Expectations about own work role Essay Example for Free

Expectations about own work role EssayIt is important to understand the expectations, including codes of practise, regulations, minimum standards or national occupational standards.Some expectations aresee moreexplain expectations about own work role as expressed in applicable standards reflect on their work record their qualifications understand what effective practise looks like formulate their selfdevelopment plan allow managers to understand lag experience/qualifications and training needs to support the development of the setting.It is also expected as a practitioner to keep every child safe and proficient in the environment as they learn and develop. It is very important to complete risk assessments daily for the safety of the children. Making sure the nursery is clean impart help prevent the spread of illnesses and infections in the provision. Childcare providers must also have procedures for administering medication and supporting children with medical needs or who a ppear peaked(predicate) during the day.

Advert Review Skoda Fabia Essay Example for Free

Advert Review Skoda Fabia EssayThe Skoda Fabia vRS isnt like a fruit cake at all. Its just plain evil Skodas cars have been con officered cheap claptrap for years. If I asked anyone old enough to have an opinion they would answer useless pile of junk or Eastern European unreliability. Skoda, wanting to give themselves a new image came up with the Cake ad. With the tagline Made of Lovely Stuff they were obviously trying to rebrand their product, to say their cars were make of good quality materials with love and attention. Skodas famous cake advert would have you believe the Skoda Fabia is made of chocolately goodness and gluttonous cake think Willy Wonkas birthday cake. Skoda has now made the sequel, and it is not cakey, nor chocolately. To show just how tough the Fabia vRS is the new advert shows a group of utter nutters lovingly biting, punching and rattling the virulent Fabia. Skoda is currently enjoying its best year on record and obviously the company wants to build on the momentum by launching a new TV campaign for the Fabia vRS hot hatchback.Skoda decided to follow in other companies footsteps and create a tongue in cheek parody of their product. The new ad, which is meant to show the darker side of the 180-horsepower-strong hatchback, features the Made from Meaner Stuff tagline. Following a similar format to the Fabia Cake advert, the new meaner vRS campaign now adopts a much darker feel. Set in a secret location within the Skoda factory, the liquorice, treacle and jelly vehicle components of cake make way for a bone chassis, a snake-powered engine and some unconventional finishing techniques.The recent ad appeals to a new audience comp ard to the earlier cake ad. It is aimed at a younger masculine audience. Hot-hatchbacks, such as this, are perfect for a younger male car owner as they are practical for driving with your mates and are in any case fast and childs play to drive. It has been turbocharged and supercharged to produce a smidgen under 180 horsepower giving it a top speed of 139 miles an hour (good for a Skoda). The Fabia comes with sports suspension so is quick and less floppy in the corners than the standard version. All this adds up to it being altogether fun to drive and go fast in.The ad also accentuates the meanness of the car with humorous and strange materials used for creating the car. The engine is made of snakes and runs on snake venom. The chassis is made go forth of a skull. The alloys are build from samurai swords. All this adds up to equal MEAN. The man biting the door into shape reminds us of Jaws from the Bond movies. While the crossbow that ends up being the windscreen windscreen wiper which is extremely crazy. The song in both ads is These are some of my Favourite Things however while in the cake ad it is the original version with Julia Andrews.In the Made of Meaner Stuff ad it is a heavy rock version by The Amatory Murder. While it may appeal to a younger male audience, this ad may not appea l to an older audience because of the mean nature of the ad and older people are generally more precautious so wouldnt want a sports car. This would lose Skoda a large proportion of the market however that audience wouldnt be likely to buy a souped up hot-hatchback anyway. This means they didnt actually lose much of the potential market anyway.And the older female audience would be more interested in the normal Fabia which Skoda advertised with the Cake ad, which incidentally increased their profits to their best year on record. Overall the ad is successful and memorable with a mop up and excellent unique selling point. It creates a mean and crazy impression of the car that Im sure would convince many a young adult to buy the Skoda Fabia vRS instead of say a Ford Fiesta ST or Golf GTi. Skoda will surely succeeded in putting out there that they make exceedingly good cars.

