Saturday, August 31, 2019

Personality Psychology †Sojourner Truth Essay

Sojourner Truth (c.1797 – 26 November 1883) Sojourner Truth dedicated her life to fighting slavery, and advocating equal rights for women. She first began speaking in 1827, giving personal testimony of the evils and cruelty of slavery; and later as a staunch supporter of suffrage, also advocated for equal rights for women. At the 1851 Women’s Rights Convention in Akron, Ohio, she delivered her speech â€Å"Ain’t I a Woman† which is now revered among classic text of feminism. She lived her life in the water-shed years of American abolition of slavery and became a leader and recognized as an icon for equality of rights and freedom. At birth, Truth was named Isabella and was a slave for the first twenty-eight years of her life because she was a child born by slaves. In 1826, Truth began life as a free woman; but only after eighteen years – in 1843 at the age of forty-six years, she rename herself, â€Å"Sojourner Truth is my name, because from this day I will walk in the light of His truth.† (p. 77). The moment of naming herself marked Truth’s cognitive freedom from her enslaved past. Neo-Analytic Approach to Personality The neo-analytic approach to personality asseverate that the individual’s sense of self as the core of personality; holding that the self â€Å"struggles to cope with emotions and drives on the inside and the demands of others on the outside† (Friedman & Schustack, 2011); that human nature is positive and goal-oriented; that society and culture shapes personality; and that development continues throughout lifespan. For the analysis of Sojourner Truth’s personality, the concepts of neo-analytical theorist Alfred Adler are selected for the purpose. Adler’s Concept of Humanity Feist & Feist (2006) described Adler’s concept of humanity as that people are self-determinant, and their unique personalities are shaped by how they interpret their lives and experiences. People are ultimately responsible for their own personalities and possess the creative power to transform feelings of inadequacy towards a final goal of either personal superiority or goal of success for society. i. Striving for superiority or success Adler believed that the central core of personality is the striving for superiority towards a final goal. The final goal – while fictional and has no objective existence – unifies personality and renders all behaviour comprehensible. According to Feist & Feist (2006), Adler posit that feelings of inferiority motivate a person to strive for either a self-centered (selfish) goal of superiority, or an altruistic goal of success for all humans. The final goal compensates and reduces feelings of inferiority and weakness, and drives the individual to seek either superiority or success. Truth was a slave for twenty-eight years. During her enslavement, she was abused and treated as chattel or property. Her slave-masters dictated and hold sway her life. Her enslavement caused Truth to feel inferior – but yet her reaction to those feelings of inferiority was to strived for a goal for success (for society). Throughout her life as a free woman, Sojourner Truth devoted herself to fight against slavery and for equal rights for all. During the American Civil War, Truth risked her life to gather and deliver supplies to black volunteer regiments; and was continually involved in various political causes. With the National Freedman’s Relief Association she continued to strive to better conditions and lives for all African Americans – of which her last campaign (sadly unsuccessful) was a land distribution programme for former slaves. ii. Social Interest Adler (1956) state that those who strive for success (instead of self-centered superiority) possess a â€Å"sense of personal worth that is tied closely to their contributions to human society. Social progress is more important to them than personal credit† † (Feist & Feist, 2006, p.72). Truth transcended her oppressed past; turned out to be a healthy individual who was motivated without personal gain to help others to â€Å"seek success for all humanity† (Feist & Feist, 2006). She was not motivated by personal gain. iii. Fictionlism / People’s behaviour and personality is shaped by their subjective perceptions. Adlerian approach maintains that that people are motivated by their subjective perceptions of what is true, and not by what is true. Their subjective perceptions of reality (i.e. fictions) influence them as if were reality. According to Feist & Feist (2006), fictions, regardless true or false, are powerful influence on people’s life. An example of a fiction is the belief in an omnipotent God that guides and helps shape many people’s lives and actions. This is clearly demonstrated in Truth’s life. Sojourner Truth’s parents taught her to believe in God, and that â€Å"God is always with her and she is never alone† (McKissack & McKissack, 1992, p.22). Throughout her life, she held this belief in an omnipotent God, and it was her source of solace (especially during her enslavement), and later – guide her in decision-making and actions. Truth believed that God was her true master. After eighteen years as a free woman, a chance encounter became the tipping point of her self-realisation. A woman asked for her name and upon that very moment Truth realized that all her life she had her slave-masters’ names and thereby declared, â€Å"The only master I have now is God and His name is Truth.† And gave herself the last name Truth (McKissack & McKissack, 1992, p.77). Truth maintained a practice of meditation and deep prayer through which she claimed God communicates with her. In her public speaking,she usually began with a declaration of her spiritual link, â€Å"Well, Children, I speaks to God and God speaks to me†¦I talks to God and God talks to me.† (McKissack & McKissack, 1992, p.82 and 117). Truth sought spiritual guidance during stressful times. For example when she had recently only left her former slave-master Dumont, she was intimidated by threats to her children to return to Dumont’s farm. After the incident she shared â€Å"Jesus stopped me† and that she experienced a powerful force that turned her around when she tried to go back to the Dumont farm. Truth held that the event was a profound meaningful spiritual experience that convinced her that she was never going back to enslavement (McKissack & McKissack, 1992, p.41). Another example of Truth’s staunch belief that God was on her side: In her fight to free and get her son to be returned to her, Truth prayed for divine intervention,â€Å"God†¦ show those about me that you are my Helper† (McKissack & McKissack, 1992, p.43). She was aided by Quaker abolitionists and a fair judge ruled justly in her favour. iv. Value of human activity must be evaluated on the basis of social interest. Adler posit that social interest is the natural human condition and that it binds society as a whole. According to Feist & Feist (2006), Adler held that social interest is the only gauge to be used in judging the worth of a person: Healthy individuals â€Å"strives for perfection for all people in an ideal community†¦are genuinely concerned about people and have a goal of success that encompasses the well-being of all people† (p.75 & 77). Sojourner continually spoke against slavery, campaigned for emancipation of slaves, suffrage and equal human rights. She spoke out against mistreatment and injustice in the army, gathered and distributed donations of food and clothing, and helped in military wards and hospitals. In 1864, Truth was recognized for her work and efforts by President Abraham Lincoln at the White House. v. Masculine Protest / Society & Culture Shapes People Adler reasoned that culture and society influenced people to overemphasize the importance of being manly, i.e. masculine protest. Many societies promote the belief that men are superior to women, implicitly implying that women are inferior. However Adler uphold that women have the physiological and psychological needs as men and therefore want â€Å"more or less the same things that men want† (Feist & Feist, 2006, p.85). This echoes feminists’ campaigns for equal rights: political, economic, and social rights and equal opportunities. Truth attended the first national (USA) Women’s Rights Convention in 1850, and was inspired as well as motivated to speak and advocate for â€Å"Equality before the law without distinction of sex or colour† (McKissack & McKissack, 1992, p.106). From that time on, she spoke for abolition of slavery and equality for women. In her 1851 speech at the Women’s Rights Convention in Akron,Ohio, Truth challenge gender discrimination, subordination, and dispelled the illusion of woman as the weaker sex. â€Å"†¦That man over there says that women need to be helped into carriages, and lifted over ditches, and to have the best place everywhere. Nobody ever helps me into carriages, or over mud-puddles, or gives me any best place! And ain’t I a woman? Look at me! Look at my arm! I have ploughed and planted, and gathered into barns, and no man could head me! And ain’t I a woman? I could work as much and eat as much as a man – when I could get it – and bear the lash as well! And ain’t I a woman?†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (McKissack & McKissack, 1992, p.112-114) vi. Lifestyle A lifestyle encompasses daily activities erstwhile pursuing one’s goals. According to Hergenhahn (2009), Adler believed that for a lifestyle to be genuinely effective it must contain considerable interest, i.e. working toward a society that would provide a better life for everyone. People with a healthy, socially useful lifestyle express their social interest through action. (Adler described a lifestyle without adequate social interest as a ‘Mistaken Lifestyle’.) According to Feist & Feist (2006), Adler considered three intertwined social issues as fundamental to an effective lifestyle: occupational tasks – choosing and pursuing a career that makes one feel worthwhile; societal tasks – creating friendships and social networks; and love tasks – finding a suitable life-partner. Truth’s lifestyle embodied all of Adler’s identified three social issues: * Occupational tasks: Truth embraced a career to fight for emancipation of slavery and equal rights for women. Besides public-speaking against slavery, Truth also worked to improve living conditions for all. In 1865, at the age of seventy, Truth accepted the task to â€Å"promote order, cleanliness, industry, and virtue among the patients at the Freedman’s Hospital† (McKissack & McKissack, 1992, p.149). * Societal tasks: Regardless when she was a slave or as a free woman, Truth formed relationships which led to social networks of friends, supporters, and even ‘fans’. Her circle of friends included Lucy Stone, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Harriet Tubman, John Brown, Richard Allen, John Jay, Frederick Douglass, and many many more equally enlightened beings. * Truth was separated from Robert, her first love who was a slave from another farm, because his slave-master forbade their marriage as children from slave-parents would belong to the slave-mother’s owner. Later Truth married (on orders of her slave-master) Tom, one of the other slaves belonging to the same slave-master. Eventually, they grew to love each other in their own way and shared common respect for each other (McKissack & McKissack, 1992, p.33). viiCreative Power Adler believed that each person possess the power to create their own lifestyle. In line with existentialistic philosophy, Adler agreed that people are ultimately responsible for who they are and their behaviour. People are their â€Å"own architect and can build either a useful or a useless lifestyle† (Feist & Feist, 2006, p.79). The creative power propels each and every one towards a goal, regardless whether in the direction of social interest or not. An individual’s creative power empowers that individual to control their own life – to determine their final goal and strive for that goal, and contributes to development of social interest. Truth’s personality reflected her optimal creative power that helped her manifest an effective lifestyle, successfully overcoming her lamented enslavement and then striving for success for all humans. In Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, Truth would be considered an actualized personality. Conclusion Adlerians maintain that people are naturally positive and goal-oriented. He also posited that mentally healthy people strive for societal success for all humans. In analysis of Sojourner Truth’s personality, it is found that Truth explicitly actualized Adler’s Individual Psychology: Truth manifested her creative power to strive for success (for all humans), thereby lived an effective (valued) lifestyle which embodied social interests and dispelled implicit inferiority of being a former slave, black, and a woman, with a staunch belief that divine power (God) guided and helped her throughout her life. References Feist, J., & Feist, G.J. (2006). Theories of Personality (6th ed.). USA: McGraw-Hill Asia. Friedman, H.S., & Schustack, M.W. (2011). Personality: Classic Theories and Modern Research (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson Hergenhahn, B.R. (2009). An Introduction to the History of Psychology (6th ed.). Belmont, CA.: Wadsworth Liebert, R., Liebert, L. (1998). Liebert & Liebert; Spiegler’s Personality Strategies and Issues (8th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA.: Brooks/Cole. McKissack, P.C.,& McKissack, F.(1992). Sojourner Truth: Ain’t I a Woman? New York: Scholastic.

