Lord Of Flies Essays (1571 words) - English-language Films, Films

Lord Of Flies Why is it that when people are placed in situations where sanity and reason are the keys to survival, people go crazy and end up ruining their chances to live? All that they needed to ensure a chance for their rescue was the fire. I don't see what is so hard about that. The fire gives off smoke, they then see the smoke as a signal showing inhabitants on the island, then passers-by will go and search for them. Plain and simple! Why did you require us to read this book? I can think of one reason, being that no matter how old you are, morals and law are necessary for survival. Yet, I still believe that this book, despite its strong message, was weak and uninteresting. What was so great about hunting? This obsession with hunting was what baffled me the most throughout this book. I honestly don't see what was so great about it, and why they let it interrupt their responsibilities. If they had not been distracted with hunting and just tended to the fire like they were supposed to, it's possible that could have been rescued earlier on in the book. "Kill the pig! Cut his throat! Kill the pig! Bash him in!" (Chap. 7, pg. 114) This line shows that they have pretty much lost it by now. It describes their loss of hope for rescue, and that they have developed a superiority complex. The rush they get from ending a life has made them go insane and clouded their judgement. As the book goes on and they say this line more often, wackiness follows. "Coming?" (Chap. 7, pg. 119) Although Ralph was a good leader and had good intentions, he was still somewhat passive because he always gave in to whatever Jack said. He would let Jack walk all over him which was a factor in the "biguns" leaving his group and joining Jack's chaotic tribe. "No. They're not as bad as that. It was an accident." (Chap. 12, pg. 184) Despite the bad things they've done and the chaos that was spreading throughout the island, they were still just children. Innocent, naive, and unaware of the outcomes of their actions. They know that what they've done was wrong but they refuse to admit it, they dilute themselves. The title: Lord of The Flies relates to the story mainly through Simon. We hear about him seeing and speaking to the Lord of The Flies and the pig's head in the book. He is the only character known to interact with the Lord of The Flies and is told by him that he holds their fates on this island. Also, the title Lord of The Flies relates with the story through the children. They flutter around the animal carcasses the way flies would. The boys celebrate killing pigs by dancing about its carcass. Similar to the way flies swarm around a rotting corpse. Which would make Jack, the Lord of The Flies since he leads the boys in their wrong doings and gets the biggest rush from killing, and celebrates the most. The scene opens with the survivors gathering and trying to act rationally by creating electing a leader and focusing on the most important thing, their rescue. This relates to the way the boys try to act civilized and just, yet they cannot escape the fact that they are still mere children. Susceptible to the "dark side" and not fully responsible. It describes how naive they are. The physical setting of this story, takes place on an uncharted desert island in the ocean. Very similar to the tropical islands of the Pacific. It is very lush, verdant, and fruitful. The island is shaped like a boat. It contains a jungle and orchards that are at the low end of the island, which rise to a treeless, rocky mountain ridge. There is a warm water lagoon which the boys bathe in, and a natural platform of fallen trees where they would hold their meetings. Also, there is a castle at the other end of the island that rises several hundred feet above the sea. The societal structure was democratic yet bias. All of the boys were from somewhat aristocratic societies since they most likely belonged to a rich boarding school if they were flown from place to place. They discriminated against the "littluns" and Piggy because they were unable to help and saw them as useless. Many felt the need to be in a higher position than

Winter Storm essays

Winter Storm essays The white storm that I was caught in happened twenty-seven years ago. The natural disaster I refer to struck on Friday, January 28, 1977, The Blizzard of 77", or as author Erno Rossi, M.A. termed it White Death. What happened on that Friday so long ago was actually a winter hurricane. It had been such a cold, brutal winter. Lake Erie had been frozen solid by Christmas. With extreme temperature and record snowfall, the snow had piled up on top of the ice. So as the 50 mile an hour wind swept across Lake Erie, it blew the powdery snow off the lake, and into Buffalo and the surrounding counties. Into my county it came with a vengeance. I was working as an office clerk at a local linen factory. At that time I did not have my license to drive, so I had to depend on others for my transportation. On this particular day it was my Dad who drove me to work, and who would also drive me home. As we went to work that day it had been snowing heavily. Note enough for us hearty Upstate New Yorkers to stay home though. As the morning had progressed, so had the snow and the wind. My Dad had called me to let me know that he was leaving work early, everyone was being sent home. My Dad came and picked me up at about 12:00 noon. At which point the winds were even stronger and visibility was zero. There we were my Dad and I leaving the city of Batavia to make our six mile trek home in the storm. As we inched our way out of the city we were headed north to our home in Oakfield New York. When I say inched I mean it literally. The windshield wipers couldnt work fast enough to keep the snow off the windshield, the wind was howling around us. We couldnt see. I would roll my window down and pop my head out to see if we were still on the road, but that did little good. So we crept on. It seemed we were alone in this white vacuum. ...