Nutritional Benefits of Beans

Nutritional Benefits of BeansBeans atomic number 18 a great source of nutrients, domed stadiums argon sometimes known as legumes. In a normal persons diet beans are matchless of the most important part because of their nutritional value. The most important nutrient in the bean is protein, which is do in the plant thanks to a bacteria called rhizobium. This bacterium places its self in the roots of the plant to change the nitrogen in to a variation that is satisfactory to be converted in to amino acids. This is the beginning of protein in the bean.Nutrients are very(prenominal) important to the human diet. They are what keep you healthy and able to grow and learn. The most common nutrients in beans are iron, folic acid, and protein. These are all helpful to your body. Iron helps to carry oxygen in your blood it also improves cypher levels and your immune system to stay strong. Folic acids are especially important to women, because it is able to prevent spinal problems and birt h defects during the first few weeks of pregnancy. It is also been proven to debase the risk of heart problems when you are older and finally protein which is needed for growth and repair of your body and its tissues.Most beans, with the exception of soybeans and peanuts, are made up principally of protein and starch. The nutrients are stored inside the bean germ in a part of the bean called the cotyledon, as shown in Figure 1. The two cotyledons are completely contact by a tough seed coat, except for the point at which the bean has a little dimple. That is where there is a break in the seed coat and youll find a little hole or pore called the hilum. The hilum is where the bean seed was attached to the living plant before it was picked and dried. Initially, when situated in weewee, the dried bean seeds can only absorb water through their hilums. After about 30-60 minutes, though, the seed coats expand and become hydrated. At that point, water can move into the bean through th e hilum and the entire seed coat surface (sciencebuddies.org).Unfortunately most people experience discomfort aft(prenominal) eating portions of beans. This is because they are full of complex sugar and fiber. The discomfort is felt because your body is forced to work extra hard to degust the sugar. Thankfully one is able to teach your body to deal with those things by just consuming vary small portions of the beans often.The cooking of the bean is very important. Cooking dried beans in liquid is completely necessary to loosen the shell of the bean and to drake down the starchy granules that are built up inside the bean when it is dried. The amount of water utilise is also very important. If you use to much the bean will absorb it and produce a weaker flavor. But if not enough water is used the bean will remain hard and will make foe a bad cooking experience. Also important is the ways they are cooked do not hard boil them. The movement of the water will damage the seed coat causi ng the bean to break apart. A gentle simmer is best. At a temperature of 180 to 200 degrees farenheight the bean should be perfectly cooked and gently treated.During my experiment I will be testing liquids containing acids, sugars, and calcium. These will slow up the process of muteing. I am looking for which of the slowing additives is fastest. Even thought fast softening is not always desirable. Expectedly the acid will work in the cell walls. It will make hemicelluloses which will soften the walls and make it less likely to dissolve. The sugar will work by causing the cell walls to normalize and by slowing swelling of the starches in the cotyledons. And finally calcium will again work in the walls of the cell, but it will cause streng and soing by cross-linking the pectin. cardinal way the softening process can be sped up is by adding baking soda. This, in the water, causes the water to become alkaline. Using just very small amounts of the baking soda can cut down baking time by 75%. The baking soda works by push button out the magnesium which is caused by the pectin. It also works by dissolving the hemicelluloses in the water. This process is not desirable because the soda will leave the undefiled product slippery and with a soapy feeling and taste.Cooking beans is usually fairly easy. The time needed to cook really depends on what kind of bean you are using and how you cook them. A few types of beans are completely safe to eat raw such as peas and bean sprouts. Most kinds of beans are best roasted or steamed. For this experiment dried mature beans will be necessary because of the amount of time needed to cook and the need for liquids to soften them. The kind of dried beans that will be used are lima beans.The lima beans will be soaked overnight in cold water. One group will be the control group, having just beans and water. The second will just harbour table salt added to it. The third and fourth groups will have lemon juice and lemon juice with cho pped tomatoes. The fifth group will have just milk, and finally, the sixth group will have molasses added.The materials are an extremely important part of an experiment. Lima beans will be soaked and then dried. To prepare the beans, one bag will be opened and poured into an airtight container. Just enough water will be added to cover the top of the beans. Once it is full, a lid will be placed on the container and then set on the kitchen counter overnight, which is approximately ten hours. Then the prepared beans will be divided into six groups and the different items will be added.