Friday, August 30, 2019

Erikson’s Psychological Stages

After closely reviewing Erosion's eight stages of life I find that currently I am facing his seventh stage. This stage is known as Generatively VS.. Stagnation it happens when you are a mature adult. This stage I see myself as because I am needed in the life that I am living. I live my life striving for the pursuit to take care of my family, and live a well-balanced life. Being the family man and devoted parent that I am Erosion's theory states that many adults obtain their needs to be needed, and by doing so they also direct the next generation in a direction.By being a generative adult I am committed to fulfill a greater need than Just my own I am committed to leading my next generation to success with my positive guidance. The children I am raising are what make me a generative adult with a purpose to live. How can I fashion a gift is the main focused question of this stage. It took me some time to fully understand what that meant, but I believe it to mean what I can do in my life for my next generation to remember me for.This means am I going to be remembered as the AZ person who care about nothing, or am I going to be remembered for the amazing person I was that accomplished everything he set his mind to. I have answered this question a number of times by actively being Involved in my daughter's life and my family's life, and showing them I can accomplish everything for us to have a great life. This means my role as a great father I am actively engaged in my daughter's life I play with her, read to her, do puzzles with her, practice words with her and try to be a positive influence to her.My daughter Is only two, and by being as positive I can be I am hoping that she grows up to be very talented and smart. The other side of It Is I am a very hard worker, and provided everything that my family needs, so In by doing this it shows her what hard work can got you. Being an active father In my daughter's life and future children's life I am hoping will bless the m with great memories of me forever. I want them to have what I never did the remembrance of a happy fun loving family.Another person who I will compare to Erosion's eight stages of life In my little rather he Is In the Industry VS. Inferiority stage. This stage will occur while the child Is In school Erickson speaks about children beginning school must have a Blvd Imagination, Impulses, and urges to make others happy. When an adult supports a child attempting to do these things the child feel good about them self. Unfortunately If that child Is not supported the child will develop Inferiority towards life. When there are great levels of Inferiority the child begins to feel helpless, and believes they cannot be helped by anyone.When the child Is praised too much and feels great pressures to do better the child tends to grow to become and adult to fast. The question this stage focuses on Is how I can be good. This question Is answered by being the best you can be, and knowing when yo u are pushing yourself too far. The child needs to be able to realize that he Is still a child and he should not have to take life so seriously. Question a number of times by actively being involved in my daughter's life and my family's life, and showing them I can accomplish everything for us to have a great life. Strive influence to her. My daughter is only two, and by being as positive I can be I am hoping that she grows up to be very talented and smart. The other side of it is I am a very hard worker, and provided everything that my family needs, so in by doing this it shows her what hard work can got you. Being an active father in my daughter's family. Another person who I will compare to Erosion's eight stages of life in my little brother he is in the Industry VS. Inferiority stage.This stage will occur while the child s in school Erickson speaks about children beginning school must have a vivid imagination, impulses, and urges to make others happy. When an adult supports a if that child is not supported the child will develop inferiority towards life. When there are great levels of inferiority the child begins to feel helpless, and believes they cannot be helped by anyone. When the child is praised too much and feels great question this stage focuses on is how I can be good. This question is answered by child needs to be able to realize that he is still a child and he should not have to take

Thursday, August 29, 2019

Nazi Opposition and the Holocaust

In â€Å"Opposition and Resistance in Nazi Germany†, Frank McDonough explains that the Christian Church was the only organization in Hitler’s Germany that opposed Nazism.   For this reason, the Church was vehemently opposed by Hitler for Nazi opposition.   The chief opponents of Nazism within the Church were punished by the Nazis.   Nevertheless, the Church refused to bow to the Nazi regime seeing as the values of the Church differed widely from Nazism. Samuel P. and Peral M. Oliner write in â€Å"The Holocaust: Problems and Perspectives of Interpretations† that there were around 50,000 to 500,000 non-Jews with altruistic personalities that came to rescue the Jews during World War II.   Although the period was marked by extreme violence and bloodshed, good was meant to overcome evil in the form of countless people that risked their lives for the Jews, despite the fact that they were not related to the Jews by religion, culture, or ethnicity. Peter Hayes mentions several such people by name in his article, â€Å"Lessons and Legacies: The Meaning of the Holocaust in a Changing World.†Ã‚   According to the author, although the Nazis believed that it was a crime to help the Jews, the brave people who helped the Jews refused to submit to Nazi pressure and injustice. Analysis All of the articles summarized above provide evidence to back up the authors’ theses.   While Frank McDonough provides historical examples of the conflict between the Church and Nazism; Samuel P. and Peral M. Oliner provide research evidence to show the altruistic characteristics of the brave non-Jewish rescuers that came to help the Jews without expecting a monetary reward in exchange for their help.   Peter Hayes uses the case study method to describe the altruistic personality of the non-Jewish rescuer. Hence, all three articles provide enough information for the writer to understand the respective topics in depth.   What is more, all three articles present information in a logical manner.   After introducing the topics of their articles, the authors present evidence to support their thesis, connecting each of their sentences and paragraphs to the previous ones.   At no point does it appear that the authors are digressing or providing little in terms of reasoning.   Rather, the articles are complete in terms of logic. Personal Response to the Readings In my opinion, the most important fact to infer from the summarized readings is that good and evil can be interwoven even in terms in great distress.   Indeed, it is good news for humanity that everybody would not submit to evil despite all odds.   So, even though the Nazis were a great threat for the good people in their area, innumerable such people refused to be afraid of Nazism,  and instead made an effort to help the Jews.   The Church refused to bow to Nazi dictatorship to boot.   I believe this is a victory for religion, even if the Jews were being persecuted because of their religion alone.   Indeed, my faith in the power of religion as well as good over evil has been strengthened through these readings.      

Wednesday, August 28, 2019

Land Use Element in San Marcos Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Land Use Element in San Marcos - Research Paper Example Long term goals influence short term goals for example, in the private investment or specific plans. There are many advantages of this plan of San Marcos in that land use has considered the type of location. San Marcos location is a proximity away from good neighborhoods. Land use will ensure economic growth as San Marcos will have inhabitants who will conduct business or promote one. In addition, with new inhabitants so does need of education creep in, making San Marco an educational hub. However, this close proximity to a lot of neighborhoods enhnaces lack of privacy and a high population which comes with competition of resources. San Marcos modern areas are full of natural habitat like wildlife, agriculture and vernal pools. This is advantageous in that the sigh provides aesthetic relief, attracts rainfall and is thus encouraged and maintained. The main significant reason for leaving an open space and conservation are in san Marcos is that it makes it easy for individuals living there to identify the natural habitat, historical background of the area and the culture of the people. San Marco’s suburbs are intentionally packed with open space which has natural habitat. This is to set aside the rich and mighty from the rest of the town giving them the needed privacy. Moreover, the open space ensures a high quality of air away from polluted air of the cities. Open space and conservation will enhance the quality of living by staring with the air that residents breathe whci is qu;laity air. Its aesthetic beauty is also amazing Convesresely, even though the space is good for air and beauty open space widens the gap between the rich and the poor. This further drives the peole in different ways thus lack of unity. San Marco housing strives to deliver secure, but cheap housing for the community.

Tuesday, August 27, 2019

Lies my teacher told me Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Lies my teacher told me - Essay Example Gone with the Wind focuses not on the hardships of slavery, but the injustices of the Union Army and Reconstruction. This is very misleading. Did the South face hardships at the hands of the Union Army? Of course they did, they lost the war. However slaves also faced injustices. In Gone with the Wind only one slave was whipped for not taking care of a hot horse (Mitchell 51). In Bullwhip days: The slaves remember: An oral history (Mellon 2002:39) a slave recounts numerous whippings with blood and blisters all over a slave’s back. This is what happened according to a witness. However all races of students would be uncomfortable with this image. That is why history has to be smoothed over for children. Is it right that teachers lie to students? No, it is not right. One human trait is to separate people, events, and history into a good and evil category. The truth is not all slaves were beaten by their white masters, but many were. Not all white people owned or even believed in s lavery, but many did. History needs to treat events as humanly as possible. That means judgment does not need to be passed, but history needs to be presented through facts not emotion. Slavery was not a clear cut issue. It is difficult, but needs to be addressed by all races. Bibliography Loewen, J. W. (1996). Lies my teacher told me. New York: Touchstone. Mellon, J. (2002).

