Charles Dickens most famous Bildungsroman novel Essay Example for Free

Charles Dickens most famous Bildungsroman novel Essay How Does Dickens Presentation of Pip as a young boy contrast to Pip as an Adult?  Great Expectations is one of Charles Dickens most famous Bildungsroman novel. This story is serialised in journals from 1860 1861. It was published chapter at a time therefore would leave every chapter at a cliff-hanger.  Due to this novel being published in journals it made this semi-autobiographical narrative available to the mass of people; soaring its popularity.  The main theme of this novel is associated with the main factors of Victorian era; Being Gentlemen; Education and Crime and Punishment. Dickens was a social observer and would therefore base his narratives on his concerns for the social laws. Great Expectations was an example of this. This story is based on Pip, the main character, and how his life changes as he comes into possession of a lot of money from an unknown benefactor breaking the wall of social mobility on his way to become a Gentleman. The whole essay shows the retrospective view of Pip looking back on his life. Furthermore most of the events experience by Pip could also be his past experiences. This is why Great Expectations is Charles Dickens most semi-autobiographical piece of writing. This general aim of this essay is to describe the way Pip was presented as a young boy and later on in his life by this worldwide known author, Charles Dickens.  The key scenes in this novel which will be analysed in detail. The chosen key scenes are; chapters 1-8 where Pip is growing up as a young kid and ahs his first encounter with the convict. The significance of these chapters is that it shows Pips childhood and also describes his first meeting with Magwitch, who plays a huge role in this novel. The central point of this report will be focused on chapter 27-38. This shows Pip as a young gentleman. This is very vital as it shows the way Pip has changed from his childhood ways. In these chapters it shows when Pip is reunited with his benefactor.  The Last key scenes will be chapter 57 and 58. This is when Pip is comes together with Joe hoping to propose to Biddy. The significance of this is that Joe is going to get married to Biddy; therefore Pips reaction to this news is very interesting. Pip was bought up an orphan. The only living family member of Pip was his sister Mrs Joe Gargery. My first fancies regarding what they were like were unreasonably derived from their tombstones This quotation emphasis the fact that Pip was an orphan who had never seen his parents and is an example of dual narrative as it is quite humorous but also sad at the same time. At the beginning of the play Dickens makes the readers fell sympathetic towards Pip. This makes the readers like Pip throughout the story no matter what he does. In the Victorian Era being an orphan was very common. It meant they had no prospects for the future, would be illiterate and would therefore lead a very poor life. They would usually be homeless or taken in by gentlemens to be their slaves. I was at that time undersized for years and not very strong. This quotation shows that Pip had a lack of prospects which emphasised he came from a poor background. The term undersized could be used for physical terms but also could be used that he had no say in the community as he was a child and he had no say generally as him and his family were very poor. Charles Dickens reversed these points about a poor person and made social mobility possible for Pip.  At the beginning of the narrative Pip is a naive young boy who has no knowing of the outside world. Most of this is due to being brought up without education. Education in that era was very important as only the rich could afford it. This immediately brought up the aspect of class issues in this novel. Education led to people being in a higher social group to those who werent educated and possibly shaped their future. Pip suffered abuse from many people. He was bought up by hand by his sister Mrs Joe. She had a reputation for this. This showed that Pip was brought with discipline and wouldnt dare to do a thing wrong as he would get punished for this. Another quotation that explains that Mrs Joe beats Pip to teach him manners and discipline is Be grateful boy to them which bought you up by hand. Whats worse shes got the tickler with her, this quotation shows how much Pip feared the tickler and getting beaten by Mrs Joe. As well as receiving physical abuse from Mrs Joe he received verbal abuse from many family friends such as Mr Pumblechook and also Estella. It was from the Victorian times that the saying Children should be seen but not heard was created. This saying applied to Pip. Many guttural sounds were used to describe the abuse that was inflicted upon Pip such as rampage. This emphasises the un-human like behaviour of Mrs Joe towards Pip.