Korsgaards Position About Lying To The Murderer

Korsgaards Position About Lying To The MurdererIn this paper I go out discuss Christine M. Korsgaards position round fictionalisation to the manslayer at the admission in response to Immanuel Kants view regarding the matter. I depart then give two objections to her view and explain why I dont find her account to be very persuasive. Then, I will argue why I believe that trickery to the receiver at the door is permissible in my opinion.I will start off by explaining Kants view. Kant believes that his moral theory forbids untruth under all possible circumstances, even those where thither is a murderer at the door wondering if an irreproachable victim is privateness in your house. After all, if everybody lied, even just to murderers at the door enquiring closely the whereabouts of their victims, then the lying could non succeed since no murderer would believe what one says, and therefore lying unhallows the first form of the Categorical Imperative, which Kant calls the Form ula of habitual Law. Similarly, the lie violates the second form of the Categorical Imperative, which Kant names the Formula of Humanity. The lie fails to rate the rationality of the murderer, since by lying we manipulate the murderer into actions directed at our own intensions and ends. Since the liars end is opposed to the end that the murderer has willingly chosen for themselves, the liar fails to treat the murderer with respect and dignity and therefore treats the murderer scarce as a means to get what they want.Lying even in such an extreme case as the murderer at the door is aImperfectionviolation of the Categorical Imperatives according to Kant. Korsgaard goes against Kants assertion that it is wrong to give the murderer at the door the wrong answer arguing that it does not violate the Categorical Imperatives to lie in these circumstances. She further discusses that it is a occupation to lie to the murderer at the door and expands on her reasoning. Korsgaard comes up wit h a two direct theory on which the first form of the Categorical Imperative would apply under all circumstances and the second only when one is defending oneself or another against evil.In order to defend Kants first Categorical Imperative, Korsgaard argues that it is in fact permissible from a Kantian betoken of view to universalize the maxim, or principle that governs action, when lying to the murderer at the door. She argues that the first form of the Categorical Imperative is not violated in the case where the murderer makes a cloak-and-dagger of their murderous intensions. She explains that if the murderer at the door does not know that the recipient knows they atomic number 18 murderers, that the murderer will think that the recipient will believe that they argon just a friendly neighbor trying to find out where their friend is for example. In other words, she believes you can universalize a maxim in which you respond to evil with an effort to frustrate evil through decept ion, where the evil person is unaware that you are aware of his plan. The evil person, or murderer, does not light up that you are in the position in which you would use this maxim therefore you would be able to use this without frustrating your purpose to successfully get off with your lie.ImperfectionIn order to defend Kants second Categorical Imperative, which explains that we must respect each others rational reputation by al elans treating others with respect and dignity and never merely as a means, Korsgaard argues that it is permissible to not abide by this formula due to the fact that the murderer is not respecting your rational nature by lying to you in the first place. Korsgaard argues that we are permitted and also give birth a duty to mutual aid one another and lie to the murderer at the door out of self-defense. She believes that in order to protect yourself you may respond to a lie with a lie. The murderer is not offering you the one thousand to consent to his act ivity with him, so Korsgaard believes that you are not obliged in response to offer transparency. Part of her argument is that you are being lied to, and you have a duty of self-respect, not to allow yourself to be used as a tool for evil. Korsgaard explains that this makes it possible to lie back to the murderer. She also makes a point that we must protect one another, especially if the person you are protecting is innocent. Korsgaard also believes this in this case you would not be abusing communication by the lie.Korsgaard relates more(prenominal) with the non-ideal Kantian view versus the ideal Kantian view in which Kant takes. Ideal Kantian theory is how we are permitted and obliged to behave if we lived in a parliamentary procedure where we all followed the rules and we were of well-behaved will and good faith. This theory explains how flawed and imperfect but good human beings would be required to behave in respect to one another. Non-ideal Kantian theory on the other hand is relevantly different. It explains how we are required to behave when m either of us are of good will butImperfectionmany of us are also not of good will. Korsgaard relates non-ideal Kantian theory to this case, the murderer is not acting on a