Reading critically and interpreting literature Term Paper

Reading critically and interpreting literature - Term Paper Example The Yellow Wallpaper, published in 1892 and written by Charlotte Perkins Gilman, charts a young woman's development into deep depression, enabled by her well-intentioned but misguided husband, who is a doctor. The main character, who remains nameless (but may be called Jane, as a reference at the very end of the story, and she will be referred to as such in this essay at times), struggles against the popular contemporary concept of the 'rest cure,' a 'medical' treatment for the â€Å"temporary nervous depression – a slight hysterical tendency† (Perkins Gilman) which nineteenth-century women were frequently diagnosed with. Her gender- and educational-based fight is against the system, represented by her husband, for a cure which is catered to her own wants and needs rather than a blanket treatment which oppresses her and worsens her condition. Yukio Mishima's 1966 Patriotism also focuses on a woman's struggle, although his is a very different perspective. Written in the third person, unlike The Yellow Wallpaper which is from the main character's point of view, Patriotism records the evening of a happily married couple's suicide pact, in grim and gory detail. Reiko and her husband reduce their world to their small house, decrease the world's population to just themselves, and then struggle wordlessly against their own concepts of a peaceful death, both mentally and physically. Their passive acceptance of a frightening situation, a reflection of Mishima's complicated feelings on contemporary Japanese morality, resists the classification of a 'struggle,' and a critic is forced to admit that the story's struggle is deeper than vocalization. It appears that it is a tract against suicide, but the author's deep-seated, somewhat twisted love for his country, and the fact that he also chose to commit seppuku, is difficult to reconcile with the repellent nature of this amazingly-written story. Mishima was also an ardent supporter of the samurai honor code. L ike the narrator of The Yellow Wallpaper, Reiko's struggle is both gender- and educationally-based, although her experience is more totally a reflection of Mishima's internal problems rather than a struggle of her own. This essay will show how setting, tone and irony in The Yellow Wallpaper and Patriotism reveal the struggles enacted through their main women characters, and how these stories reflect their author's respective fears. The setting of The Yellow Wallpaper becomes the focus of Jane's struggle against her husband's medical and frankly misogynistic beliefs. It is is the most important motif of the story, in that the narrator believes that the cause of her descent into madness is the wallpaper – its colour, pattern and even its smell. The narrator and her husband have taken â€Å"ancestral halls† (Perkins Gilman) as their summer holiday home; the â€Å"place has been empty for years† (Perkins Gilman) and as such, presumably, is old and run-down. Jane is enclosed in the large room at the top of the house, even though she fervently expressed a desire to stay in one of the rooms downstairs. The old, â€Å"atrocious† (Perkins Gilman) yellow room both entraps her and symbolizes that entrapment: John coerces her to stay alone in the room, on the basis of his educational and emotional authority, against her will. Just as the protagonist cannot overcome him, nor can she fight against the mores of the society which dismisses her

Monday, August 26, 2019

The payment is made as soon as the contract is signed Case Study

The payment is made as soon as the contract is signed - Case Study Example All of a sudden if Jason says he is insolvent, or even proves to be. Jim is the one who will be actually stuck in the entire situation. Jim is probably thinking, Jason's not going to pay him. In certain contracts, the payment is made as soon as the contract is signed. So there are two possibilities. One: If the payment has already been made to Jim, all he needs to worry about is that Jason, might not claim in court, that now that he is insolvent this contract is null and void and so he wants' the money back. Two: if the payment is yet to be made, then Jason will definitely want to not make the payment. Jim has the right to make his point in court in both the cases. What Jim needs to understand is the fact that under the JCT 05 Standard Form of Building Contract with Quantities contract. The general law, right to stop otherwise denies a contract can come up in a lot of situations. Initially, a single party can make it apparent that it has no intent of performing its part of the good deal. Secondly, that party might be responsible of such a grave violation of contract that it will be tackled as bearing no target of acting. An occurrence of this type is recognized by law as a repudiatory breach. In mutual cases, the innocent party has an alternative; either to confirm the contract also holds the additional party to its responsibilities at the same time as asserting costs as apt for the breach, or else to get the contract to an ending. If negation is decided on for, then both the parties are free from any more contractual compulsion to carry out.1Also Jim ought to know that not every breach is alike nor do the astringent parties essentially have the similar privileges for the diverse breaches. For instance if in a case a contractor is thrown out his job, the contractor may discover it the tough way that project financer acted irrationally plus used irrational force, moreover it may be acknowledged the one in defaulting.2If Jason gets in touch with Jim, this act will be then by action of law, and will take place where the accountable party has committed a basic infringe and the blameless party has then b y remark or act chosen to believe the refutation and finish the contract. In this case Jim will not be claiming any rights that he might have in this case. Jim should opt for a scenario wherein, he might have chances to claim his damages while at the same time abiding by his contractual commitment. It is vital that Jim as the innocent party ascertains evidently the lawful base for this path of action. More significantly, it ought to be esteemed that the distressed party is forever permitted to seek alternative for a specific violation through an action in indemnity. If Jason does terminate the, it would hence, be the last option, wherever any possible quantum of payment in the shape of a grant for damages is expected to be inadequate to give good reason for the continuation of the focused agreement. Jim has by law the right, to claim for damages while any breach of contract can give rise to a claim for damages, because the evasion by Jason would be specifically of a very grave or essential nature. Jim can claim his right to the damages. It would be wiser to wait and see what Jason's next step will be and decide accordingly in light of a ll above given advice. Section 2) The statement tort is derivative from the

Sunday, August 25, 2019

NETWORK SECURITY I Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

NETWORK SECURITY I - Research Paper Example With networking in place, real time communication has been made possible through emails, VOIP, teleconferencing, online chats among other channels. However, these networks are vulnerable to numerous security threats, which have the capacity to cause extensive damage and losses for the users (Andress, 2011). This paper is a critical evaluation of network security threats and their solutions. Network Security Threats A network is an interconnection of two or more computers for the purpose of sharing resources, such as hardware and software (Wetherall, 2010). There are various types of networks which include, but not limited to, local area networks (LAN), wide area networks (WAN) and metropolitan area networks (MAN). Local area networks are commonly found in institutions and offices, whereby sharing of resources is internal, for example, between departments or various workstations in an office. Wide area networks facilitate sharing of information on a wide geographical location, whereby numerous LANs around the world are interconnected for this purpose. The internet and the World Wide Web are examples of LAN as they can be accessed by users from every corner of the globe as long as they are connected to an internet service provider (ISP). MAN, on the other hand, exists in a smaller geographical location than WAN but larger than that of LAN (Wetherall, 2010). These networks have facilitated criminals with an avenue to make money through illegal activities especially due to the fact that millions of people around the world utilize one or all of the above mentioned networks on daily basis. Loads of data and sensitive information are exchanged over these networks on hourly basis and due to this; criminals have taken advantage through their technical skills to conduct cyber attacks, either for economic benefits or for malicious purposes (Zalewski, 2011). The internet, for example, has facilitated users with an avenue to conduct businesses and transactions through onlin e shopping. Online shopping is a mode of doing business whereby manufacturers and retailers design interactive websites, in which they display their products and details. Interested shoppers are only required to visit the websites from the comfort of their personal computers, from which they can evaluate and compare prices of commodities offered by different companies. Processes, such as cataloguing and placing orders are made through the same media thus making it easy and cheap for marketers and consumers to fulfill their desires without necessarily having to travel to the physical business location. This has also facilitated globalization as digitizing the world in this manner brings the world citizens closer thus forming a global village (Schneider, 2011). However, online shopping has been noted as being one of the major targets and facilitators of cyber crime. Rogue programmers have continued to develop phishing sites, which they utilize to steal users’ personal informati on for the purposes of committing fraud. Phishing sites are websites, which impersonate genuine websites such that it becomes difficult for users to differentiate between the genuine and the rogue websites. These websites usually request users to input their personal details, such as credit card numbers, emails, names, bank details among other sensitive

Saturday, August 24, 2019

Robot Lawnmowers Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Robot Lawnmowers - Essay Example The sellers make their customers buy them and thus ample time is saved for attracting new clientele and persuading them to buy robot lawnmowers. This not only saves time but also offers huge profit. 2.1.3. The best robot lawnmowers that are being sold in the market holding positive feedback from the elderly and the disabled consumers include Robomower, Lawnbott, and Husqvarna Automower (Squidoo LLC, 2011). Robomower is being made by a company in Israel named Friendly Robotics, and is being traded into the US by Systems Trading Corporation (STC). Lawnbott is being made by an Italian company named Zucchetti Centro Sistemi and is being imported by Kyodo America (KA). It is marketed by the name of Ambrogio in Europe. Automower is made by a Swedish company and is imported and marketed by official Husqvarna dealers. Robot market is developing at a fast pace since robots are making lives easier by automating the systems and leaving enough time for leisure along with saving money (Fuller, 1991). Since new technology is continuously replacing the old one, the price of robot lawnmowers is dropping and is expected to further drop in the coming years with a simultaneous increase in their usage especially by consumers who are elderly or are disabled. The technology regarding the hardware, software and design is being improved but the component prices are dropping since the demand is increasing. The robot market is seriously considering the needs of the elderly and the disabled persons and the robot lawnmower market also consider them their biggest consumers. The robotic mower market is expected to quadruple in the coming few years. However, at least a decade is needed for these lawnmowers to replace the contractors’ business so in the meanwhile the contractors can make use of these intelligent devices to make money in their businesses. 2.6.2. In

Friday, August 23, 2019

King Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

King - Essay Example He addresses the anxiety of those who criticize his ‘direct action’ as illegal, by distinguishing between the â€Å"two types of laws: just and unjust† (King, 8). Individuals have the moral responsibility not only to obey just laws, but also to disobey unjust laws. King agrees â€Å"with St. Augustine that â€Å"an unjust law is no law at all†Ã¢â‚¬  (King, 8). He holds that a just law is one which is in accordance with morality, uplifts human personality and is equally applicable to the majority and the minority. King categorically asserts that â€Å"law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice† (King, 9). King’s position justifies government action which would be immoral from the perspective of an individual. A government is morally within its rights to strike back at any threat to national security, regardless of the geographical location of the perceived enemy. The government’s foremost duty is to ensure the security of its citizens and preserve the sovereignty of the nation. Although King’s â€Å"inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny† is based on the United States of his era, changing times and vast technological advances in communication and transport have made his position applicable on a global scale (King, 5). Actions in one part of the globe have instant repercussions on distant parts. The interconnectedness of global networks of terror justifies government strikes anywhere in the world. Such strikes cannot be construed as contravention of another nation’s sovereignty. The use of drones in Pakistan in making preemptive strikes against Al Quaeda is justified. Critics cite this as extreme action, but, as King asserts, being â€Å"extremists -- for the extension of justice† King, 11) is acceptable. This validates the Obama government’s action against Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. King acclaims â€Å"the vision to see that inj ustice must be rooted out by strong, persistent and determined action† (King, 12). Governments can resort to extreme actions, resulting in the loss of lives, in the cause of national security. Government intervention in the cause of global justice is also justified. King strongly declares that â€Å"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere† King,  5). It is not possible to insulate America from the rest of the world. Although the role of a ‘global policeman’ may not be acceptable to everyone, responsibility cannot be shirked. Isolationism is a policy which belongs to the past. Intervention on humanitarian grounds, and on the grounds of protection of self-interest, is justified by King’s definition of justice. American intervention in Bosnia stopped the carnage which decimated the land. Again, intervention in Libya struck a blow for democracy. Of course, intervention carries great risks, as is clearly seen in the quagmire of Iraq. In the case of Syria, the escalating casualties call out for intervention. The government continues to restrict its action to the provision of humanitarian and logistical aid to the rebels. This stand is largely based on the perception that Assad is a secular ruler who holds back the surge of Islamic extremism in the Arab world. It is time to realize that, in King’s words, it is wrong â€Å"

