Formal Response papers (2-3pp) — Response papers should be composed in formal prose and be used to practice thesis development and argumentation. They should function primarily to develop and focus theses that may be refined into a final paper. You may approach a concept related to the assigned material, delve into details, explore broader themes, symbols, or ideas, or engage any other literary, critical, theoretical, analytical, or humanistic argumentation.
All formal writing assignments must follow these guidelines. Not following correct formatting with be penalized:
–Be formatted according to MLA
–Contain a works cited page
–Use one inch margins on all sides.
–12 pt, Times New Roman font
–Last Name & Page # in top right corner
–Contains parenthetical citations
Film Writing: Best Practices
As this course is mainly engaged with film, you will be required to use time markers for each in-text citation: (Title of the Film Hour:Min:Sec) eg. (Batman 01:23:15). Because you will need to reference a fair amount of evidence in your analysis and writing (direct quotes, scenes from the films, articles, etc.), I highly suggest that you watch the film with subtitles on so you are able to write down the exact quote. You are expected to read and watch the entirety of whatever is assigned. If you take notes as you read, you will be much more prepared for the written assignments. Also, remember to save all of your work often and in multiple locations.
Watch: Birdman Read: Mulder “Believe It or Not, This is Power” and write a formal response paper
Sin In Oedipus The King English Literature Essay
In the play Oedipus the King, Queen Jocasta illustrates the devastating effects of perpetuating ones sin rather than confronting it. Motivated to hide her own shame, Jocasta sets into motion and perpetuates a series of events that she intended to prevent, but ultimately accepts at Oedipus expense. Throughout the play she attempts to hide the truth by deceit and feigned disbelief. Long before the play ever begins Jocasta sets into motion the events that lead up to the tragic ending of Oedipus the King. She was so ashamed to be the mother of a child with such a dismal future that she had him cast out onto a mountain. By this action and her lack of action as a parent she decided Oedipus destiny. This is the first example of Jocastas s shame and deceit. my son he wasn t three days old and the boy s father fastened his ankles, had a henchman fling him away on a barren, trackless mountain. Jocasta most certainly cast-out her son because of the shame he brought on her. Later in lines 1289-1291 we see the herdsman testify that Jocasta was the one who gave him the child with the charge to kill it. Now she is ashamed of what she did and to free herself from that guilt she consciously lies to herself and those around her about what happened. When Oedipus comes to Thebes before the beginning of the play, Jocasta s shame is compounded. Jocasta knew the prophecy that foretold the death of her husband by her son s hand, and her probable incestuous marriage. She believed the prophecy and had her son cast-out because of it. After her husband had died, a young stranger from a foreign land was to take her for his wife. Jocasta quickly identified this stranger, Oedipus, as her son from long ago. Her understanding of the prophecy, Oedipus ankles, the sending away of the only witness to the murder of her husband, and her calmness after hearing Tiresias accusations indicate that she knew Oedipus true identity before their nuptial. Why did Jocasta marry Oedipus knowing he was her son? If Jocasta did not marry Oedipus she would have to give some reason. Had she cited the prophecy and said that he was her son she would heap shame on her head. She would have to publicly shame her son and herself by acknowledging that her son killed his father, her husband tried to kill her son and the prophecy was being fulfilled even after she tried to prevent it. Marrying and coupling with her son, with no one ever knowing the truth, was the only way Jocasta could escape public and private humiliation. Jocasta knowingly chose to fulfill the prophecy, while Oedipus was unaware, in order to hide her shame and guilt. She made herself believe that if the prophecy was fulfilled and no one was the wiser she and her son could live the rest of their lives as a happy couple free of public shame or guilt. Even so, Jocasta could not free herself from the shame she knew she bore. She lived a life of lies and publicly dismissed the prophecy, which she knew to be true, in order to convince herself and those around her that all was well. Jocasta used the word thieves while others use the word travelers to describe the killer(s) of King Laius. She repeatedly tried to convince Oedipus that there was no credibility in what the oracles prophesied. A prophet? Well then, free yourself of every charge! Listen to me and learn some piece of mind: no skill in the world, nothing can penetrate the future. Here is proof, quick and to the point. (778-783) She goes on to tell of the birth and casting-out of her son and of the death of Laius, in an attempt to prove the prophets have no credibility (knowing all along that they are correct in every detail). Despite her effort to convince Oedipus of the unimportance of the prophecy Oedipus could not be convinced. Jocasta begins to become desperate. Her entire world, a world of lies, would crumble if the truth were discovered. Jocasta s actions might appear to be the calming role of a wife in this situation, but her motives are more self-centered. She knows the prophecy has been fulfilled and if Oedipus discovers it her shame and guilt will be laid bare for all to see. This fact becomes more obvious when the messenger from Corinth arrives. Oedipus begins to see how a horrible trap is squeezing around his neck. Jocasta knows she set the trap long ago, a trap for Oedipus as well as herself. She knows Oedipus is close to springing this trap and begs him to stop probing the issue. Stop in the name