good will. She believes that in non-ideal circumstances we have justifications for treating each other in such ways that we wouldnt treat each other in ideal circumstances.Although I think Korsgaard has made some interesting claims, I believe her arguments have not been fully persuasive. My first objection to Korsgaards argument is that I believe she misunderstands how Kantian universalization is supposed to work. Korsgaards account will not defend Kant successfully because it only works under certain circumstances. This is Korsgaards main flaw in her assertion Universalization does not work when the murderer is transparent about their evil intensions. Korsgaards argument only works when the murderer does not know that you know of their int ensions. Lying maxims fail to be universalized when both parties know the occurrences they are in causing a major gap in Korsgaards argument.I believe that regardless of whether you can universalize lying to a murderer, it should al more or less always be permissible to do so in order to save a life. For example, if you were hiding Ann Frank in your wine cellar and the Nazi Police came to your door and asked you if you were hiding any Jews, you would have to tell the Nazis the truth under Korsgaards universalization claim. The Nazis know that everybody knows of their murderous intentions, so they know that you know that they will kill Ann Frank if you told them where she was hiding, therefore the Nazis will know that you will lie to them in order to save her life. So you will notImperfectionbe able to universalize this maxim and get away with lying in this particular situation. This example proves that Korsgaards assertion is in very weak, since it only works under a certain scena rio.After discussing this material with my partner, Corine Machalani, we went over some objections that Korsgaard might offer to this assertion. I believe Korsgaard would argue against this claim by stating that in a scenario where the murderer is not trying to deceive, the only thing you could do is refuse to answer his question. This is absolutely ridiculous because I think if you told a murderer that you would be putting your life in danger. By telling someone that you are not going to tell him, you have practically admit that you are hiding something from them. So in the case of the murderer you are admitting that you know the whereabouts of their victim but refuse to tell them. This would be a very dangerous situation that I would altogether try and avoid. When dealing with an evil person such as a murderer, you must protect your life.I believe lying to the murderer at the door is permissible out of self-protection and because it is the morally right thing to do. You know that by hiding Jews in your house you are good luck the law, so in order to protect yourself against the Nazis you should be allowed to lie out of self-defense. Even where the Nazis tell you that if you tell them the truth that you will be rewarded instead of in person prosecuted or injured, I still believe you should lie. You should help one another and to protect an innocent persons life because it is the right thingImperfectionto do. Life is the most precious thing and should be guarded in any way possible, whether your life or another individuals.Although I believe Korsgaard has made a good point regarding the duty to aid an innocent person against evil, I believe some of her reasoning is incorrect. Korsgaards argues that if someone lies to you, you can lie back to them. Korsgaard argues that since the murderer is lying to you about their motives, you may respond to a lie with a lie. I believe this is not a strong argument. A lie is an intentional invitation of think and a breaking of faith, and the fact that the murderer is lying to you doesnt justify you lying to them back, and it definitely is not a reason that makes lying moral in any way. My reasoning regarding this matter is the eye for an eye argument, I believe two wrongs dont make it right. Just because someone lies to you doesnt make it right to lie back, and if our world operated this way there would be nothing but chaos.I believe when deciding whether lying is right or wrong, it all comes down to the intensions of the parties involved. The Nazis have evil intensions of murdering innocent people for no reason, and you have good intensions of protecting yourself and others. Even though in Germany back in those days it was the law to hand over the Jews, that community was corrupt and flawed. The only time I would argue that it is permissible not to lie to the murderer at the door would be if the person you were hiding in your house were also a murderer. I believe lying is acceptable when saving an i nnocent life.Korsgaard has not successfully justified in pointing to Kants view of lyingImperfectionas a refutation of the Categorical Imperatives. I believe a Kantian needs to bitethe bullet and agree that there are some serious flaws in their argument. There are lies that Kantians believe are impermissible even though such lies are actually a duty in my eyes. Korsgaard has not successfully proven that Kants Categorical Imperatives actually work in difficult situations concluding that her argument is not very strong.