Thursday, August 22, 2019

Commonwealth of Nations Essay Example for Free

Commonwealth of Nations Essay Inside Jewish Synagogue The Paradesi Synagogue is the oldest active[1] synagogue in the Commonwealth of Nations,[2] located in Kochi, Kerala, in South India. It was built in 1568 by the Malabar Yehudan people or Cochin Jewish community in the Kingdom of Cochin. Paradesi is a word used in several Indian languages, and the literal meaning of the term is foreigners, applied to the synagogue because it was historically used by White Jews, a mixture of Jews from Cranganore, the Middle East, and European exiles. It is also referred to as the Cochin Jewish Synagogue or the Mattancherry Synagogue. The synagogue is located in the quarter of Old Cochin known as Jew Town,[2] and is the only one of the seven synagogues in the area still in use. The complex has fourbuildings. It was built adjacent to the Mattancherry Palace temple on the land gifted to the Malabari Yehuden community by the Raja of Kochi, Rama Varma[disambiguation needed]. The Mattancherry Palace temple and the Mattancherry synagogue share a common wall. History The Malabari Jews formed a prosperous trading community of Kerala, and they controlled a major portion of world wide spice trade. In 1568, the Jews of Kerala constructed the Paradesi Synagogue adjacent to Mattancherry Palace, Cochin, now part of the Indian city of Ernakulam, on land given to them by the Raja of Kochi. The original synagogue was built in the 4th  century in Kodungallur (Cranganore) when the Jews had a mercantile role in the South Indian region along the Malabar coast now called Kerala. It was later moved to Kochi from Kodungallur. The first synagogue of the Malabari Jews in Cochin was destroyed in the Portuguese persecution of the Malabari Jews and Nasrani people of Kerala in the 16th century. The second synagogue, built under the protection of the Raja of Cochin along with Dutch patronage, is the present synagogue. It is called Paradesi synagogue because it was built with Dutch patronage at a time when Kochi was under Dutch occupation, thus the name paradesi synagogue or foreign synagogue. In 1968, the synagogue celebrated its 400th anniversary in a ceremony attended by Indira Gandhi, the Indian Prime Minister. Social composition and traditions The Paradesi Synagogue had three classes of members. * White Jews were full members. The White Jews, or Paradesi Jews, were the recent descendants of Sephardim from Holland and Spain. * Black Jews were allowed to worship but were not admitted to full membership. These Cochin Jews were the original Jewish settlers of Cochin. * Meshuchrarim, a group of freed slaves who had no communal rights and no synagogue of their own sat on the floor or on the steps outside. However, in the first half of the 20th century,Abraham Barak Salem, a meshuchrar, successfully campaigned against this discrimination. As is normal for Orthodox Jewish synagogues, the Paradesi Synagogue has separate seating sections for men and women. The Paradesi Synagogue is the only functioning synagogue in Kochi today with a minyan (though this minyan must be formed with Jews from outside Kochi, as the number who still reside there is not sufficient). In conformity with the Hindu, Nasrani and Islamic traditions of Kerala, the worshippers are required to enter the Paradesi Synagogue barefoot.[3] Other facets which are unique to the Cochin Jewish community, and which are results of Hindu influence, include special colors of clothing for each festival, circumcision ceremonies at public worship, and distribution of grapes soaked myrtle leaves on certain festivals. In addition, the Cochin Jews currently have no rabbis, as the community is led by elders. The synagogue is also open to visitors; the ticket-seller, Yaheh Hallegua, is the last female Paradesi Jew of child-bearing age. Objects of antiquity The Paradesi Synagogue has the Scrolls of the Law, several gold crowns received as gifts, many Belgian glass chandeliers, and a brass-railed pulpit. It houses the copper plates of privileges given to Joseph Rabban, the earliest known Cochin Jew, dating from the 10th century, written in Tamil on the two plates, by the ruler of the Malabar Coast. The floor of the synagogue is composed of hundreds of Chinese, 18th century, hand-painted porcelain tiles, all of which are unique. There is also an oriental rug, a gift from Haile Selassie, the last Ethiopian Emperor.[5] The most visible part of the synagogue is the 18th century clock tower, which, along with other parts of the complex,which underwent repair work under the direction of World Monuments Fund, between 1998 and 1999.[6] Hebrew inscription at the Mattancherry synagogue A tablet from the earlier synagogue in Kochangadi in Kochi (built in 1344) is placed on the outer wall of the Paradesi synagogue. The inscription states that the structure was built in 5105 (in the Hebrew Calendar) as an abode for the spirit of God Description The temple was built in first millennium during the time of Kamarupa. Allahabad rock inscriptions of Samudragupta mentioned about it. Temple was destroyed during the middle of second millennium and revised temple structure was constructed in 1565 by Chilarai of the Koch dynastyin the style of medieval temples.[2] The current structure has a beehive-like shikhara with delightful sculptured panels and images of Ganeshaand other Hindu gods and goddesses on the outside .[3] The temple consists of three major chambers. The western chamber is large and  rectangular and is not used by the general pilgrims for worship. The middle chamber is a square, with a small idol of the Goddess, a later addition. The walls of this chamber contain sculpted images of Naranarayana, related inscriptions and other gods.[4] The middle chamber leads to the sanctum sanctorum of the temple in the form of a cave, which consists of no image but a natural underground spring that flows through a yoni-shaped cleft in the bedrock. During the Ambuvaci festival each summer,the menstruation of the Goddess Kamakhya is celebrated. During this time, the water in the main shrine runs red with iron oxide resembling menstrual fluid. It is likely that this is an ancient Khasi sacrificial site, and worshiping here still includes sacrifices. Devotees come every morning with goats to offer to Shakti.[5] The Kalika Purana, an ancient work in Sanskrit describes Kamakhya as the yielder of all desires, the young bride of Shiva, and the giver of salvation.Shakti is known as Kamakhya. Kamakhya Temple in Himachal Pradesh. The Kamakhya temple in the forest region of Polian Purohitan in Una District of Himachal State is situated at about 600 mt above sea level. The Pindi,was brought over by the Rajpurohits of Brahaminical Aryan descent of the sage Vatsayan some 800 years ago after the invasion of the Shans in 1200C, with the destruction of the first tantric ritual site. The worshippers escaped in mass migration from the Garo-Khasi hillregion of Assam, via the Tibet Himalaya silk route to Kashmir .While some left for the north west frontiers, a few families of the Brahamin Vatsayan Rajpurohits sanctified the tantric Kamakhyakuldevi in the wilderness of an isolated forest hill in Polian Purohitan. Sculptures carved on the temple The first tantric Kamakhya Temple was destroyed during the Mongol invasion in the Nilachal hills in the 12 BC, so was the fate of the second tantric temple destroyed in the Muslim attacks, probably by the Hindu convert Muslim  warrior Kala Pahad. The Brahaminical legend of the Shakti in the later period led to the worship of the tantric goddess as Hindu Shakti goddess. The worship of all female deity in Assam symbolizes the fusion of faiths and practices of Aryan and non-Aryan elements in Assam.[6] The different names associated with the goddess are names of local Aryan and non-Aryan goddesses.[7] The Yogini Tantra mentions that the religion of the Yogini Pitha is ofKirata origin.[8] According to Banikanta Kakati, there existed a tradition among the priests established by Naranarayana that the Garos, a matrilineal people, offered worship at the earlier Kamakhya site by sacrificing pigs.[9] The goddess is worshiped according to both the Vamachara (Left-Hand Path) as well as theDakshinachara (Right-Hand Path) modes of worship.[10] Offerings to the goddess are usually flowers, but might include animal sacrifices. In general female animals are exempt from sacrifice, a rule that is relaxed during mass sacrifices.[11] Legends A complete view of the temple Vatsayana,a Vedic Sage in Varanasi during the later first Century was approached by the King in the Himalayan region (now Nepal) to find a solution to convert the tribals and their rituals of human sacrifice to a more socially accepted worship. The Sage suggested the worship of a tantric goddess Tara that spread towards the eastern Himalayan belt till the Garo Hills where the tribals worshipped a fertility yoni goddess Kameke. It was much later in the later Brahaminical period Kalika Purana that most tantric goddess were related to the legend of Shakti and began to be erroneously worshipped as a devi by the Hindus. According to the Kalika Purana, Kamakhya Temple denotes the spot where Sati used to retire in secret to satisfy her amour with Shiva, and it was also the place where her yoni fell after Shiva danced with the corpse of Sati.[12] This is not corroborated in the Devi Bhagavata, which lists 108 places associated with Satis body, though Kamakhya finds a mention in a supplementary list.[13] The Yogini Tantra, a latter work, ignores the origin of Kamakhya given inKalika Purana and associates Kamakhya with the goddess Kali and  emphasizes the creative symbolism of the yoni. Kamakhya during Ahom era According to a legend the Koch Bihar royal family was banned by Devi herself from offering puja at the temple. In fear of this curse, to this day no descendants of that family dares to even look upward towards the Kamakhya hill while passing by. Without the support of the Koch royal family the temple faced lot of hardship. By the end of 1658, the Ahoms under king Jayadhvaj Singha had conquered the Lower Assam and their interests in the temple grew. In the decades that followed the Ahom kings, all who were either devout Shaivite or Shaktacontinued to support the temple by rebuilding and renovating it. Rudra Singha (reign 1696 to 1714) was a devout Hindu and as he grew older he decided to formally embrace the religion and become an orthodox Hindu by being initiated or taking sharan of a Guru, who would teach him the mantras and become his spiritual guide. But, he could not bear the thought of humbling himself in front a Brahmin who is his subject. He therefore sent envoys to Bengal and summoned Krishnaram Bhattacharyya, a famous mahant of Shaktasect who lived in Malipota, near Santipur in Nadia district. The mahant was unwilling to come, but consented on being promised to be given the care of the Kamakhya temple to him. Though the king did not take sharan, he satisfied the mahant by ordering his sons and the Brahmins in his entourage to accept him as their spiritual guru. When Rudra Singha died, his eldest son Siba Singha (reign 1714 to 1744), who became the king, gave the management of the Kamakhya temple and along with it large areas of land (Debottar land) to Mahant Krishnaram Bhattacharyya. The Mahant and his successors came to be known as Parbatiya Gosains, as they resided on top of the Nilachal hill. Many Kamakhya priests and modern Saktas of Assam are either disciples or descendants of the Parbatiya Gosains, or of the Nati and Na Gosains.