Consistent Style Sheet Eliminates Value Judgments

Consistent Style Sheet Eliminates Value Judgments Consistent Style Sheet Eliminates Value Judgments Consistent Style Sheet Eliminates Value Judgments By Maeve Maddox One of our readers, Pankaj, has asked for clarification on the posting called The Gentleman Fled on Foot. Was I addressing a matter of diction, or was I advocating the denial of respect for persons in unfortunate circumstances? Some publications and newsrooms have a policy of referring to people by surname only, once the full name has been mentioned. Others have a policy of adding the honorific to the surname every timeor for a set number of timesafter the full name has been mentioned. In either case, I see no problem. When a policy is in place, the writer knows whether to use Mr/Ms/Rev/Dr with the surname, or to go with plain Jones. My post was concerned with a practice that Ive observed often enough to regard it as a trend. Apparently many news sources have no set policy because they sometimes refer to people by surname only, and sometimes with the honorific plus surname. I first became aware of this strange practice several years ago when my dissertation adviser was murdered in his campus office. Ill call the professor Jones, and the man who killed him Smith. One of the articles published in a local paper, having named both men in the lead, went on for several columns to refer to the professor, who had a Ph.D. and was usually called Dr. Jones, as Jones, but referred to the other man as Mr. Smith each time he was mentioned. It could be that the tendency to be super-polite when talking about criminals grows from the knowledge that anyone who has yet to be convicted must be referred to as an alleged whatever. Perhaps writers who call bank robbers gentlemen are just being cautious. I dont know. In any case, the question forced me to look at why this inconsistency of diction bothers me. Ive had to conclude that Mr. Pankaj is a more accepting person than I am. In the absence of a style sheet rule, Id be inclined to leave off the Mr. when it comes to perpetrators of the more horrid crimes. 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 General category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:When to use "on" and when to use "in"Do you "orient" yourself, or "orientate" yourself?People vs. Persons

Analysis of Group Processes Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Analysis of Group Processes - Essay Example Group Overview This group has been formed for the purposes of attaining a particular objective. The primary directive of the group is to provide Death Star Hospital (DSH) with clear directions on how to achieve a better healthcare service delivery in Death Star Hospital. The group is made up of seven people, all from different hospital departments. Each member has their own responsibilities, and in working together the group is able to meet its targets and obligations (Hogg and Tindale, 2001). The group is tasked with formulating a way through which DSH will increase efficiency in all its departments to ensure a better quality service is delivered to patients. Members of the Group 1. Yoda: Team Manager Yoda is the most learnt member of the group; he is a hospital administrator. His creativity, positive thinking, passion and dedication make him the right man to be at the helm of the group. He easily interacts with people and has a witty sense of humour. We nicknamed him Yoda because o f how he is able to perceive what one wants to say when having difficulty in explaining oneself. Despite being a highly ranked member of the hospital management, he prefers working in the ‘trenches’ with the rest of staff, as he loves his work. 2. Leila: HR Manager When she arrived in Death Star Hospital three years ago, the human resource department was on the verge of being scrapped from the company due to its unproductiveness. Leila single-handedly brought the department back to life, and it is one of the most efficient and productive departments within the hospital. No challenge is too big for this young lady; she is extremely proactive when it comes to finding solutions in case any problem arises. However, her strict attitudes make her come across as aggressive in situations that involve confrontation, and she can be extremely intimidating. 3. C-3PO: Health Science Librarian C-3PO is the Health Science Librarian at DSH and she is held in high regard among her peers in the industry. C-3PO believes in self-drive and is not patient with people who delay her progress. She has excellent people skills. 4. Luke: Chief Resident His high level of expertise makes him a highly experienced doctor within DSH. He is a conservative person and does not talk much during work hours. He does not take personal or professional attacks lightly, and he tends to be very defensive if his department comes under fire. He has gotten himself into trouble with the hospital administrator for putting the needs of his department in front of the hospital’s needs. 5. Darth Vader: Financial Manager His impeccable cost cutting mechanisms are unmatched within the hospital. Darth Vader had climbed the corporate ladder to the manager position within the first four years of joining Death Star Hospital. Sometimes he gets too personal when hospital departments abuse their budget allocations. He is a good team player and a good listener when people give him suggestions and ideas . 6. Landor: System Analyst Landor has been with DSH for around six years now; he is currently the head of the hospital’s IT department. He was instrumental when DSH was switching from a manual system to a computerised one three years ago. He is a good communicator and is able to determine user requirements without fail, and he delivers each and every time even when given short deadlines. 7. R2-D2: Chief Nurse R2-D2 is the head of the nursing department of DSH. Even though she is young, she maintains a high