The Family In Sociology

The Family In SociologyFunctionalism, an approach which dominated much of twentieth century thinking, sought to apologise the family through the alert functions it played as a social institution. George Peter Murdock, a notable American Anthropologist and functionalist, conducted a study in 1949 in where he studied the institution of the family in 250 different societies. He concluded by saying that the family plays four different basic functions which he termed reproductive, educational, sexual and economic. Education was vital in t severallying the norms and values of society whilst reproduction produced members for society. The family certainly does not perform these functions exclusively, this perhaps more relevant after the industrial revolution when the family scattered legion(predicate) of its functions to new specialized social institutions such(prenominal) as factories, schools and hospitals. However the family sedate makes important contributions to all of the in a hi gher place functions.Talcott Parsons, a respected American sociologist, in like manner pioneered the functionalist perspective of the family. In addition to serving functions to society as a whole as explained above, it also plays evenly vital functions for its individual members. According to Parsons, the family during advance(prenominal) years of childhood structures the childs personality and the internalization of societys culture. Taught primary(prenominal)ly by the childs p atomic number 18nts, the central norms and values of society are internalized into a child to a point where it becomes instinctive and instinctive. This is the same for every(prenominal) child, and without this internalization, society would not be able to function. An American child for example would grow up with the central idea of independence and a strong motivation to achieve a high status in society as these are the central qualities of American culture.Once this personality is achieved, it es sentialiness be maintained and this is the second basic function of the family the stabilization of adult personalities. In order to balance the stress and strains of life found in a busy society, an individual can seek emotional support by his spouse. This function is especially important in Western societies as the nature of the favourite nuclear family means that there is no extended family to rely upon for emotional support. Thus the married couple must solely depend on each other. The introduction of a child in a family also allows for the next step in stabilizing the adult personality. Adults can act out puerile elements of their own personalities whilst engaging with his or hers child in a activity. This cannot be done in adult society.The points discussed above largely derive from two of the some influential functionalists in the 20th century. However, there sour in recent times has come under particular criticism. Critics tend to agree upon the fact that two perspectiv es offer an unrealistic picture of the family, portraying a couple who unwillingly care for each others every need. Parsons idea of socialization is also dubious as it fails to consider the child who will not conform to his parents values and morals. Parsons and Murdock also both fail to offer functional alternatives to the family unit.As to affirm these criticisms, this functionalist view of the family has not been choose by other sociologist who favor a more blunt and critical explanation. Friedrich Engles, with his publication of The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State in 1884 real the first Marxist perspective of the family. He combined an evolutionary approach with Marxism, explaining how at the early plays of evolution, means of production were communally owned and the family as such did not exist. There were no rules to dictate the boundaries of sexual relationships thus society as a whole was the family. However, with the development of the state later in history, restrictions were apply on sexual relationships and on the production of children, reaching the point in where the nuclear family was born. Coinciding with this new unit was the privatization of both property and means of production. These assets were passed scratch off by the male to his heir, and in order to ensure the legitimacy of the link, greater control was placed on women in order to ensure that there was no question about the authorship of the offspring. Summarized by Eagles himself in the original book, It is based on the supremacy of the man, the express purpose being to produce children of undisputed paternity such paternity is demanded because these children are later to come into their fathers property as his natural heirs.Alternative Marxist perspectives sought to study the role families played in industrial societies. They argued that the capitalist system exploited the free domestic labor of the housewife, seeing childrearing and housework as an essenti al part of the economy. However the central command was that the employer only paid for the services of the male breadwinner, securing the housewifes contribution for free. In addition to this, Marxist also saw that the worker was only able to work capacious hours for his employer as the domestic labor of looking after the children for example was done by the housewife. The housewife, in addition to the above work, also benefited the employer by reproducing potential workers. Expanding