Wednesday, August 21, 2019

Act Utilitarianism Essay Example for Free

Act Utilitarianism Essay Utilitarianism is a theory in normative ethics holding that the proper course of action is the one that maximizes overall happiness. It is now generally taken to be a form of consequentialism, although when Anscombe first introduced that term it was to distinguish between old-fashioned Utilitarianism and consequentialism. [1] According to utilitarianism the moral worth of an action is determined only by its resulting outcome although there is debate over how much consideration should be given to actual consequences, foreseen consequences and intended consequences. Two influential contributors to this theory are Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. In A Fragment on Government Bentham says ‘it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong’ and describes this as a fundamental axiom. In An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation he talks of ‘the principle of utility’ but later prefers â€Å"the greatest happiness principle. [2][3] Utilitarianism can be characterized as a quantitative and reductionist approach to ethics. It is a type of naturalism. [4] It can be contrasted with deontological ethics,[5] which does not regard the consequences of an act as a determinant of its moral worth; virtue ethics,[6] which primarily focuses on acts and habits leading to happiness; pragmatic ethics; as well as with ethical egoism and other varieties of consequentialism. [7] Utilitarianism has often been considered the natural ethic of a democracy operating by simple majority without protection of individual rights. [8] Early utilitarianism The importance of happiness as an end for humans has long been recognized. Forms of hedonism were put forward by Aristippus and Epicurus; Aristotle argued that eudaimonia is the highest human good and Augustine wrote that all men agree in desiring the last end, which is happiness. Happiness was also explored in depth by Aquinas[9][10][11][12][13] However, utilitarianism as a distinct ethical position only emerged in the eighteenth century. Although utilitarianism is usually thought to start with Jeremy Bentham there were earlier writers who presented theories that were strikingly similar. In An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals David Hume writes: In all determinations of morality, this circumstance of public utility is ever principally in view; and wherever disputes arise, either in philosophy or common life, concerning the bounds of duty, the question cannot, by any means, be decided with greater certainty, than by ascertaining, on any side, the true interests of mankind. [14] Hume had studied under Francis Hutcheson and it was he who first introduced a key utilitarian phrase. In An Inquiry into the Original of Our Ideas of Beauty and Virtue (1725) Hutcheson writes, In comparing the moral qualitys of actions, in order to regulate our election among various actions proposed, or to find which of them has the greatest moral excellency, we are led by our moral sense of virtue to judge thus; that in equal degrees of happiness, expected to proceed from the action, the virtue is in proportion to the number of persons to whom the happiness shall extend (and here the dignity, or moral importance of persons, may compensate numbers); And in equal numbers, the virtue is as the quantity of the happiness, or natural good; or that the virtue is in a compound ratio of the quantity of good, and number of enjoyers. In the same manner, the moral evil, or vice, is as the degree of misery, and number of sufferers; so that, that action is best, which procures the greatest happiness for the greatest numbers; and that, worst, which, in like manner, occasions misery. [15]. In the first three editions of the book Hutcheson followed this passage with various mathematical algorithms â€Å"to compute the Morality of any Actions†. In this he pre-figured the hedonic calculus of Bentham. It is claimed[16] that the first systematic theory of utilitarian ethics was developed by John Gay. In Concerning the Fundamental Principle of Virtue or Morality (1731) Gay argues that. Utilitarianism â€Å"happiness, private happiness, is the proper or ultimate end of all our actions†¦ each particular action may be said to have its proper and peculiar end†¦(but)†¦. they still tend or ought to tend to something farther; as is evident from hence, viz. that a man may ask and expect a reason why either of them are pursued: now to ask the reason of any action or pursuit, is only to enquire into the end of it: but to expect a reason, i. e. an end, to be assigned for an ultimate end, is absurd. To ask why I pursue happiness, will admit of no other answer than an explanation of the terms. †[17] This pursuit of happiness is given a theological basis: â€Å"Now it is evident from the nature of God, viz.his being infinitely happy in himself from all eternity, and from his goodness manifested in his works, that he could have no other design in creating mankind than their happiness; and therefore he wills their happiness; therefore the means of their happiness: therefore that my behaviour, as far as it may be a means of the happiness of mankind, should be such†¦thus the will of God is the immediate criterion of Virtue, and the happiness of mankind the criterion of the wilt of God; and therefore the happiness of mankind may be said to be the criterion of virtue, but once removed†¦(and)†¦ I am to do whatever lies in my power towards promoting the happiness of mankind. [18] Gay’s theological utilitarianism was developed and popularized by William Paley. It has been claimed that Paley was not a very original thinker and that the philosophical part of his treatise on ethics is â€Å"an assemblage of ideas developed by others and is presented to be learned by students rather than debated by colleagues. †[19] Nevertheless, his book The Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy (1785) was a required text at Cambridge[19] and Smith says that Paley’s writings were â€Å"once as well known in American colleges as were the readers and spellers of William McGuffey and Noah Webster in the elementary schools. †[20] Although now largely missing from the philosophical canon, Schneewind writes that utilitarianism first became widely known in England through the work of William Paley. [21] The now forgotten significance of Paley can be judged from the title of Birks 1874 work Modern Utilitarianism or the Systems of Paley, Bentham and Mill Examined and Compared. Apart from restating that happiness as an end is grounded in the nature of God, Paley also discusses the place of rules. He writes, â€Å"†¦actions are to be estimated by their tendency. Whatever is expedient, is right. It is the utility of any moral rule alone, which constitutes the obligation of it. Modern Utilitarianism by T. R. Birks 1874 2 But to all this there seems a plain objection, viz. that many actions are useful, which no man in his senses will allow to be right. There are occasions, in which the hand of the assassin would be very useful†¦ The true answer is this; that these actions, after all, are not useful, and for that reason, and that alone, are not right. To see this point perfectly, it must be observed that the bad consequences of actions are twofold, particular and general. The particular bad consequence of an action, is the mischief which that single action directly and immediately occasions. The general bad consequence is, the violation of some necessary or useful general rule†¦ You cannot permit one action and forbid another, without showing a difference between them. Consequently, the same sort of actions must be generally permitted or generally forbidden. Where, Utilitarianism therefore, the general permission of them would be pernicious, it becomes necessary to lay down and support the rule which generally forbids them. †[22] 3 Classical utilitarianism Jeremy Bentham Benthams book An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation was printed in 1780 but not published until 1789. It is possible that Bentham was spurred on to publish after he saw the success of Paley’s The Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy. [23] Benthams book was not an immediate success[24] but his ideas were spread further when Pierre Etienne Louis Dumont translated edited selections from a variety of Benthams manuscripts into French. Traite de legislation civile et penale was published in 1802 and then later retranslated back into English by Hildreth as The Theory of Legislation, although by this time significant portions of Dumont’s work had already been retranslated and incorporated into Sir John Bowrings edition of Benthams works, which was issued in parts between 1838 and 1843. Benthams work opens with a statement of the principle of utility, â€Å"Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do†¦ By the principle of utility is meant that principle which approves or disapproves of every action whatsoever according to the tendency it appears to have to augment or diminish the happiness of the party whose interest is in question: or, what is the same thing in other words to promote or to oppose that happiness. I say of every action whatsoever, and therefore not only of every action of a private individual, but of every measure of government. †[25] In Chapter IV Bentham introduces a method of calculating the value of pleasures and pains, which has come to be known as the hedonic calculus. Bentham says that the value of a pleasure or pain, considered by itself, can be measured according to its intensity, duration, certainty/uncertainty and propinquity/remoteness. In addition, it is necessary to consider â€Å"the tendency of any act by which it is produced† and, therefore, to take account of the act’s fecundity, or the chance it has of being followed by sensations of the same kind and its purity, or the chance it has of not being followed by sensations of the opposite kind. Finally, it is necessary to consider the extent, or the number of people affected by the action. Perhaps aware that Hutcheson eventually removed his algorithms for calculating the greatest happiness because they â€Å"appear’d useless, and were disagreeable to some readers†[26] Bentham contends that there is nothing novel or unwarranted about his method for â€Å"in all this there is nothing but what the practice of mankind, wheresoever they have a clear view of their own interest, is perfectly conformable to. † Rosen warns that descriptions of utilitarianism can bear â€Å"little resemblance historically to utilitarians like Bentham and J. S. Mill† and can be more â€Å"a crude version of act utilitarianism conceived in the twentieth century as a straw man to be attacked and rejected. †[27] It is a mistake to think that Bentham is not concerned with rules. His seminal work is concerned with