The Constitution of the United States Essay -- Papers History USA Gove

The Constitution of the United States When the Constitution of the United States was first created in 1787, its purpose was to unify our country. However, by 1850, the United States had become 'source of sectional discord and tension and ultimately contributed to the failure of the union it had created.' What happened during the 63 years after it was first established to 'contribute to the failure of the union it had created?' One must look at what the Constitution promoted to make the country unified and what it did to make it disunified. Compromises such as 3/5, the Missouri, and the tariff of 1850 all helped to unify and shape our country. However, compromises such as the Fugitive Slave Law, Popular Sovereignty, and the slave trade all led to disunify our country. The large populous states naturally wanted the number of representatives in the new Congress to be based on population. The Virginia Plan provided that there would be two houses of Congress and that in each one representation would be based on population. Li ke many other ideas that have made history, it was remarkably simple. Why not divide the Congress into two houses? In one house (the Senate) each state, regardless of population, would have the same number of representatives. In the other house (the House of Representatives) each member would represent the same number of people. 'Quite appropriately this came to be called the Great Compromise. Other major compromises came on slavery and on the control of commerce. The southern states, where the slaves were really treated as property, still wanted the slaves counted as people for the purposes of representation in the New House of Representatives. Some delegates argued that if one kind of property was counted f... ... a truce that announced the opening of fight to the finish. The Missouri Compromise preserved sectional balance for over 30 years and provided time for the nation to mature. The Fugitive Slave Law however, helped lead to the disunification of both the country and the Constitution. The F.S.L. stated that any captured person who claimed to be a free black and not a runaway slave was denied the right to trial by jury. Popular Sovereignty held the greatest possibility maintaining the unity of the Democratic Party and national unity, but that like a lot of other things was proven to be wrong. Buchanan presumably premeditated the Dred Scott Decision but no one really proved it. In conclusion, like stated in the thesis, there were many factors that led to the nation's sectional discord and the unity within the nation. Some of which are still around today but work better.