Rhetorical Analysis Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 3

Rhetorical Analysis - Essay Example This essay will judge Obama's speech according to the principles of rhetoric – ethos, pathos, logos and mythos – to show that a speech with no apparent political motive (motive as distinct from purpose) can still be worthy of rhetorical study. Ethos, the (usually introductory) part of speech which convinces the audience of the speaker's moral authority on the subject to be addressed, has been under debate for at least hundreds of years: the question is whether ethos can be established before the speech, if a speaker's moral character, if known to the audience, has some effect on the audience's reception to what they say (Hyde, ix). The debate is purely academic, however, because Obama's position as President of the United States means that he will generally be accepted as an authority wherever he chooses to speak. At the time, his great interest in the reformation of healthcare and health insurance made his appearance in front of the ANA even more relevant. Obama's etho s is, as always, evident in three parts. Firstly, his casual announcement of somewhat specious facts – â€Å"it is an honor to speak to the ANA, representing more than three million registered nurses across the country† – present phronesis, as do his declaration of personal experience with nurses (which I will discuss under pathos). However, this is jeopardized slightly by his obvious lack of specialized knowledge on nursing. Moral excellence, or arete, is mostly to be discerned from the President's work previous to this speech, but is also reinforced in the large middle section which discusses his recent achievements in the field of health insurance, in which the Democratic party and progressive Americans are portrayed as a force of good against the â€Å"abusive† insurance industry. Eunoia is a powerful force in this speech, as Obama begins with personally thanking a member of the audience and congratulating her mother on her daughter's achievements; he continues with a joke (â€Å"I don't break promises to nurses because you never know when I'm going to need a shot†), which was received with laughter by the audience. He humanizes himself by talking about himself as fallible during the birth of one daughter and the serious childhood illness of another. The speech is peppered with individuals, and Obama's thanks for these people; the ending note is one of praise for the strong women and men who endure â€Å"tough †¦ stressful †¦ exhausting and †¦ thankless† jobs to help sick people. The audience is very much brought over to Obama's side by his goodwill and even flattery. This brings me to the second aspect of rhetoric: pathos. I see great evidence of pathos in Obama's speech – his appeals to emotion are frequent and often personal, as evident in many of his public appearances (Coop, 41). The video clip of the speech shows his great passion for less discrimination in healthcare, and his words cont ribute to this emotion. The stories of Obama's family – one daughter's birth and another's bout of meningitis as a three-month-old – are calculated to flatter every member of the union for being a nurse, not to thank the small number of nurses who attended to his family in times of need. Obama refers to the nurses who