the principles of legislation and the hedonic calculus is introduced with the words â€Å"Pleasures then, and the avoidance of pains, are the ends that the legislator has in view. † In Chapter VII Bentham says, â€Å"The business of government is to promote the happiness of the society, by punishing and rewarding†¦ In proportion as an act tends to disturb that happiness, in proportion as the tendency of it is pernicious, will be the demand it creates for punishment. † The question then arises as to when, if at all, it might legitimate to break the law. This is considered in The Theory of Legislation where Bentham distinguishes between evils of the first and second orders. Those of the first order are the more immediate consequences; those of the second are when the consequences spread through the community causing ‘alarm’ and ‘danger’. Utilitarianism â€Å"It is true there are cases in which, if we confine ourselves to the effects of the first order, the good will have an incontestable preponderance over the evil. Were the offence considered only under this point of view, it would not be easy to assign any good reasons to justify the rigour of the laws. Every thing depends upon the evil of the second order; it is this which gives to such actions the character of crime, and which makes punishment necessary. Let us take, for example, the physical desire of satisfying hunger. Let a beggar, pressed by hunger, steal from a rich mans house a loaf, which perhaps saves him from starving, can it be possible to compare the good which the thief acquires for himself, with the evil which the rich man suffers? †¦ It is not on account of the evil of the first order that it is necessary to erect these actions into offences, but on account of the evil of the second order. †[28] 4 John Stuart Mill Mill was brought up as a Benthamite with the explicit intention that would carry on the cause of utilitarianism. [29] Mills book Utilitarianism first appeared as a series of three articles published in Frasers Magazine in 1861 and was reprinted as a single book in 1863. Higher and lower pleasures Mill rejects a purely quantitative measurement of utility and says, â€Å"It is quite compatible with the principle of utility to recognise the fact, that some kinds of pleasure are more desirable and more valuable than others. It would be absurd that while, in estimating all other things, quality is considered as well as quantity, the estimation of pleasures should be supposed to depend on quantity alone. †[30] Mill notes that, contrary to what its critics might say, there is â€Å"no known Epicurean theory of life which does not assign to the pleasures of the intellect†¦ a much higher value as pleasures than to those of mere sensation. † However, he accepts that this is usually because the intellectual pleasures are thought to have circumstantial advantages, i. e. â€Å"greater permanency, safety, uncostliness, c. † Instead, Mill will argue that some pleasures are intrinsically better than others. The accusation that hedonism is â€Å"doctrine worthy only of swine† has a long history. In Nicomachean Ethics (Book 1 Chapter 5) Aristotle says that identifying the good with pleasure is to prefer a life suitable for beasts. The theological utilitarians had the option of grounding their pursuit of happiness in the will of God; the hedonistic utilitarians needed a different defense. Mill’s approach is to argue that the pleasures of the intellect are intrinsically superior to physical pleasures. Few human creatures would consent to be changed into any of the lower animals, for a promise of the fullest allowance of a beasts pleasures; no intelligent human being would consent to be a fool, no instructed person would be an ignoramus, no person of feeling and conscience would be selfish and base, even though they should be persuaded that the fool, the dunce, or the rascal is better satisfied with his lot than they are with theirs†¦ A being of higher faculties requires more to make him happy, is capable probably of more acute suffering, and is certainly accessible to it at more points, than one of an inferior type; but in spite of these liabilities, he can never really wish to sink into what he feels to be a lower grade of existence†¦ It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are of a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question†¦ [31] Mill argues that if people who are â€Å"competently acquainted† with two pleasures show a decided preference for one even if it be accompanied by more discontent and â€Å"would not resign it for any quantity of the other† then it is legitimate to regard that pleasure as being superior in quality. Mill recognises that these ‘competent judges’ will not always agree, in which case the judgment of the majority is to be accepted as final. Mill also acknowledges that â€Å"many who are capable of the higher pleasures, occasionally, under the influence of temptation, postpone them to the Utilitarianism lower. But this is quite compatible with a full appreciation of the intrinsic superiority of the higher. † Mill says that this appeal to those who have experienced the relevant pleasures is no different to what must happen when assessing the quantity of pleasure for there is no other way of measuring â€Å"the acutest of two pains, or the intensest of two pleasurable sensations. † Mills proof of the principle of utility In Chapter Four of Utilitarianism Mill considers what proof can be given for the Principle of Utility. He says’ â€Å" The only proof capable of being given that an object is visible, is that people actually see it. The only proof that a sound is audible, is that people hear it In like manner, I apprehend, the sole evidence it is possible to produce that anything is desirable, is that people do actually desire it†¦ No reason can be given why the general happiness is desirable, except that each person, so far as he believes it to be attainable, desires his own happiness†¦ we have not only all the proof which the case admits of, but all which it is possible to require, that happiness is a good: that each persons happiness is a good to that person, and the general happiness, therefore, a good to the aggregate of all persons. †[32] It is usual[33] to say that Mill is committing a number of fallacies. He is accused of committing the naturalistic fallacy, because he is trying to deduce what people ought to do from what they do in fact do; the fallacy of equivocation, because he moves from the fact that something is desirable(1), i. e. is capable of being desired, to the claim that it is desirable(2), i. e.that it ought to be desired; and the fallacy of composition, because the fact that people desire their own happiness does not imply that the aggregate of all persons will desire the general happiness. Hall[34] and Popkin[35] defend Mill against this accusation pointing out that he begins Chapter Four by asserting that â€Å"that questions of ultimate ends do not admit of proof, in the ordinary acceptation of the term† and that this is â€Å"common to all first principles. † According to Hall and Popkin, therefore, Mill does not attempt to â€Å"establish that what people do desire is desirable but merely attempts to make the principles acceptable. †[33] The type of â€Å"proof† Mill is offering consists only of some considerations which, Mill thought, might induce an honest and reasonable man to accept utilitarianism. [33] Having claimed that people do, in fact, desire happiness Mill now has to show that it is the only thing they desire. Mill anticipates the objection that people desire other things such as virtue. He argues that whilst people might start desiring virtue as a means to happiness, eventually, it becomes part of someone’s happiness and is then desired as an end in itself. The principle of utility does not mean that any given pleasure, as music, for instance, or any given exemption from pain, as for example health, are to be looked upon as means to a collective something termed happiness, and to be desired on that account. They are desired and desirable in and for themselves; besides being means, they are a part of the end. Virtue, according to the utilitarian doctrine, is not naturally and originally part of the end, but it is capable of becoming so; and in those who love it disinterestedly it has become so, and is desired and cherished, not as a means to happiness, but as a part of their happiness. [36] 5 Utilitarianism 6 Twentieth century developments Ideal Utilitarianism The description Ideal Utilitarianism was first used by Hastings Rashdall in The Theory of Good and Evil (1907) but is more often associated with G. E. Moore. In Ethics (1912) Moore rejected a purely hedonistic utilitarianism and argued that there is a range of values that might be maximized. Moore’s strategy was to show that it is intuitively implausible that pleasure is the sole measure of what is good. He says that such an assumption, â€Å" involves our saying, for instance, that a world in which absolutely nothing except pleasure existed—no knowledge, no love, no enjoyment of beauty, no moral qualities—must yet be intrinsically better—better worth creating—provided only the total quantity of pleasure in it were the least bit greater, than one in which all these things existed as well as pleasure. † â€Å"It involves our saying that, even if the total quantity of pleasure in each was exactly equal, yet the fact that all the beings in the one possessed in addition knowledge of many different kinds and a full appreciation of all that was beautiful or worthy of love in their world, whereas none of the beings in the other possessed any of these things, would give us no reason whatever for preferring the former to the latter. †[37] Moore admits that it is impossible to prove the case either way but believed that it was intuitively obvious that even if the amount of pleasure stayed the same a world that contained such things as beauty and love would be a better world. He adds that if anybody took the contrary view then â€Å"I think it is self-evident that he would be wrong. †[37] Act and rule utilitarianism In the mid-twentieth century a number of philosophers focused on the place of rules in utilitarian thinking. [38] It was already accepted that it is necessary to use rules to help you choose the right action because the problems of calculating the consequences on each and every occasion would almost certainly result in you frequently choosing something less than the best course of action. Paley had justified the use of rules and Mill says, â€Å"It is truly a whimsical supposition that, if mankind were agreed in considering utility to be the test of morality, they would remain without any agreement as to what is useful, and would take no measures for having their notions on the subject taught to the young, and enforced by law and opinion†¦ to consider the rules of