of god, if you love your own life, call off this search! My suffering is enough. (1161-1163) Jocasta has suffered privately for years and years, but nothing is more terrifying to her than the public discovering her shame. Oedipus, bent on discovering the truth about his birth, dashes all of Jocasta s hopes of abandoning the search. Hurry, fetch me the herdsman, now! Leave her to glory in her royal birth. (1174-1175) Jocasta s shame of course is his royal birth. The truth is close at hand. All of her lies and shame are about to be revealed and she is powerless to stop it. All she can do now is curse him with the name she gave him at birth when she tried to have him killed: man of agony that is the only name I have for you, that no other ever, ever, ever! (1176-1178) At this moment she can t bear any more. The agony of her own sins, her own shame is bearing down with all its weight on her heart. There is no escape for Jocasta from the trap she has set by her own actions and deceit. The only escape from her shame is suicide. Still true to form, in the last minutes of her life she is unable to acknowledge that she brought this all down on her own head. She blamed Laius. She wept for what had happened to her. Never once did she express regret or ask forgiveness for what she did to the lives of those close to her. In the end consumed by her own self pity and shame for what had been done to her she hung herself on the bed where she laid willingly with the son she was so shamed by. By her own actions Jocasta is a victim in Oedipus the King; but more, she is a catalyst for the victimization of others. Driven by her own prideful nature, her actions wove a net in which she and Oedipus were caught. The character Jocasta illustrates how one individual s crimes can affect those they love the most. Jocasta wanted Oedipus to be happy, but was unable to make it so because of her own shame. This is the universal truth of Oedipus the King: When we, like Jocasta, burden ourselves with private guilt or shame we are unable to freely and wholly loves those around us. Unfortunately, we may actually cause great pain in their lives, just as Jocasta did.
The Problem of Evil: Religious and Apologetic Way Analytical Essay
write my term paper Introduction The problem of evil is simply the disagreement of how such a great God can exist and evil still dominates a greater part of the world he created. It seems quite logically incompatible the extent of evil and the existent of a benevolent God. According to John Scott (2008, 2), the fact of suffering with no doubt is one of the greatest challenges for the Christian faith. The authenticity of evil and anguish is the biggest obstacle faith. For the Christians themselves it becomes hard to comprehend how the great good God who created them allows them to suffer, and to some deep and hurting ways. The disillusionment increases with multitude of Christians been fed with information on exaggerated expectations of wealth and health. Evil can be classified in to two major categories: the moral evil and natural evil. Natural evil are the consequences of natural happenings like the floods and earthquakes. Moral evil are the actions of human being that bring about this results for example rape, theft and others. The problem of evil can be viewed into broad ways: the religious way or the apologetic way. The apologetic way analysis skeptically, challenging the possibility of the existence of God who cause people to suffer. Religious is the problem of evil approached from a believer’s point of view whose faith many a times has been tested through temptations (Clack, 2008, 127) Is the presence of evil in the world compatible with the existence of a benevolent God? The compatibility of presence of evil and the existence of a great God has been logically and evidently challenged by philosophers. According to Rood (1996, 1), a good and an all powerful God is able to do away with evil, and if evil cannot be destroyed then there is a possibility the good and powerful God exists not. His statements show of how difficult it is for a good God to exits alongside or together with evil, for it is certain the powerful God should destroy the evil. David Hume, a philosopher in the 18th century, ‘God might be willing to prevent evil, but have not the ability? Is he able but not willing? Or is He both willing and able? The nature of God as depicted in history, his existence and power should not allow evil to subsist. I would argue out that the existence of an all powerful God and presence of evil compatible for the possibility of evil makes the munificence of God whole. The completeness of the compassion of God calls for a freewill among the human beings which necessitates the existence of evil. From a glance the existence of evil is a great challenge to the existence of God’s compassion. Get your 100% original paper on any topic done in as little as 3 hours Learn More This is because evil in the lives of God’s people shows lack of humanity in God’s benevolence. Evil is the opposite of good and so if evil would not exist, it would mean there would be no good hence people would be denied the opportunity of freewill and making choices; for there is no good without choice. Man is one creature that has the ability to chose good, and also he can decide to choose the opposite. The absence of good in a man replicates to absence of good in the world. This cannot be termed as absence of God or him being all powerful for out of his infinite goodness that he has poured upon man, man has decided to choose evil. Taking the completeness of God’s benevolence and compare with Aristotle’s argument on completeness of justice which is a virtue; its completeness is found in its full exercise. Therefore complete benevolence of God will be achieved by allowing full practice of choice which will mean there will be existence of evil. The presence of evil should not be measured by the existence of a great God in the world. For God’s plan was to peacefully and with complete unity