Example of Interview Protocol

Interview Protocol: 1. How would you define biology? 2. How would you define life? 3. Give 5 examples of life and explain why they exhibit life. 4. What is the smallest unit of life? 5. Is soil alive? Why or why not? 6. Is air alive? Why or why not? 7. What body part makes us most alive? Why? Interview #1 Interviewer (LH): How would you define biology? Interviewee (BM): Um.. as a part of life LH: Okay, how would you define life? BM: Uh.. everything around you†¦from the sky to the grass LH: Can you give 5 examples of life and explain why they exhibit life.BM: Plants, because you need them to breathe oxygen, yourself, because you are you, animals, because they are part of the food chain (she flashed a thumbs up here because she was proud she recalled this information), the sun, because you need it to grow and not be moody, and water, water because everything needs water. LH: Nice.. what is the smallest unit of life? BM: Um†¦um.. um†¦I know this†¦ LH: I know you doâ € ¦ (Another minute passed and never recalled despite looking around the room and looking directly at the cell poster) LH: Is soil alive? Why or why not?BM: Yes, because you can make it grow. LH: Is air alive? Why or why not? BM: Um†¦(about 30 second delay)†¦I am going to say no†¦ LH: Why not? BM: (she shrugs) LH: Okay, go back to how you defined life. How do you define life? What makes something alive to you? BM: It grows and survives. LH: Okay, so is air alive? BM: No, because it doesn’t grow. LH: One of your examples of life was the human body. What part of the human body makes you most alive and why? BM: Your heart because it makes everything move. Because you can live without a brain, can’t you? You can be brain dead.LH: But once your heart gives out then you are dead? BM: Yes, because you still can live†¦ LH: Without a brain but not without a heart? BM: You can live more without a brain then a heart. LH: Very nice, thank you for participatin g. Interview #2: Interviewer (LH): How would you define biology? Interviewee (YC): The study of life. LH: And†¦how do you define life? YC: Something that moving, breathing, functioning LH: Ok.. can you give me five examples of life and explain why they exhibit life. YC: Plants, cause they grow, humans, cause they move around, they function, they think and they also grow.. m.. wait†¦animals cause that’s like humans†¦. um.. LH: Two more YC: I really can’t think of two more. Those are the only ones I can think of right now. LH: Ok, so plants, animals and humans, what is the smallest unit of life? YC: The cell LH: And, is soil alive to you? Why or why not? YC: Um.. yeah because it makes things grow. LH: Okay.. is air alive to you? Why or why not? YC: No, because in order to be alive you have to be, like, functioning, growing, moving and air is just two chemicals put together to make one chemical. LH: Okay, and what body part makes a human being most alive an d why?YC: The heart because without your heart you can’t function, you can’t, because your heart makes your whole body function so without that you won’t be able to function. Because the heart is the one that produces the blood and the blood sends out to all of your†¦um.. cells and all your body parts. It also sends out reflexes. It also helps with your reflexes and everything. LH: Nice, thank you. Analysis: The most surprising part of the interview came after the interview when the two subjects started arguing about their answers. I invited two friends to come after school but interviewed them separately.After I was done with the second interview, the girls started discussing how they answered each question. Their focus was specifically on the last two questions: is air alive and what part of the body makes a human being alive? They started discussing molecules and molecular interactions in air that could create life or prevent life depending on the qualit y of air. In addition, they considered the importance of the brain in the human body and discussed the implications of being brain dead but still alive. After some discussion, the girls decided the brain is the coach and the heart is the player.Both students are basketball players so it helped them to process the information by relating to basketball. In other words, the coach gives direction but the players still have to execute the plays. Another point of interest was the correlation of grades with ease and accuracy of recall. My first subject is receiving a B in my class and the second subject an A. The first subject knew the concepts but had more difficulty with the exact definition. The first subject talked around topics demonstrating knowledge of content standards but had difficulty pinpointing her ideas.The second subject gave exact definitions and answers quickly. The comfort level was visible in the answers provided, both in accuracy and timing. In addition, despite discuss ing the characteristics of life, I realized both students still created a superficial definition of life. They summarized life as something that moves and grows and breathes, but they did not consider reproduction and they are made of cells and more technical aspects of the definition of life. The students also had trouble with their own definition when I started asking them about specific questions regarding living/non-living parts.Although it was interesting the second subject had a greater connection between her definition and her explanation of why a heart is the most critical organ for life. I also noticed when giving examples of life, both subjects focused on broad categories of life: plants, animals, humans and neglected specific examples of living things. I would be interested to see if a younger student would name specific living things or focus on broad categories. I suspect the broad categories come from the fact we are studying cells and just studied ecology and the focu s is on plant versus nimal or consumer versus producer. After completing my interview I realized my questions were too narrow. I tried to predict what the students would say and create appropriate follow-up questions but the questions still had short answers. I need to reflect on how to write my questions to solicit longer responses with more detail to demonstrate feeling. The discrepancy between what I anticipated and what happened could be the result of the nature of the survey and the focus on content compared to my research survey that focuses on experiences and emotions.