upon this idea, families acted as an ideological conditioning device which reproduced ideologies which prop up capitalism. Children are in affect a reflection of their parents in terms of values and behaviors and so uninspiringly act on them into the same work and patterns. Outside of the household, women were seen as a reserve army of labor that could be drawn in when there was a labor deficit and returned home when demand fell. All of these valuable services were provided to the employer for fre e, with him only having to pay the male breadwinner.The Marxists approach compared with the functionalist idea is much more critical of the family unit, and this trend continues with the feminists perspective.In their book Familiar Exploitation, radical feminists Christine Delphy and Diana Lenoard attached importance in Marxist methodology in explaining the family unit but nevertheless were of the opinion that men, not capitalism, were the main beneficiaries of the exploitation of womens labor in the household. They began their explanation by detailing how they saw the family as an economic system in where men benefit from, and exploit the work of women. They identified several factors that related to the family as an economic system, for example that the family structure typically involves two roles and that the male ordinarily occupies the most important one, head of household, and the women and children are left with being helpers. What makes the role of head of household so imp ortant is that he has final say on important decisions and assigns duties to other members of the family. These duties vary harmonise to the status and sex of the person in the family as women for example are normally given the task of doing the domestic and reproductive work. The head of household usually has control over finances and spending decisions and this still applies even when the woman is in paid employment. As concluded by Delphy and Leonard, The head of the family may induct a near monopoly over, and he always has greater access to and control of, the familys property and external relations.Both of these radical feminists perhaps offer the most across-the-board radical feminist insight into the family unit. They depict a patriarchal and hierarchal structure in where men dominate and receive 57 varieties of unpaid services. It would be wrong to suggest that women are not oblivious to their exploitation but economic and social constraints make it difficult for women to escape from the patriarchal family. However their assurance that all families have a head has earned their work criticism. The data where this theory derived from is also questionable as it is said to be dated, and more present-day(a) data show in actual fact show less gender inequality in middle bod families than in working track families.Both of the above approaches tend to agree on the fact that woman are often exploited by men in family life and in the case of Marxism, also benefit capitalism. As already mentioned, both fail to take into account the variety family life can adopt in various societies and the effect this can have on individuals. Difference feminist ensure that the variety of positions women can find themselves in is central to their argument, taking into account homosexual couples, single parent families and the impact social position and race has on the womans position. Leading difference feminist Linda Nicholson in her book The myth of the traditional fam ily began by defining what is meant by the traditional family. She saw it as the the unit of parents with children who live together, separating it from other kin and emphasized the important bond among husband and wife. This simplistic image of the family is the one often associated with the nuclear family and it became popular among commentators in the 1950s. Alternative families to this image however were not regarded with the same esteem but Nicholson rejected this notion, present that alternative families offered greater benefits than the nuclear family for the women who live in them. In her particular study, she saw poor black women in the USA at more of an gain when at the head of the household without men. Reason being was that their tended to be a stronger relationship between other friends and kin which in turn provided support and insurance, destiny out families most in need at a particular time. This theory evidently had disadvantages, namely the lack of a father mo del which is built-in for a childs upbringing. However traditional families also share several disadvantages such as the inability of a child to turn to other relatives for help when step by his parent. Nicholson concluded her work in a very liberal manner, advocating greater choice in individuals choosing their preferred living arrangements according to what best suitable them. She disagreed with the distinction between traditional and alternative families, citing that traditional families often give the impression that they have long been the norm whilst this is not true.The summary given above is only one take on the family by a difference feminist among dozens. On the whole however, they all tend to avoid narrowly restrain the role women play in families and instead show a degree of sensitivity towards different experiences of family life experienced by women of different classes, sexual orientation course and ethnicity. It would therefore be fair to say that difference femi nists offer the