exist with man. The freewill God gave man was a replication of what exactly he had and wanted for man in order for his to accomplish the good intended for him. The existence of God allows man to be able to accomplish good in the presence of another option. Therefore evil should exist as a possibility for humans but should not be actualized in their lives. Many a times that Humans choose to do evil and God chooses not to intervene and remove the evil; yes indeed he watches to see the consequences for if he would interfere it means choice is not good and could no longer be free. Therefore i strongly believe that the existence of evil is purely compatible with the presence of a benevolent God; for God’s completeness in his benevolence depends on the human actualization of what is good. According to Genesis, everything that God created was good, and all things existing in the world are either creatures of the creator. And God is creator of all things; therefore we can say God is the creator of evil. But according to Kreeft (1988, 58) evil is not a thing but it is a choice that human beings make therefore, God is not the ultimate creator of evil as it would be argued but God created choice men made wrong choice which consequently makes evil. For no evil will or has ever existed as a thing but always as wrong choice or the aftermath of those wrong choices. We will write a custom Essay on The Problem of Evil: Religious and Apologetic Way specifically for you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The situation at hand implies that God does not exist but this is more so a conflict which can be resolve. Rich (1996, 2) in his view suggests that one of the key solutions is to understand that the fact that God is all powerful is not a suggestion that he has the ability to anything imaginable. The reality in the scripture is that ‘with God all things are possible’ (Mt 19:26). But the same scriptures identifies that some things God cannot perform. Good example is Tit. 1:2 which clearly states that, ‘God cannot lie’. Things that are way out of God’s character of righteousness he cannot do. God cannot do something absurd for the sake of a rational world. The responses to the problem of evil are quite a number but not many are satisfactory. The first response is freewill defense this is because we are the creators of evil. Indeed most evil are those imposed by men. When God created the earth he gave human beings an ability to make choices on their own without manipulation. Men have in return paid it back with misuse of this freedom. God would be able to finish evil by making an automated human being or world which he would control as per his wish. Having in mind some evils are natural it brings us to another solution for the problem of evil (Kreeft, 1988, 58). Some traits in the society would not be evidence if evil was wiped out of the world. Compassion is of so much value in our society but it cannot be seen or experienced without suffering. Bravely is also only evident in the presence of danger. God created us in a way we would create room for each other in our lives. Suffering and some evils in the world has taught us to have a heart of self sacrifice. Some evils act as stabilizers of the state of the nation hence without them the world would be at a miss. Having in mind God would not undo the past for the sake of this rational world. From his argument he concluded that God would not have eliminated evil for its existence is more so a way of letting the world exist on a stable platform. God’s creation was done in his own image, which gave room for an interpersonal existence with him, choice is therefore vital in this case to allow human beings to freely love him and without being force. Those who disbelieve in the compassion of God due to the evils that exist in this society Hick says, they are people under a great misconception that God have created the world that we may exist like animals in a zoo. This implies he created to make us pleasant and comfortable as possible; however God was not creating a paradise where humans would enjoy minimum pains and maximum of pleasure (Clack, 2008, 127). Not sure if you can write a paper on The Problem of Evil: Religious and Apologetic Way by yourself? We can help you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More To some extent people may argue out that the moral evils are human creations but the natural evils goes way beyond human understanding. Why would a great and caring God full of mercy allow his children so severely suffer to points of losing their lives? This sounds interesting especially being a question to a father from a child. The human nature over the years has changed from thankful and obedient beings to forgetful and disobedient humans. Some of these evils we have no control over are ways that God is using to remind us of his existence when we are home and dry, contented in our comfort areas he strikes to remind us of his existence. Conclusion In conclusion the existence of a benevolent God and existence of evil though many a times they look incompatible and their reality no as expected, they are very much compatible. In relation to the argument above the existence of evil makes the benevolence of God complete. For compassion is not extended neither is it seen without suffering. Evil brings suffering which in return attracts the compassion of God. The ability of Human beings to make choices which God fully designed in his creation cannot be fair if God restricted human to good only. If you can make a choice it means there exists something of a lesser quality of bad which in other terms is evil. Reference List Clack, B., 2008. The Philosophy of Religion: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge: Polity Press Rick, R., 1996. The Problem of Evil: How Can A Good God Allow Evil? Plano, TX: Probe Ministries Kreeft, P., 1988. “The Problem of Evil.” Chapter 7 in Fundamentals of the Faith. San Francisco: Ignatius Press. John, S., 2008. The problem of evil. US: WordPress. Web.