Hamlet: Context of the Original Version Essay

Shakespeare uses words in his plays that are often confusing to modern readers. His wordplays, however, are what make his works worth reading. That is why there are available resources that attempt to explain at least some of the context of Shakespeare’s words in his plays. One of these resources is a website that offers a translation of the original work into the modern language. The service is called No Fear Shakespeare. The translations, however, does not provide the experience that is brought to the audience that using Shakespeare’s words does. One of the plays that No Fear Shakespeare translates into the modern version is Hamlet. We shall examine and compare how the original version differs in context and complexity from the modern version using Act III scene 4. This is where Hamlet met Gertrude in her room and had killed Polonius. First, we examine that Shakespeare’s words, while may be used in its literal sense, is also used to refer to something else. In fact, the English language is full of connotations and metaphorical usage that it is often easy to undermine the context of Shakespeare’s words by modern readers. Hamlet and Gertrude’s exchange of words in the beginning of the scene, for example, use words that, when translated into modern version, lose their symbolic meaning. The word â€Å"offended† was translated into the word â€Å"insulted† which is not as effective or powerful in use as the original term. â€Å"Idle tongue† was translated simply into â€Å"foolish† and â€Å"wicked tongue† simply into â€Å"evil. † â€Å"Tongue† in the original context is used to refer to the characters’ manner of speaking. Thus, an â€Å"idle tongue† means that Hamlet was speaking without meaning, purpose or basis and â€Å"wicked tongue† while may mean to be literally evil, may also refer to something with mischief. One must remember that Hamlet is very critical about those around him, treating the other characters with suspicion. He knew that there are those who contrive against him and his mother does not escape his doubts. Thus, Hamlet’s use of â€Å"wicked† is more closely applicable to â€Å"mischief† than to â€Å"evil. † Fact is the term â€Å"question† may actually mean â€Å"doubt† in the original context. It is important to note that while the translations closely resemble the meaning of the original, it loses the power of the original. Hamlet also referred to Polonius, although he was unaware that it was Polonius who was behind the tapestry, as a â€Å"rat. † One might be easily led in the modern translation that Hamlet simply means to regard the person literally as a rat which justifies killing it. Those aware of the English language know that the term rat could refer to someone who is despicable, or an informer of sort, a spy perhaps. This meaning is reinforced when Hamlet regarded Polonius as an â€Å"intruding fool† later on. Hamlet also regarded Polonius as â€Å"wretched† and was translated into simply â€Å"low-life,† which hardly compares to the power of the original term that means someone who is in a very unhappy or unfortunate state. The term is also used to express anger, hatred or annoyance. Gertrude’s expression confronting Hamlet stating that he dared to â€Å"wag thy tongue in a noise so rude† was simply translated to â€Å"talk to me so rudely.† One could immediately see the richness of the original passage as compared to the translation. While the meaning of the phrase was preserved, the power and drama of the original was not. The use of figurative speech was also disregarded in the modern translation. For example, when Hamlet cried â€Å"Rebellious hell,† the apostrophe was omitted from the modern translation. The lines were translated not as if Hamlet was calling out to hell, hence, does not retain the richness and complexity of the original. It must be noted that the use of figurative speech makes a literary work an art, and the failure of the translated version to maintain its use in the original passage is a failure to meet the excellence exemplified by the original. The problem that exists in the modern translation of Shakespeare’s plays lies in the context of the meaning of the words, the mystery of its use, and the application of figurative speech. Shakespeare’s words are often richer in context and complex in meaning that it is also the reason of the difficulty to understand some concepts and messages in the play. The meaning, context and complexity of the words as used in the original version disappear when translated into the modern version. Modern versions of the text are usually taken in its literal sense, thus, the author’s real purpose in using the words disappear. Furthermore, the art of using words by applying figurative speech was not preserved in the modern version. Modern translations of the text, while easier to understand, fail to meet the complexities of Shakespeare’s words and come short in the richness of its context.