most advance perspective on family life.In order to expand upon the perspectives explored above, various themes must be examined to gain a comprehensive understanding of the family as a unit of social organization. Perhaps the greatest process to have an effect on family life was the advent of industrialization and in advance(p)ization in the eighteenth century. Modernization refers to the development of social, cultural, economic and political practices and institutions which are thought to be typical of modern societies whilst industrialization refers to the mass production of goods in a factory system which involves some degree of mechanized production technology. Sociologists regard the above factors to be the destructive reasons responsible for change in Western societies in the early eighteenth century. Embroiled in this was of course the family unit which found problems relating itself to industrialization or modernization. For example, every society experie nced the above changes differently with each social institution effected in differing ways. This problem was exacerbated by the fact that industrialization and modernization is a developing process, our different culture, politics and society to those of our ancestor evidence of this. The complexity of trying to associate families and industrialization and modernization allows for plentiful confusion among academics as to what a pre-industrial family consist of.Michael Young and Peter Willmott were among those who traced the development of the family from pre-industrial England to contemporary times. Specific to their study, which was published in a book titled The Symmetrical Family in 1973, they traced the changes experienced by the family up to the 1970s. They concluded, using a variety of sources and social surveys, that the family had gone through four main degrees.Stage one belonged to the pre-industrial family which was seen as an unit of production consisting in the main o f a husband, wife and unmarried children who cooperate as a team. With the advent of industrial revolution however, this form of family became largely extinct with the exception of some floriculture communities in the nineteenth century.Followed closely after was stage 2 which coincided with the beginning of the industrial revolution and continued throughout the nineteenth century. As discussed earlier, the family lost many of its functions to other social institution and thus ceased to be an unit of production. The nineteenth century witnessed chronic poverty and high unemployment and therefore the family responded by breaking outdoor(a) from the traditional nuclear model into an extended network which included grandparents and grandmothers. This allowed for an insurance policy and someone to rely on in tough times. As with stage 1, stage 2 declined in importance in the twentieth century but still found prominence in low income, working class areas.Finally, and still predominatin g today according to Young and Willmott, is stage 3 which the two sociologist conducted a large scale social survey in order to spread out and later became the basis of their book. Stage 3 saw the return of the nuclear family with the exception of it being now more home centered. Free time was usually spent doing domestic work at home and leisure time allowed parents to play with their children and watch television. Stage 3 witnessed a stronger conjugal bond between husband and wife and a notable self-reliance now associated with the nuclear family. The term used to describe this type of nuclear family is symmetrical family, referring to the now equally shared duty of maintaining the household between two spouses. Radically different to the inequality described above about the allocation of chores and responsibility of finances, couples in stage 3 now share many of the chores and decisions.Many of the above points are open to criticism, especially by feminists who disagree with the concept of the symmetrical family and instead still seeing oppressive inequality between husband and wife. Despite this, Young and Willmott accomplish in tracing the family before, during and after the industrial revolution and the various forms it adopted according to the needs of society.Many criticisimis raised about the sociological prespectives is that they fail to consider other forms family may adopt in society.

Essay on the Double Meanings of The Odyssey -- Homer, Odyssey Essays

The Double Meanings of The Odyssey Throughout Homers The Odyssey, there ar a number of glaring symbols that are used to represent abstract ideas. I would like to suggest that each symbol that Homer uses within The Odyssey has two clear meanings. The double meanings of these symbols are used to represent Odysseus and Telemachus as they strive to meet each other. While each symbol has a meaning that represents the growth of Telemachus, each one also represents, by another meaning, the growth and development of Odysseus. When they meet for the first time, the symbols, and the character traits that they represent confluence, and the resemblance between Odysseus and Telemachus becomes complete. One of the main ideas running throughout the Odyssey is the impressiveness of water. It has the power of giving life and quick, safe travel, but it also has the potential to drown you through the itself. While it is often perceived as being favourable and usually life giving, it also demons trates how too much of a good thing can bring harm. It brings much harm to Odysseus as he is traveling to Phaeacia, At Zeus command the whole sky is heavy with clouds, the sea is seething, squalls from every corner hurtle together. There is nothing now for me but certain d... ..., et al. A commentary on Homers Odyssey. 