morality as improvable, is one thing; to pass over the intermediate generalisations entirely, and endeavour to test each individual action directly by the first principle, is another†¦ The proposition that happiness is the end and aim of morality, does not mean that no road ought to be laid down to that goal†¦ Nobody argues that the art of navigation is not founded on astronomy, because sailors cannot wait to calculate the Nautical Almanack. Being rational creatures, they go to sea with it ready calculated; and all rational creatures go out upon the sea of life with their minds made up on the common questions of right and wrong. †[39] However, rule utilitarianism proposes a more central role for rules that was thought to rescue the theory from some of its more devastating criticisms, particularly problems to do with justice and promise keeping. Throughout the 1950s and 1960s articles were published both for and against the new form of utilitarianism and through this debate the theory we now call rule utilitarianism was created. In an introduction to an anthology of these articles the editor was able to say, â€Å"The development of this theory was a dialectical process of formulation, criticism, reply and reformulation; the record of this process well illustrates the co-operative development of a philosophical theory. †[40] Smart[41] and McCloskey[42] initially used the terms extreme and restricted utilitarianism but eventually everyone settled on the terms act and rule utilitarianism. The essential difference is in what determines whether or not an action is the right action. Act utilitarianism maintains that an action is right if it maximises utility; rule utilitarianism maintains that an action is right if it Utilitarianism conforms to a rule that maximises utility. In 1953 Urmson published an influential article[43] arguing that Mill justified rules on utilitarian principles. From then on articles have debated this interpretation of Mill. In all probability it was not a distinction that Mill was particularly trying to make and so the evidence in his writing is inevitably mixed. In 1977 a collection of Mill’s writing was published which included a letter in which he said: â€Å"I agree with you that the right way of testing actions by their consequences, is to test them by the natural consequences of the particular action, and not by those which would follow if everyone did the same. But, for the most part, the consideration of what would happen if everyone did the same, is the only means we have of discovering the tendency of the act in the particular case. †[44] This seems to tip the balance in favour of saying that Mill is best classified as an act utilitarian. Some school level textbooks and at least one UK examination board[45] make a further distinction between strong and weak rule utilitarianism. However, it is not clear that this distinction is made in the academic literature. It has been argued that rule utilitarianism collapses into act utilitarianism, because for any given rule, in the case where breaking the rule produces more utility, the rule can be refined by the addition of a sub-rule that handles cases like the exception. [46] This process holds for all cases of exceptions, and so the ‘rules’ have as many ‘sub-rules’ as there are exceptional cases, which, in the end, makes an agent seek out whatever outcome produces the maximum utility. [47] 7 Two-level Utilitarianism In Principles (1973)[48] R. M. Hare accepts that rule utilitarianism collapses into act utilitarianism but claims that this is a result of allowing the rules to be as specific and un-general as we please. He argues that one of the main reasons for introducing rule utilitarianism was to do justice to the general rules that people need for moral education and character development and he proposes that â€Å"a difference between act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism can be introduced by limiting the specificity of the rules, i. e. , by increasing their generality. †[49] This distinction between a ‘specific rule utilitarianism’ (which collapses into act utilitarianism) and ‘general rule utilitarianism’ forms the basis of Hare’s two-level utilitarianism. When we are ‘playing God or the ideal observer’ we use the specific form and we will need to do this when we are deciding what general principles to teach and follow. When we are ‘inculcating’ or in situations where the biases of our human nature are likely to prevent us doing the calculations properly, then we should use the more general rule utilitarianism. Hare argues that in practice, most of the time, we should be following the general principles: â€Å"One ought to abide by the general principles whose general inculcation is for the best; harm is more likely to come, in actual moral situations, from questioning these rules than from sticking to them, unless the situations are very extra-ordinary; the results of sophisticated felicific calculations are not likely, human nature and human ignorance being what they are, to lead to the greatest utility. †[50] In Moral Thinking (1981) Hare illustrated the two extremes. The archangel is the hypothetical person who has perfect knowledge of the situation and no personal biases or weaknesses and always uses critical moral thinking to decide the right thing to do; the ‘prole’ is the hypothetical person who is completely incapable of critical thinking and uses nothing but intuitive moral thinking and, of necessity, has to follow the general moral rules they have been taught or learned through imitation. [51] It is not that some people are archangels and others proles but rather â€Å"we all share the characteristics of both to limited and varying degrees and at different times. †[51] Hare does not specify when we should think more like an archangel and more like a prole as this will, in any case, vary from person to person. However, the critical moral thinking underpins and informs the more intuitive moral thinking. It is responsible for formulating and, if necessary, reformulating the general moral rules. We also switch to critical thinking when trying to deal with unusual situations or in cases where the intuitive moral rules give Utilitarianism conflicting advice. 8 Preference utilitarianism Preference utilitarianism was first put forward in 1977 by John Harsanyi in Morality and the theory of rational behaviour[52] but it is more commonly associated with R. M. Hare,[51] Peter Singer[53] and Richard Brandt. [54] Harsanyi claimed that his theory is indebted to Adam Smith, who equated the moral point of view with that of an impartial but sympathetic observer; to Kant who insisted on the criterion of universality and which may also be described as a criterion of reciprocity; to the classical utilitarians who made maximising social utility the basic criterion of morality; and to ‘the modern theory of rational behaviour under risk and uncertainty, usually described as Bayesian decision theory’. [55] Harsanyi rejects hedonistic utilitarianism as being dependent on an outdated psychology saying that it is far from obvious that everything we do is motivated by a desire to maximise pleasure and minimise pain. He also rejects ideal utilitarianism because â€Å"it is certainly not true as an empirical observation that people’s only purpose in life is to have ‘mental states of intrinsic worth’. †[56] According to Harsanyi, â€Å"preference utilitarianism is the only form of utilitarianism consistent with the important philosophical principle of preference autonomy. By this I mean the principle that, in deciding what is good and what is bad for a given individual, the ultimate criterion can only be his own wants and his own preferences. †[57] Harsanyi adds two caveats. People sometimes have irrational preferences. To deal with this Harsanyi distinguishes between ‘manifest’ preferences and ‘true’ preferences. The former are those â€Å"manifested by his observed behaviour, including preferences possibly based on erroneous factual beliefs, or on careless logical analysis, or on strong emotions that at the moment greatly hinder rational choice† whereas the latter are â€Å"the preferences he would have if he had all the relevant factual information, always reasoned with the greatest possible care, and were in a state of mind most conducive to rational choice. †[57] It is the latter that preference utilitarianism tries to satisfy. The second caveat is that antisocial preferences such as sadism, envy and resentment have to be excluded. Harsanyi achieves this by claiming that such preferences partially exclude those people from the moral community. â€Å"Utilitarian ethics makes all of us members of the same moral community. A person displaying ill will toward others does remain a member of this community, but not with his whole personality. That part of his personality that harbours these hostile antisocial feelings must be excluded from membership, and has no claim for a hearing when it comes to defining our concept of social utility. †[58] More varieties of utilitarianism Negative utilitarianism In The Open Society and its Enemies (1945), Karl Popper argued that the principle maximize pleasure should be replaced by minimize pain. He thought â€Å"it is not only impossible but very dangerous to attempt to maximize the pleasure or the happiness of the people, since such an attempt must lead to totalitarianism. †[59] He claimed that, â€Å"there is, from the ethical point of view, no symmetry between suffering and happiness, or between pain and pleasure†¦ In my opinion human suffering makes a direct moral appeal, namely, the appeal for help, while there is no similar call to increase the happiness of a man who is doing well anyway. A further criticism of the Utilitarian formula ‘Maximize pleasure’ is that it assumes a continuous pleasure-pain scale which allows us to treat degrees of pain as negative degrees of pleasure. But, from the moral point of view, pain cannot be outweighed by pleasure, and especially not one man’s pain by another man’s pleasure. Instead of the greatest happiness for the greatest number, one should demand, more modestly, the least amount of avoidable suffering for all †[60] Utilitarianism The actual term Negative Utilitarianism was introduced by R. N. Smart as the title to his 1958 reply to Popper[61] in which he argued that the principle would entail seeking the quickest and least painful method of killing the entirety of humanity. â€Å"Suppose that a ruler controls a weapon capable of instantly and painlessly destroying the human race. Now it is empirically certain that there would be some suffering before all those alive on any proposed destruction day were to die in the natural course of events. Consequently the use of the weapon is bound to diminish suffering, and would be the rulers duty on NU grounds. †[62] Negative utilitarianism would seem to call.