UCLA Treatment of Mental Disorders and Breathing Body & Sound Meditation Discussions
UCLA Treatment of Mental Disorders and Breathing Body & Sound Meditation Discussions.
Part 1According to the National Institute of Mental Alliance, (Links to an external site.) 1 in 5 Americans experience a major mental heath issue per year. Despite these staggering statistics, stigmatization regarding mental health and seeking help for these issues remains. For this discussion post, you will reflect on the material in Chapter 15 regarding stigmatization and treatment of mental disorders by answering the following questions: 1. Why do you think this stigmatization still exists despite increased knowledge of mental health disorders. What barriers are there to people discussing about mental health issues? 2. How do you think that we, as a society, can move forward and reduce this stigma? What strategies do you think would be useful in helping people to recognize, discuss, and seek treatment for mental health issues? Respond to two other students. Your peer comments should be substantive and informative. Part 2For this discussion post, you will be trying out self-regulation and therapeutic techniques in the form of meditation. These are commonly used techniques that are trained over time in cognitive behavioral therapy. Go to the mindfulness meditations on this UCLA webpage. (Links to an external site.) They are all free to listen to at home. The meditations vary in length from 3-13 minutes. Listen to TWO of these meditations and answer the questions below for EACH of the meditations.Which meditations did you listen to? Briefly describe it. What were your impressions of the meditations?a) For example, was it easy or hard to concentrate? Did you feel more or less relaxed afterwards (or the same as before)? Was it hard to relax? Did it become easier to do the meditations over time?b) Which meditation did you like more? Why?Do you think that meditation is a viable option for you in the future? Why or why not?Respond to two other students. Your peer comments should be substantive and informative.
UCLA Treatment of Mental Disorders and Breathing Body & Sound Meditation Discussions
Sports Management Tournament Project.
Sports Management Tournament Project..
SPORTS MANAGEMENT TOURNAMANET MANAGEMENT PROJECTYou will be provided with 5 choices for your tournament. You will complete a bracket/schedule according to the format given. You will need to provide the bracket, seeding, dates, times, and sites. You will also provide proper tiebreakers if called for. This will be completed on paper no larger than legal size and can be as many pages as needed.Pick one of the following. Project should be completed on paper no larger than legal size. You can use as many pages as necessary. Make sure the times and dates are sports specific. (Ex: football teams would not play multiple games in a week). High Schools and Junior Highs cannot play on Sundays. Pay close attention to the seeding and the matchups. You do not have to advance the teams in the bracket. It needs to be typed.Helpful hint: you can use a bracket template from a website and then insert a text box for times, dates, etc. Easiest way to turn this in is to scan and email it to me. Feel free to send your work to me as you go so I can provide help. Do not forget about tie breakers when applicable.1. Take the top 16 NCAA Football teams from the USA Today Coaches Poll or the Associated Press Poll and develop a 16 team tournament bracket along with aconsolation bracket.2. Take the final top 8 state ranked high school volleyball teams in both 4A and 5Aand develop a 4 pool tournament with 1st-4th place finishers.3. Using all Big XII volleyball teams develop a double elimination tournament4. Using the current Division I NJCAA Soccer rankings develop a 12 team doubleelimination tournament.5. 32 team basketball tournament with a winners bracket and a consolation bracket. For reference you can research the Sandra Meadows basketball classic.Make sure to take into account- dates, times, sites, tiebreakers.
Sports Management Tournament Project.
Essay Writing at Online Custom Essay
Review This Service