Free Essays on Machiavelli And Arendt

Machiavelli and Arendt â€Å"Totalitarian policy claims to transform the human species into an active unfailing carrier of a law to which human beings otherwise only passively and reluctantly be subjected.† A statement in Hannah Arendt’s Ideology and Terror: A Novel Form of Government, in this essay she outlines and defines totalitarianism. Her explanation includes many variables that can be misrepresented as those ideals set forth by Niccolo Machiavelli in his 1513 working The Qualities of the Prince. According to Arendt totalitarianism is made of several qualities. She describes an end state of â€Å"world domination† accomplished by tyranny. In this lawless government, a single individual will have power that is provoked in his own interest rather than that of the people. Under this action, there will be no â€Å"general agreement† as to laws that will be implied, rather, there will obedience and humans will follow the â€Å"laws of nature†. Hence, totalitarianism is a movement by mankind to become â€Å"One man† states Arendt. Thus, this statement alone is not congruent with Machiavelli’s idealistic values of a prince. Within his work, Machiavelli outlines and defines those qualities and assumptions that a leader, a prince, must possess in order to succeed or for that matter, fail. In recounting the essay, the Prince first has a duty to become a master of war. In doing so he will be prepared in the time of adversity. By enduring personal sacrifice in peacetime, he will in turn learn to be proactive when facing famine, restlessness and pain. Arendt’s totalitarianism describes the need for a military to destroy all those opposed to the movement. Her use of force is for the destruction of those not in the movement, as Hitler did to the Jewish. Machiavelli’s battle would rather be compared to an Army protecting it’s borders from foreign invasion. The act of a person being generous can often be taken for granted. ... Free Essays on Machiavelli And Arendt Free Essays on Machiavelli And Arendt Machiavelli and Arendt â€Å"Totalitarian policy claims to transform the human species into an active unfailing carrier of a law to which human beings otherwise only passively and reluctantly be subjected.† A statement in Hannah Arendt’s Ideology and Terror: A Novel Form of Government, in this essay she outlines and defines totalitarianism. Her explanation includes many variables that can be misrepresented as those ideals set forth by Niccolo Machiavelli in his 1513 working The Qualities of the Prince. According to Arendt totalitarianism is made of several qualities. She describes an end state of â€Å"world domination† accomplished by tyranny. In this lawless government, a single individual will have power that is provoked in his own interest rather than that of the people. Under this action, there will be no â€Å"general agreement† as to laws that will be implied, rather, there will obedience and humans will follow the â€Å"laws of nature†. Hence, totalitarianism is a movement by mankind to become â€Å"One man† states Arendt. Thus, this statement alone is not congruent with Machiavelli’s idealistic values of a prince. Within his work, Machiavelli outlines and defines those qualities and assumptions that a leader, a prince, must possess in order to succeed or for that matter, fail. In recounting the essay, the Prince first has a duty to become a master of war. In doing so he will be prepared in the time of adversity. By enduring personal sacrifice in peacetime, he will in turn learn to be proactive when facing famine, restlessness and pain. Arendt’s totalitarianism describes the need for a military to destroy all those opposed to the movement. Her use of force is for the destruction of those not in the movement, as Hitler did to the Jewish. Machiavelli’s battle would rather be compared to an Army protecting it’s borders from foreign invasion. The act of a person being generous can often be taken for granted. ...

Flag Burning Unconstitutional essays

Flag Burning Unconstitutional essays Flag burning is absolutely not a valid form of political expression under the first amendment. Though the Supreme Court, in the case of Gregory Johnson, ruled that it was in fact constitutional to allow people to burn the flag, the evidence against this ruling is overwhelming. First, the first amendment does provide protection to demonstrators wishing to voice their political opinions vocally and symbolically, the amendment does not allow for the desecration of sacred objects such as flags, cemeteries, and public monuments. The Texas law in effect when Gregory Johnson burned an American flag in protest of the American political system clearly states that it is illegal to desecrate such objects. The law defined desecration as physical mistreatment of such objects in a way which the accused knows will offend one or more persons likely to observe or discover the act. When Gregory Johnson burned his flag he clearly intended to make a public display and offend onlookers. The se cond argument against flag burning is that there are many other ways for one to express dislike for the American democratic system than to burn on of its most sacred objects. The flag stands for much more than the fifty states, in the it represents battles fought for the United States by hundreds of thousands of veterans. The flag represents national unity. The third, and most important, argument is that flag burning is an act that could possibly cause a large amount of violence if done in a public place. The first amendment does not protest this type of speech. (Texas vs. Johnson worksheet) The Texas law created to protect sacred objects clearly states that it is illegal to desecrate anything that could case public dismay. In Gregory Johnsons trial several witnesses testified that they were deeply offended by Johnsons act. This argument alone makes flag burning illegal. Gregory Johnson should have been punish...