Faithful and Fruitful Logic :: Logic Philosophy Papers

Faithful and Fruitful Logic Appropriate for a conference relating philosophy and education, we seek ways more faithful than the truth-functional (TF) hook to understand and represent that ordinary-language conditional which we use in, e.g., modus ponens, and that conditional’s remote and counterfactual counterparts, and also the proper negations of all three. Such a logic might obviate the paradoxes caused by T-F representation, and be educationally fruitful. William and Martha Kneale and Gilbert Ryle assist us: "In the hypothetical case in which p, it is inferable, on the basis that p and at least in the given context, that q." "Inferable" is explained. This paraphrase is the foundation of the logic of hypothetical inferability ("HI logic"). It generates the negative but non-TF device "hib" (= "there is a hypothetical-inferability bar against the conjoint proposition that"), followed by a bracketed conjunction. This is an enriched negative: "hib (p . -q)" is stronger than "-(p . -q)," and "-hib" ("dash hib" = "there is no h-i bar...") offers us "-hib (p . -q)," weaker than "p . -q." Thus equipped, we can test deductive arguments by the CI ("Compatible-or-incompatible?") method explained, and explode paradoxes. The paraphrase, "hib," and the CI method are fruitful in training students to understand this conditional, and to demonstrate genuine validity or invalidity. The logic generally taught to English-speaking students is symbolic logic. How faithful is it when employed as a representation of the connectives they use and will use in their ordinary conversation and in most of their intellectual activity, at least if they are not mathematicians? How fruitful for their education? Is there a logic more faithful and likely to be more fruitful? A conference inviting us to relate philosophy and education makes those questions especially opportune. I Reviewing Strawson’s Introduction to Logical Theory in Mind (1953), Quine admits that Strawson is "good on ‘É ’ and ‘if/then’" and "rightly observes the divergence between the two". But he left unchanged his handling of "the conditional" in subsequent editions of his textbooks. In the review he writes unconcernedly (as would be impossible for Ryle, Austin or Strawson) of the "Procrustean treatment of ordinary language at the hands of logicians", defending it by offering symbolic logic as the appropriate language for science, and suggesting that philosophy of science comes close to being "philosophy enough". Ackermann, in the Preface to his Modern Deductive Logic, takes quite a different approach. He emphasises the "mathematical and scientific applications" of symbolic deductive logic, but says "one may well wonder" whether it has "enough philosophical value" to justify a major place in the philosophy curriculum.

Ford Pinto Case Study

Ford Pinto Case Study MGT 216 Ford Pinto Case Study The purpose of this paper will be to determine whether Ford was to blame in the Ford Pinto Case. This paper will provide possible solutions as well as supporting statements. This paper will examine all external social pressures and determine how external pressures affect individuals’ points of view. Further, this paper will discuss how the issue would be viewed differently in today’s society. In today’s society ethical issues are under heavy scrutiny. To examine this case thoroughly, the time and social norms of the time must be taken into consideration. The big question with the case is whether or not the Ford business acted ethically when designing the Pinto’s fuel system. The case was put under a microscope and analyzed because the company did not upgrade the integrity of the system until 1978 because of the cost benefits analysis. In determining whether or not to make the production change, the Ford Motor Company defended itself by contending that it used a risk/benefit analysis. Ford stated that its reason for using a risk/benefit analysis was due to the fact that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) required them to do so (Leggett, 1999). Business people should not forget that they have a social responsibility as well as a responsibility of maintaining business ethics. If faced with an ethical dilemma similar to that in the Pinto case, it would be important to consider the factors and remind management that it is unethical to knowingly market a car with unsafe parts to the public (De George, 2006). Taking the time to put in a bit more money to make a quality product is more important than building a car that will eventually be recalled and decline in future profits. Quality and safety are on the minds of consumers when purchasing a car. When the cars are made of good quality, it shows the consumers that the values and ethics of a company are solid and that the company puts pride in their work. This ensures that there develops a trust between consumer and company, and possibly a long relationship between the two. If these observations do not convince management, it should be suggested to publish a warning on the risks associated with the Pinto and/or issue a recall. The last option would force management to take nother look into investing more in their cars. If management declines the request to inform the public then the ethical decision would be to â€Å"blow the whistle†. Safety should be the first concern. Putting oneself behind the wheel with family would make that decision easy. Any