Tuesday, August 20, 2019

Treatment of Homosexuality in Restoration and Enlightenment

Treatment of Homosexuality in Restoration and Enlightenment Homosexuality and the Problem of Identification in Restoration and Enlightenment England Restoration and Enlightenment England undeniably inherited, and to a large extent carried on the social, religious, and legal prejudices, or restrictions towards homosexual men that already existed for many centuries. The pronounced and extensive feelings against homosexuality in England which could be regarded as homophobic, as else where were strongly related to Christian theology and its strong influence upon prevailing social attitudes. There are several outright and clear condemnations of homosexuality in both the Old and New Testaments that influenced Christian theology to refute homosexuality as a deeply sinful and immoral act.[1] Outside of Judeo- Christian theology and ideology, homosexuality had not always been condemned or morally and socially vilified. Indeed in classical Greece and Rome being openly homosexual seemingly left men without detrimental social, religious, or legal consequences, which meant that few men had bothered to cover up their homosexual identities, fee lings, activities, and lifestyles. All that had changed once Christianity had become the dominant religion throughout Europe and taught that homosexuality was abnormal and sinful behaviour, and led to actions which were morally indefensible.[2] The Renaissance had rekindled interest in classical Greek and Roman art, literature, and sculpture, which in parts mentioned homosexuality as a normal and un-sinful part of everyday life. An unintended by product of the Renaissance had been the realisation that male homosexuality had not always been socially, or religiously taboo, and that it had not therefore been illegal in classical Greece or Rome. These earlier societies had not held homosexual men in disdain or made them social outcasts’ yet they were supposed to be immoral and degenerate compared to Christian societies. The realisation that only Judeo-Christian societies were so predominantly homophobic provided an impetus for homosexual men to alter their societies by arguing th at they were free to chose how they lived their lives and were not actually morally depraved. The initial moves to allow homosexual men to live openly started in Southern Europe before having an impact in Renaissance and Enlightenment England.[3] Arguably the Reformation disrupted the liberalising effects of the Renaissance, yet would eventually lead to increased levels of secularisation, and to the more liberal academic, social, and scientific attitudes of the Enlightenment. The more immediate consequences of the Reformation was increased attempts to rid Western European societies of false theology and cleanse it of immorality such as homosexuality, although the resulting conflicts between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism received the most attention amongst contemporaries and historians alike.[4] In England the onset of the Reformation had not altered the difficult situations that homosexual men faced if they wished to live their lives openly. That was due to the Protestants whether within the Church of England or the non-conformists outside of it being as opposed to male homosexuality as the Roman Catholic Church had always been. For the churches, homosexual thoughts or desires were just as sinful as actually performing homosexual acts. However if homosexual men refrained from acting upon their desires they would at least escape earthly punishment for their sins, which would be judged by God on their Judgement Day. Homosexual men either had to hide their sexual preferences or deny them completely. For they had virtually no alternative to concealing their orientation or gender identifications, and leading clandestine private lives. Hiding sexual orientation could make all the difference between been socially and economically successful or been disgraced, and possibly executed. Rumours of being homosexual could prove to be ruinous whether such allegations were proven or not. If actual homosexual acts could be proved to have taken place beyond doubt in an English Crown Court it would be fatal to those convicted. The high risks involved in leading a homosexual life even in secret helps to explain the lack of evidence that homosexual men left behind about themselves, as leaving information in writing or talking to the wrong people could leave to being convicted and then executed.[5] The concealment of homosexual identification was almost universally considered to be essential in England prior to the Restoration and Enlightenment eras, and remained highly important throughout those times. For men that held powerful social, economic, political, and religious positions being publicly identified or just rumoured to be a homosexual could prove to be disastrous for the maintenance of their position. Such rumours could reach the top of the political, social, and religious orders. During the 1590s until his death, even the Archbishop of Canterbury, John Whitgift came under suspicion of being sexually involved with another man. Whitgift was lucky enough to maintain the confidence of Elizabeth I as well as James I and therefore was not disgraced or removed from his post. Clergy had to be above suspicion of immoral sexual conduct whether homosexual or heterosexual in nature. The fact that England as a Protestant country allowed clerical marriage meant that the clergy could gratify heterosexual needs through marriage, whilst homosexual clergy if they existed had to preach the teachings of a religion that despised their sexuality.[6] The higher position a man held the greater the effort he would have put into hiding his homosexual orientation and identification. For instance, in the 14th century Edward II’s known homosexuality, when combined with his political ineptness contributed to his removal from the throne, and his subsequent murder. Kings were expected to be more masculine than any other men within society are, as they were expected to lead their countries during wartime, for kings to be suspected or known to be homosexual was detrimental for their chances of reigning over their countries successfully. Nearer to the Restoration and Enlightenment eras, the Duke of Buckingham was widely believed to have become the most influential and powerful royal favourite, not to mention the chief minister via his rumoured homosexual relationship with James I. Buckingham managed to form a similarly close relationship with Charles I, who seemed oblivious to the Duke’s unpopularity and incompetence. Rumours o f homosexuality did not damage Buckingham as much as his ineptness, yet they did not help improve his popularity either.[7] For homosexual men in Restoration and Enlightenment England, their social, political, and religious exclusion if their sexual orientation became public knowledge was attributable to the way in which homosexuality was regarded as being tantamount to sodomy by a majority of the heterosexual population. Sodomy was deemed to be as serious a sin as heresy and witchcraft, as the definition of sodomy incorporated all sexually deviant acts.[8] In earlier periods, males caught committing homosexual acts were usually trialed and punished by Church courts. The law was changed in 1534 in order for people accused of buggery to be trialed by Crown courts. The legislation of 1534 made it even more dangerous for male homosexuals to be known as being sexually active, or even to have their orientation known. The maximum punishment for any man caught and convicted for this crime was execution. Thus making buggery a crime punishable by death, in line with the sentences for heresy and witchcraft. The onl y difference was that the practice of executing heretics and alleged witches had gone by the end of the Enlightenment era, whereas the carrying out of homosexual activities was still a capital offence until 1861 and a crime until the 1960s[9]. Immediately prior to the Restoration period had been the Commonwealth, which had attempted to rigorously enforce all moral and religious values to meet with its fundamentalist Protestant ideology, including all heterosexual and homosexual sex outside of marriage. Whilst the Puritanical regime inspired by Oliver Cromwell had intended to cleanse the whole of Britain of its sins, it failed. During the Commonwealth period heterosexual adulterers as well as respectable Anglicans had to lead clandestine existences just like homosexuals and Roman Catholics had done for many decades.[10] Charles II’s return from exile ushered in the era of the Restoration, which brought a relaxation of the draconian moral codes of the Commonwealth, especially in the Royal Court. Despite his own immoral behaviour, Charles II only went as far as wanting religious toleration rather than officially supporting a relaxation of moral and sexual standards of behaviour. Even had Charles wished to improve the l egal position of homosexual men he would have not been prepared to face public and Parliamentary opposition to such plans.[11] Whilst the Restoration may have meant a more relaxed moral attitude at the Royal Court, there was no change in the legal position of men caught performing homosexual acts.[12] Concealment of homosexual identification or the protection of men in high social and religious positions was the best way to stay clear of prosecution and ultimately execution.[13] Living in towns and cities in general and in London in particular improved the chances of homosexual men not being caught, and leading a more fulfilling existence.[14] Homosexual men to an overwhelming extent publicly appeared to fit in with the gender role models during the Restoration and Enlightenment eras in England. As not conforming to conventional gender role models would have revealed their identity as homosexual men, many therefore decided to cover up their true identity to avoid persecution and their own personal disgrace. Homosexual men therefore, had to perform the gender roles expected of heterosexual men, such as being husbands, fathers and acting as heads of their households. Getting married and having children was the best means of concealing homosexual identification and removing suspicions of any sexual wrongdoing or immorality. Men of all social, economic and religious status were homosexuals, yet the higher their status the more they had to lose by revealing their sexual orientation. Self-preservation was presumably a greater motivation than self-expression or self-fulfilment. Although it must have made countless numbers of homo sexual men in Restoration and Enlightenment England the Reformation had weakened the hold of Christianity over society unknown to anybody at that time. The main long-term consequence of Protestantism was to increase the level of secularisation in England, although other social values reinforced prejudices towards homosexual men.[15] The Enlightenment continued the process of secularisation started by the Renaissance and only delayed by the Reformation, which slowly made English social and genders values more liberal and less repressive.[16] In many respects social prejudices against homosexual men outlasted the religious reasons for homosexuality being illegal in England in the first place. The fear of sodomy as an unnatural form of sexual behaviour persisted even as English society became increasingly secularised.[17] The treatment of homosexual men in Restoration and Enlightenment England was not the same throughout the country. London was a city in which homosexual men could attempt to be more open about their sexual orientation and worry less about fulfilling expected gender roles. As one of the biggest cities in the world, London was place in which homosexual men had an increased level of opportunities to be true to themselves, rather than outwardly conform to social and religious norms with regard to sexual conduct. Homosexual men that remained publicly unknown had to carry on living up to widespread masculine stereotypes.[18] These comments have to be qualified, as although London was a cosmopolitan centre where it was possible to lead different lifestyles that differed from the Christian and heterosexual norm. London was also the part of England in which the letter of the law could be enforced most vigorously, as it was the seat of government and Courts and magistrates would not want to be seen as unable to tackle criminal and immoral activities. As individuals homosexuals may have been able to lead homosexual lives with the protection of people in high places. However, at the end of the day it still remained sensible for homosexual men to hide their orientation as the legislation that could result in their conviction and execution remained upon the statute books.[19] For the majority of homosexual men in Restoration and Enlightenment England the opportunities to be readily identifiable as homosexuals were strictly limited and even when those chances were available it remained dangerous to take them. Some careers such as acting or singing gave a few homosexual men the chance to appear less masculine in public without raising undue suspicions of their sexual orientation. The majority of homosexual men were in the situation where they had to perform the social, economic, religious, or political functions that their position at birth had put them into. The majority of so cial, political, religious, and economic positions in Restoration and Enlightenment meant that all men had to perform their tasks in masculine ways. [20] Therefore, it could be concluded that the circumstances of the times made it very difficult for homosexual men to clearly allow themselves to be identified as such by their contemporaries in Restoration and Enlightenment England. It has also made it harder for modern historians to qualify and quantify the number and the experiences of homosexual men during that period. As was explored and evaluated above there were various reasons for homosexual men to conceal their sexual orientation from becoming general public knowledge, and to carry out any homosexual activities in secret, if at all. The overwhelmingly Christian nature of England before, during, and after the Restoration and Enlightenment eras had a very strong upon how homosexual men had to hide their sexual preferences from English society as a whole. Before the Reformation, the Roman Catholic Church had wide acceptance of its theology and opinions with regard to male homosexuality. The Roman Catholic Church had taught that all male homosexual activities should be regarded as deadly sins, which stemmed from all homosexual men having morally deviant thoughts that inevitably led to behaviour which needed to be severely punished, even to the point of executing homosexual men. Basically, Christian ideology was opposed to homosexuality on the grounds that it was an intolerable sin, just like heresy and witchcraft, which needed to be eradicated. The Reformation did not change the Christian perspective that male homosexuals should be punished as and when they were caught performing homosexual acts. Indeed the legislation that allowed the English Crown Courts to prosecute and execute people convicted of buggery was passed by the Reformation Parliament that enacted the break away of the English Church from the Papacy. The knowledge that being caught performing homosexual acts would result in execution meant that all men that performed such acts by and large did so in complete secrecy to avoid capital punishment. T he need for self preservation meant that the vast majority of homosexual men concealed their identities to stay alive and free, with the options to carry out homosexual activities in secret, or abstain from meeting other men altogether. To remain successfully hidden from people that might have them prosecuted the majority of homosexual men would chose not to leave written documentary evidence of their sexual activities or their feelings towards other men, as such material could easily have led to their conviction and subsequent execution. Homosexual men could have been from any social and economic background, as homosexuality seems to occur naturally within some men. After all it would hardly have been nurtured within Restoration and Enlightenment societies in England that overwhelmingly regarded homosexuality as being wrong and unnatural. Only limited numbers of homosexual men felt save enough not to hide their orientation, living in London, or having rich and powerful protectors w ere the factors that might allow some degree of openness. Bibliography Ashley M, (2002) A brief history of British Kings Queens, Robinson, London Betteridge T, (2002) Sodomy in Early Modern Europe, Manchester University Press, Manchester Fernandez-Arnesto, F Wilson, D (1996) Reformation Christianity and the World 1500-2000, Bantam Press, London Gardiner Wenborn (1995) The History Today Companion to British History, Collins and Brown Ltd, London Lenman, (2004) Chamber’s Dictionary of World History, Chambers, Edinburgh MacCulloch D, Reformation – Europe’s House Divided (2004) Penguin Books, London Schama, S (2001) A History of Britain The British Wars 1603-1776, BBC Worldwide, London 1 Footnotes [1] MacCulloch, 2004 p. 620 [2] MacCulloch, 2004 p. 620 [3] Betteridge, 2002 pp. 71 – 74 [4] Roberts, 1996 p. 235 [5] MacCulloch, 2004 p. 209 [6] MacCulloch, 2004 p. 209 [7] Betteridge, 2002 p. 46 [8] MacCulloch, 2004, p.622 [9] Gardiner Wenborn, 1995, p.388 [10] Schama, 2001, p.235 [11] Ashley, 2002, p.320 [12] Gardiner Wenborn, 1995, p.646 [13] Betteridge, 2002, pp.71-74 [14] MacCulloch, 2004, p.620 [15] Fernandez-Armesto Wilson, 1996, p.290 [16] Lenman, 2004, p.264 [17] Gardiner Wenborn, 1995, p.388 [18] Betteridge, 2002, pp. 71-74 [19] MacCulloch, 2004, p.622 [20] Betteridge, 2002 pp. 71-74