The Necklaces Essay Example for Free

The Necklaces Essay Motifs Coveting Throughout â€Å"The Necklace,† Mathilde covets everything that other people have and she does not. Whereas Monsieur Loisel happily looks forward to having hot soup for dinner, Mathilde thinks only of the grandness of other homes and lavish table settings that she does not own. When Monsieur Loisel obtains an invitation for a party, she covets a new dress so that she can look as beautiful as the other wives as well as jewelry so that she does not look poor in comparison to them. She is so covetous of Madame Forestier’s wealth that she cannot bear to visit her, but she overcomes her angst when she needs to borrow jewelry for the party; there, her coveting is briefly sated because she gets to take one of the ornaments home with her. After the party, she covets the fur coats the other women are wearing, which highlight the shabbiness of her own wraps. This endless coveting ultimately leads to Mathilde’s downfall and, along the way, yields only fleeting happiness. It is so persistent, however, that it takes on a life of its own—Mathilde’s coveting is as much a part of her life as breathing. Symbols The Necklace The necklace, beautiful but worthless, represents the power of perception and the split between appearances and reality. Mathilde borrows the necklace because she wants to give the appearance of being wealthy; Madame Forestier does not tell her up front that the necklace is fake, perhaps because she, too, wants to give the illusion of being wealthier than she actually is. Because Mathilde is so envious of Madame Forestier and believes her to be wealthy, she never doubts the necklace’s authenticity—she expects diamonds, so diamonds are what she perceives. She enters willingly and unknowingly into this deception, and her complete belief in her borrowed wealth allows her to convey an appearance of wealth to others. Because she believes herself rich for one night, she becomes rich in others’ eyes. The fact that the necklace is at the center of the deception that leads to Mathilde’s downfall suggests that only trouble can come from denying the reality of oneâ⠂¬â„¢s situation.

Intuitions :: Philosophy Judgement Papers

Intuitions This paper examines two attempts to justify the way in which intuitions about specific cases are used as evidence for and against philosophical theories. According to the concept model, intuitions about cases are trustworthy applications of one’s typically tacit grasp of certain concepts. We argue that regardless of whether externalist or internalist accounts of conceptual content are correct, the concept model flounders. The second justification rests on the less familiar belief model, which has it that intuitions in philosophy derive from one’s (often tacit) beliefs. Although more promising than the concept model, the belief model fails to justify traditional philosophical use of intuitions because it is not clear a priori that the beliefs at issue are true. The latter model may, however, legitimize a less a prioristic approach to intuitions. If anything unifies different philosophical methodologies it's some sort of reliance on intuitions. It's remarkable, therefore, how rarely we attempt to justify their employment in philosophy. The intuitions philosophers care about are typically judgements about whether specific (hypothetical or actual) cases are cases of a certain kind. Some philosophical topic such as reference, knowledge or personal identity is under investigation. A theory is proposed and is then tested against our intuitions about specific cases that bear on the topic. In general, if our intuitions contradict what a theory implies about whether, say, S refers to x, or knows that p, or is identical to T, this counts against the theory. If on the other hand, our intuitions match what a theory tells us about particular cases, this usually counts in favor of the theory. All procedures of this sort rest on a principle like I: I Intuitions about specific cases can be used as evidence for and against philosophical theories. This paper is about whether I can be justified. We examine two models, the Concepts Model (CM) and the Belief Model (BM). In our view, neither of them provides a solid foundation for I as it is traditionally applied in philosophy. CM CM has four components: 1. A concept, C, determines what it takes for something to fall under that concept (what it takes for something to be a C). 2. Someone who possesses or grasps a concept, C, doesn't always know explicitly what it takes to be a C because some (maybe most) concepts are understood by us in part tacitly. 3. Intuitions about whether specific cases fall under C are reliably guided by, or generally "match" one's understanding, tacit or otherwise, of C.

Mass Incarceration Essay

Michelle Alexander is a civil rights lawyer, advocate, Associate Professor of law at Ohio State and the author of The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the age of colorblindness. In her presentation she talks about how mass incarceration is happening in America. The overwhelmingly disproportionate incarceration of African Americans constitutes a â€Å"new Jim Crow era† that singles out people of color and relegates them to second class citizenship status. Through extensive documentation Alexander shows that Reagan’s â€Å"War on Drugs† was developed at a time before cocaine hit urban streets, and was used to whip up political support from southern whites who resented the advances made by blacks. She shows how people of color have been unfairly targeted in the drug war with police raids focusing on urban black neighborhoods and not suburban areas or college campuses even though black and white drug use is virtually the same. Blacks were given stiffer penalties t hat often restricted their ability to vote, work and go to school upon release. She shows how racism is institutionalized so well that it can appear to be â€Å"colorblind† to both white conservatives and liberals. I think Michelle Alexander is a good public speaker because she is very educated and well developed. I think her delivery was effective because she have good research with plenty of references. Alexander’s overall message is that â€Å"home of the free† has incarcerates a larger percentage of its population than any other country. And that the increase in our prison population since 1980 can be traced not to rise crime rates but to changes in policies, especially to harsh sentencing, supported by race-based surveillance, in the war on drugs. Once someone is caught in the system, the history of a felony relegates them to underclass status forever. I agree with Michelle Alexander because I care about racial justice and equality. I think the audience liked her presentation because she informed her audience about the current state of our justice system, the experience of police encounters, and how the law serve to disempowered people and make them disappear. She also offers insight to a system that affects and effects each and every person living in America. One thing I th ink was missing from the presentation is she left out parental guidance because as a parent no matter what your financial background is it is important that our youth is taught not to engage in criminal activity or you will be punish for it.

John Brown University Admissions ACT Scores More