It will be foolish on our part to deny religion just because we've advanced in science and technology. As our knowledge increases, we must move nearer to the roots of our religion, and this is the stage when both religion and science will be working together for the betterment of mankind. For example, euthanasia, the killing of a human being to relieve pain and suffering (mercy-killing), is widely considered unethical. This mercy-killing is just a euphemism for suicide. The reason why we don’t say suicide is because it is usually frowned upon by society, yet when someone is on a hospital bed and doesn’t want to live anymo re, it’s justified.People say suicide and mercy-killing are different, but they both lead to the same result: the killing of a human being because the person no longer has a desire to live. By definition, this is indeed suicide because it is taking a life away since they no longer find value for it, and yet it is being done throughout the world in public hospitals. Now a doctor with a good moral and ethical background due to religion or a community with strong values would not succumb to the pressures of this daily occurrence. And aren’t doctors supposed to bring life into this world and help sustain it when outside forces threaten it?Moreover, it is daunting to think that someone can just â€Å"pull the plug† on another being just because the former wants to die. Science and technology can be a blessing in the hands of wise men, while it can be deadly in the hands of others, and if we are wiser and nearer to our religious roots we can enjoy our lives better kno wing that religion’s morals and values will use science to the benefit of all mankind. Thirdly, possibly one of the most controversial and heated theories of all is the one that concerns the very place in which we live in, the big bang theory.According to the big bang theory, space, time, and all matter around us was created by the grandest explosion ever to occur in our universe. When consulting religious persons about this theory they would whole heartedly disagree with it. Assuming they were Catholics, they would immediately refer to the Bible and cite that God created the world, the vegetation, animals, and humans within it. Now level headed persons who are on neither side of the science-religion debate would argue that, why can’t both the big bang theory and the biblical story of God be true?They would reason that perhaps God used this method of creation for His own purpose, to create a world that is habitable by life. Once again the religious would disagree, sayi ng that according to the book of Genesis, God created Earth in seven days, and according to the big bang theory the earth took billions of years to develop in order to exhibit any traces of human life. Seven days compared to billions of years is quite a difference, yet when examining the word of God in the Bible, the religious cannot take the seven day period so literally.Perhaps it did take God seven days to create the earth, but maybe God was on a different time scale. One day for us is twenty four hours, but one day for God could have been thousands, millions, or billions of years. Furthermore, perhaps these seven days weren’t consecutive. They could have been spanned out over billions of years and just the major days on which God created his most praised wonders are mentioned. In addition to the creation process of the earth, God could have used the scientific methods of photosynthesis, natural selection, and countless others to create this world.Not only can we bring sci ence and religion closer together than ever by this new perspective, but we can say that one definitely assisted in the process of the other and that the relationship between science and religion is strong. Ultimately, one can see that science and religion can coexist, because; many of our brightest minds are an example of this, science can be used for worthy causes due to religion’s ethics, and with a new perspective it can be debated that God himself used science for his own creation purposes. No one is forced to sway either way of the debate and everyone is elcomed to stay neutral, nonetheless, one cannot obliviously deny one and praise the other with an un-open mind. We can choose to believe one, but we shouldn’t reject the other altogether. All we should ask of ourselves is not to ignore the pressing questions which alter our views on religion or science, but to expand our tunnel vision and wander into unfamiliar territories to grasp a better understanding of both ; consequently closing the gap between science and religion so that one day the feud between the two may rest peacefully in the minds of all.