information would be distributed anonymously and made known in all forms of media to the public (Nadler & Schulman, 2006). The social pressures that Ford Motor Company faced were: decline in sales, increased risk of litigation and lawsuits, and their reputation being slandered. The Ford Corporation knew from the beginning that the Pinto was dangerous. If the corporation continued to manufacture the Pinto they knew there was a risk of many lawsuits (class action) and litigation on the horizon. The corporation conducted a cost-benefit analysis to determine how many deaths would occur and how it would impact the company financially. The cost-benefit analysis would determine the cost the company would be responsible for if a certain percentage of the deceased persons’ families sued the company and won (DeGeorge, 2006). It was in the best interest of the company to cut their losses and stop manufacturing the Pinto because the issues became public. Their reputation was tarnished, despite the fact that they corrected the problems. This lead to a reduction in sales/profits since the consumers wouldn’t invest in the Pinto due to prior issues. Consumers didn’t care that they corrected the issues. The best option for Ford is to invest in a safer and better product and cut their losses. During the 1970s it should have been obvious to Ford that the general public was not favorable to them ignoring the problems concerning the fuel tank. Even though they reasoned it out of their calculations by using a risk/benefit analysis, safety was a factor to buyers even back then. The same approach mentioned above could have been used back then as well. Step one would have been encouraging management to make the right decision. Ford should have decided to not produce additional cars with the issue. Publishing a warning to all purchasers of the (impaired) car should also have occurred, along with an offer of updating the fuel tank with the appropriate parts free of charge. If management declined to do any of these then blowing the whistle would be best. As indicated before, one just has to put themselves in the driver’s seat along with their family to understand the importance of correcting the problem. You truly cannot put a price on a human being, no matter how hard you try. Essentially, ethics and morals are nearly bound at the same hand. A vehicle, knowingly defective, can be sold day in and day out for personal and corporate gain. Ethics plays its part when the entire corporation is knowingly and encouraging these actions. A re-call on a vehicle is not the fault of the salesman selling the car in Wheeler, TX. It is the right and duty of the auto-maker to let the salesman in Wheeler, TX aware of the defaults in the vehicle in order for that salesman to inform his customers of the automobile that they are prepared to purchase. THIS is an ethical violation! It becomes an ethical question, when the Corporates encourage the sales of these ill-made vehicles simply in order to meet they’re bottom line. (Toyota). It is fascinating that when we speak of ethics that we never speak of values. The CEO’s, COO’s CFO’s have no values in these instances; therefore they have no morals or ethics. Rarely do we see the head of a Fortune 500 Company come out publicly and admit that they had no ethics going into this project. Ethics has gone by the waste-side in recent years and the corporations are not the only ones to blame. These employees of they’re rightful companies have literally forced most of there employees to, so called, â€Å"play ball† for sales, benefits and bonuses. No matter what the cost or expense to the consumer. Many believe that ethics still lives and breathes in our corporate world, but until there are morals and honesty, the American people are simply done buying what they are selling! References De George, R. (2006). Chapter 12 Whistle blowing. â€Å"Business Ethics†, 6thed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Leggett, C. (1999). Life as it applies to the Negligence-Efficiency. Retrieved from http://www. wfu. edu/~palmitar/Law&Valuation/Papers/1999/Leggett-pinto. html on February 9, 2011 Ford Pinto Case Study Ford Pinto Case Study MGT 216 Ford Pinto Case Study The purpose of this paper will be to determine whether Ford was to blame in the Ford Pinto Case. This paper will provide possible solutions as well as supporting statements. This paper will examine all external social pressures and determine how external pressures affect individuals’ points of view. Further, this paper will discuss how the issue would be viewed differently in today’s society. In today’s society ethical issues are under heavy scrutiny. To examine this case thoroughly, the time and social norms of the time must be taken into consideration. The big question with the case is whether or not the Ford business acted ethically when designing the Pinto’s fuel system. The case was put under a microscope and analyzed because the company did not upgrade the integrity of the system until 1978 because of the cost benefits analysis. In determining whether or not to make the production change, the Ford Motor Company defended itself by contending that it used a risk/benefit analysis. Ford stated that its reason for using a risk/benefit analysis was due to the fact that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) required them to do so (Leggett, 1999). Business people should not forget that they have a social responsibility as well as a