How to Treat Geological and Astronomical Terms

How to Treat Geological and Astronomical Terms How to Treat Geological and Astronomical Terms How to Treat Geological and Astronomical Terms By Mark Nichol Determining whether to refer to geological and astronomical terms with initial uppercase or lowercase letters can be a challenge, because various publications and publishers differ on capitalization style. The following guidelines, however, appear to predominate: Names of geological time spans are capitalized, but the terms for the magnitude of duration (eons, eras, periods, epochs, and stages, in descending order of length), are not; in scientific and nonscientific prose alike, these terms can be omitted: â€Å"The Mesozoic is also known as the Age of Dinosaurs.† â€Å"Mrs. Wattle has been teaching Freshman Composition since the Mesozoic.† Whether modifying terms such as early, middle, and late are capitalized depends on whether they are themselves modified: â€Å"Tyrannosaurus rex lived during the Late Cretaceous.† â€Å"The Deccan Traps erupted in the very late Cretaceous.† â€Å"Ice age† is considered a generic term because multiple such events have occurred. In astronomy, general terms in proper names of celestial bodies are generally capitalized (â€Å"Orion’s Belt,† â€Å"Barnard’s Star,† â€Å"Comet Halley†). Note, however, that comet is lowercased in lay references to â€Å"Halley’s comet.† In nontechnical contexts, sun and moon are often lowercased: â€Å"She shielded her eyes from the bright light of the sun.† â€Å"Beware when the moon is full.† In works about astronomy, or those in which other celestial bodies are referenced, uppercase them: â€Å"The Sun is merely one of countless stars.† â€Å"The Moon orbits our planet roughly every twenty-eight days.† The same rule applies to the name of our planet. In idioms such as â€Å"where on earth,† â€Å"down to earth,† and â€Å"move heaven and earth,† the name requires no emphasis, and references to our world from a surface perspective and to its soil are likewise lowercased: â€Å"I traveled to the four corners of the earth to find it.† â€Å"The earth here is rich and loamy.† But the word as the name of the planet should be emphasized like any other: â€Å"The first four planets, Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars, consisting mostly of rock and metals, are called the terrestrial planets.† (Note that Earth, in such contexts, need not be, and rarely is, preceded by the.) General terms like â€Å"solar system,† galaxy, and universe are usually not capitalized; some publications and books uppercase them (especially in references to our own solar system and the Milky Way galaxy). Names of celestial phenomena and objects such as the aurora borealis and the rings orbiting Jupiter and Saturn are lowercased. Remember, too, when discussing the planets orbiting the Sun, that Pluto was in 2006 demoted to a dwarf planet one of four in the solar system’s distant Kuiper belt (a fifth dwarf planet lies in the asteroid belt, between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter), and may not even be the largest one. (The scientific jury is still out on whether the similarly sized Eris is larger). And why is belt capitalized in â€Å"Orion’s Belt† and not in â€Å"the Kuiper belt†? In the former term, it’s a reference to part of the personification of the Orion constellation, but in the latter, it’s merely a description, just as in â€Å"the asteroid belt.† Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Style category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:45 Synonyms for â€Å"Food†Select vs. SelectedSit vs. Set

Philosophical aspects of qualitative research Essay

Philosophical aspects of qualitative research - Essay Example Philosophical tenets influence qualitative research in relation to data analysis, data collection approach and research questions. Philosophical aspects of social science are applicable in qualitative research. Qualitative research in social science involves focusing on exploring of ideas, meanings, patterns, inconsistencies and the nature of conflicts in individual’s behaviors and thoughts (Bryman, 2009). The technique provides a technique of eliminating cases of bias in interpreting data. A core value in the use of qualitative research is that it is interpretative and interactive. Philosophical theories are applicable in qualitative research influence the process of data analysis, the general approach to data collection and formulation of research questions. In qualitative research, the data analysis aims at finding understandable output. The focus of the analysis is not in simplification of figures, but it concentrates on giving the figures, some meanings (Hammersley & Traianou, 2012). The approach used in the data collection process greatly affects qualitative research techniques. The nature of the data collected in quantitative research must be in a form that is easy to interpret. Qualitative research questions often lead the researcher towards obtaining information that explains the human behavior. They assist in obtaining information that explains why and how certain phenomena occur in an individual’s