3 Vols. Oxford PA4167 .H4813 1988Jones, Peter V. Homers Odyssey a companion to the translation of Richmond Lattimore. Carbondale, IL Southern Illinois University Press, c1988. PA4167 .J66 1988Peradotto, John , Man in the Middle sound Name and Narration in the Odyssey, Princeton UP 1990Stanford, William Bedell. Homers Odyssey. 2 Vols. Macmillan Thalmann, William G., The Odyssey an epic of return. New York Twayne Publishers. PA4167 .T45 1992 Tracy, Stephen V., The story of the Odyssey. Princeton, N.J. Princeton University Press, c1990. PA4167 .T7 1990

Robert Jordans Wheel of Time :: Robert Jordan Wheel of Time

Robert Jordans Wheel of Time The Wheel of Time turns, and Ages come and pass, loss memories that become legend. legend fades to invention, and even myth is want forgotten when the Age that gave it birth comes again. In one Age, called the Third Age by some, an Age moreover to come, an Age long past, a wind rose in the Mountains of Mist. The wind was not the beginning. There are neither beginnings nor endings to the turning of the Wheel of Time. But it was a beginning. (Jordan, 1). In the human being of Robert Jordans bestselling fantasy series, The Wheel of Time, the life of the ordinary people has been undergoing some extraordinary changes. The legendary Dragon has been Reborn, and the Last affair to decide the mess of humanity draws nigh. Meanwhile, outside of this world sit millions of readers, from all reaches of life, waiting anxiously for the next chapter in the story to be told. They debate what has happened, what it inwardness in the consideration of the story, what it means for the future of the Wheel, as well as how it impacts their lives. The Wheel of Time is a world where absolute good battles absolute evil, and however shades of grey-haired cloud the landscape. A world of hope and despair, a world of peace and war. From this world a following has grown. People from various cultures, different languages, and different semipolitical ideologies gravitate together forming a cohesive group that helps to spread the word about the work of Robert Jordan. In much the same musical mode that J.R.R. Tolkien created a myth for the modern ages with his saga The Lord of the Rings and George Lucas has done with his Star Wars series of movies, so has Robert Jordan entered into the realm of mythology with his work The Wheel of Time. And this myth, like those which slang come recently, and those from antiquity, has created a community of followers around it. They are drawn together initially because of a personal interest, and they stay not only for t hat interest, but because of the community that grows as a result of engaging themselves with this story. The world of the Wheel is one that is beginning to see turmoil when it is first introduced to the readers. Winter is holding on much thirster than it should, and there is fear in the air (Jordan Eye 11).Robert Jordans Wheel of Time Robert Jordan Wheel of TimeRobert Jordans Wheel of Time The Wheel of Time turns, and Ages come and pass, leaving memories that become legend. Legend fades to myth, and even myth is long forgotten when the Age that gave it birth comes again. In one Age, called the Third Age by some, an Age yet to come, an Age long past, a wind rose in the Mountains of Mist. The wind was not the beginning. There are neither beginnings nor endings to the turning of the Wheel of Time. But it was a beginning. (Jordan, 1). In the world of Robert Jordans bestselling fantasy series, The Wheel of Time, the life of the ordinary people has been undergoing some extraordinary changes. The legendary Dragon has been Reborn, and the Last Battle to decide the fate of humanity draws nigh. Meanwhile, outside of this world sit millions of readers, from all reaches of life, waiting anxiously for the next chapter in the story to be told. They debate what has happened, what it means in the context of the story, what it means for the future of the Wheel, as well as how it impacts their lives. The Wheel of Time is a world where absolute good battles absolute evil, and yet shades of grey cloud the landscape. A world of hope and despair, a world of peace and war. From this world a following has grown. People from different cultures, different languages, and different political ideologies gravitate together forming a cohesive group that helps to spread the word about the work of Robert Jordan. In much the same manner that J.R.R. Tolkien created a myth for the modern ages with his saga The Lord of the Rings and George Lucas has done with his Star Wars series of movies, so has Robert Jordan entered into the realm of mythology with his work The Wheel of Time. And this myth, like those which have come recently, and those from antiquity, has created a community of followers around it. They are drawn together initially because of a personal interest, and they stay not only for that interest, but because of the community that grows as a result of engaging themselves with this story. The world of the Wheel is one that is beginning to see turmoil when it is first introduced to the readers. Winter is holding on much longer than it should, and there is fear in the air (Jordan Eye 11).