responsibility of maintaining business ethics. If faced with an ethical dilemma similar to that in the Pinto case, it would be important to consider the factors and remind management that it is unethical to knowingly market a car with unsafe parts to the public (De George, 2006). Taking the time to put in a bit more money to make a quality product is more important than building a car that will eventually be recalled and decline in future profits. Quality and safety are on the minds of consumers when purchasing a car. When the cars are made of good quality, it shows the consumers that the values and ethics of a company are solid and that the company puts pride in their work. This ensures that there develops a trust between consumer and company, and possibly a long relationship between the two. If these observations do not convince management, it should be suggested to publish a warning on the risks associated with the Pinto and/or issue a recall. The last option would force management to take nother look into investing more in their cars. If management declines the request to inform the public then the ethical decision would be to â€Å"blow the whistle†. Safety should be the first concern. Putting oneself behind the wheel with family would make that decision easy. Any information would be distributed anonymously and made known in all forms of media to the public (Nadler & Schulman, 2006). The social pressures that Ford Motor Company faced were: decline in sales, increased risk of litigation and lawsuits, and their reputation being slandered. The Ford Corporation knew from the beginning that the Pinto was dangerous. If the corporation continued to manufacture the Pinto they knew there was a risk of many lawsuits (class action) and litigation on the horizon. The corporation conducted a cost-benefit analysis to determine how many deaths would occur and how it would impact the company financially. The cost-benefit analysis would determine the cost the company would be responsible for if a certain percentage of the deceased persons’ families sued the company and won (DeGeorge, 2006). It was in the best interest of the company to cut their losses and stop manufacturing the Pinto because the issues became public. Their reputation was tarnished, despite the fact that they corrected the problems. This lead to a reduction in sales/profits since the consumers wouldn’t invest in the Pinto due to prior issues. Consumers didn’t care that they corrected the issues. The best option for Ford is to invest in a safer and better product and cut their losses. During the 1970s it should have been obvious to Ford that the general public was not favorable to them ignoring the problems concerning the fuel tank. Even though they reasoned it out of their calculations by using a risk/benefit analysis, safety was a factor to buyers even back then. The same approach mentioned above could have been used back then as well. Step one would have been encouraging management to make the right decision. Ford should have decided to not produce additional cars with the issue. Publishing a warning to all purchasers of the (impaired) car should also have occurred, along with an offer of updating the fuel tank with the appropriate parts free of charge. If management declined to do any of these then blowing the whistle would be best. As indicated before, one just has to put themselves in the driver’s seat along with their family to understand the importance of correcting the problem. You truly cannot put a price on a human being, no matter how hard you try. Essentially, ethics and morals are nearly bound at the same hand. A vehicle, knowingly defective, can be sold day in and day out for personal and corporate gain. Ethics plays its part when the entire corporation is knowingly and encouraging these actions. A re-call on a vehicle is not the fault of the salesman selling the car in Wheeler, TX. It is the right and duty of the auto-maker to let the salesman in Wheeler, TX aware of the defaults in the vehicle in order for that salesman to inform his customers of the automobile that they are prepared to purchase. THIS is an ethical violation! It becomes an ethical question, when the Corporates encourage the sales of these ill-made vehicles simply in order to meet they’re bottom line. (Toyota). It is fascinating that when we speak of ethics that we never speak of values. The CEO’s, COO’s CFO’s have no values in these instances; therefore they have no morals or ethics. Rarely do we see the head of a Fortune 500 Company come out publicly and admit that they had no ethics going into this project. Ethics has gone by the waste-side in recent years and the corporations are not the only ones to blame. These employees of they’re rightful companies have literally forced most of there employees to, so called, â€Å"play ball† for sales, benefits and bonuses. No matter what the cost or expense to the consumer. Many believe that ethics still lives and breathes in our corporate world, but until there are morals and honesty, the American people are simply done buying what they are selling! References De George, R. (2006). Chapter 12 Whistle blowing. â€Å"Business Ethics†, 6thed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Leggett, C. (1999). Life as it applies to the Negligence-Efficiency. Retrieved from http://www. wfu. edu/~palmitar/Law&Valuation/Papers/1999/Leggett-pinto. html on February 9, 2011

Pasear Conjugation in Spanish, Translations, Examples