Sociological and Psychological Theories of Crime

Sociological and Psychological Theories of Crime In this task I am going to be looking at different theories which involve criminology, once I have completed that I am going to research one sociological and one psychological theory. At the same time I am going to look at the normal factors that might influence crime. I am also going to be looking at what criminology is and lots of different aspects of crime. Contents (Jump to): Biological Theories  of Crime Nature vs nurture Sociological Theories of Crime Functionalism Merton’s strain theory Marxism Labelling Theory Chicago School Psychological Theories of Crime Psychoanalytical theory Social learning theory Introduction What is criminology? Criminology is a subject which has a lot of different aspects to it. There are a lot of different areas why people turn to committing crime. The reasons are: Sociology Psychology Biology Geography Law Anthropology What is crime? My definition of crime would be that it is something that someone has done wrong, which is breaking the law. So should be punished for it. Another definition for crime would be crime is the breach of a rule or law for which some governing authority or force may ultimately prescribe a punishment. Right or wrong? We also had a class discussion about what is crime and what is right and wrong? The comments that came up are: An act that is punishable by law. Something that someone has done which is illegal. Behaviour which is contrary to the laws of society. I think that a right reason for breaking the law if there was one would be if someone was so poor and they didn’t have any money to get any food and they stole some food to keep them from starving to death. That isn’t as bad as some crimes and they are only committing the crime so they can stay alive. A wrong reason for committing a crime would be if someone murdered someone else. That is a wrong crime because there will never be a good enough reason for killing someone. Time and place Laws are brought in everyday and different parts of the country and also world. Some examples of different times and place laws have come in are, in 1908 incest was not regarded as a criminal offence in the UK. Everyone knew that it was wrong and that you shouldn’t do it but it wasn’t until 1908 that a law was brought in to stop people who do commit the crime. Another example of this was that it wasn’t illegal to rape within in marriage and that only changed in 1991, when it became illegal. An example of places when it comes to laws is that some laws are different in some country than others. An example of this would be, in the Netherlands they are legally allowed to have sex at the age of 12, but in England they are only legally allowed to have sex when they are 16. In a class discussion we had a look at what might be legal in five years and what is legal now but wouldn’t be legal in five years. A few examples of thing that might not be legal in five years are: Drinking age might have gone up to age of 21. Driving age might go up so there are will be fewer accidents involving young drivers. Children allowed in pubs. Having a drinking whilst eating a meal with parents. We also looked at laws that are illegal at the moment but they might be legal in five years. Examples of this would be: Smoking cannabis might be made legal for everyone not just people who need them for the medical reasons. They might have special licenses that mean people are allowed to smoke in pubs which have the license. Explanation of why do people commit crime? There are many reasons why people commit crime but they have been defined it into three categories. The three groups that they have been put into are biological or genetic, sociological and psychological. Biological or genetic: this is theory that people who have committed have inherited it from their parents. So they are basically born as a criminal. Sociological: this theory is that people will commit crime on depending on who they socialise with. They might do it because they are being pressured by the people they socialise with. Psychological: this is theory s that people will commit crimes all depending on what their personality is like. If there have a good personality they are less likely to commit crime. Biological Theories for Crime Underlying which is also known as distal. Something that effect someone their whole life and it is being held deep down might cause them to commit crime. This might be how they were brought up when they were younger. Immediate this is also known as proximal. Is where the surrounding of a person include the people they will be hanging around with, might effect if someone commits crime or not. Factors that might affect people to commit crime are: Cultural factors (learned social behaviour). This could be their family or even where they come from. It could relate their religion and what they are told they should and should not do. Power of peer group. This could be friends because they might feel pressured to commit crime because all of their mates are. They might want to fit in a group and to be in that group they may have to do something to show they are good enough. Media- the media can affect people in a lot of different ways. It can make people happy, sad or even angry. They have affect on people to do things might not normally do. Statistics Statistic is something where they will collect data and make averages and probabilities out of the results. One of many statistics is that men are twice more likely to commit a crime than women are. Another statistic is that 16 24 have the highest rate for crime in both sexes. BIOLOGY – nature v nurture Nature and nurture will come into to forms when it comes to crime. They have two different views on why people commit crime. The two different views are that people are born a criminal or they are made a criminal once they are born. Nature: This is a theory where they believe that people are born the way they are and they don’t develop into the way they are now. So when crime is involved they have the theory that they will be born as a criminal, and they don’t develop it over time. It will come down to the genetic inheritance, if their parents are criminals they will become a criminal as well because of the genetic inheritance. They will say that genetic determination is inherited which includes the tendency to commit crime. Not many people still believe in this theory it came about in the early stages of the last century, when biologists like Darwin where about. They did studies with twins, which are identical. This means that they are the same in everyway including the same genes. They studied both of the children to see if one of them or both of them become a criminal. They also looked if one did commit a crime the other one is more likely to commit a crime. This is known as concordance. This is more likely to happen with Identical twins than just twins because identical twins have the same genes but twins only share half. A study which supports this theory with evidence is Goldman and Cottesman (1995). They have evidence to support this theory because they showed that if one identical twin does one thing the other one is more likely to do it as well. But they also found that they are in the as environment so they have been brought up the same. Maybe if they were apart it might be different. Nurture This is a theory where they don’t believe it is anything to do with genetic inheritance. They think that everyone is born normal and that lived experiences affect if we will commit crime in are life time or not. Certain area’s that might affect why people will commit crime are: Low family income- they might have any money so they have might have to resort to crime because they will want to buy things that everyone else have, like the latest toys and because they cant afford to pay for them they might steal the instead. Poor child-rearing techniques- if their parents don’t bring their child up right they might know what is wrong and they might think that stealing is acceptable. Large families- that could many reasons like if they had a large family they might not have enough money to provide for them, or they might commit a crime because they don’t get much attention so they do it to get attention, etc. Low educational achievement- that is because they will have no qualifications, so they will not be able to get a job so they won’t have any money to pay for anything which might make them resort to crime. My own view My own view on the biology would be that I agree with the nurture theory because I don’t think that people are born the way they are. I disagree with the nature theory because in some families the parents have never committed a crime and they have a child and that commits crime. It shows that it is nothing to do with being born in a certain way. I think that people commit crime because of people who are around them who can influence them. I think it is all down to influences. Sociological Theories of Crime In this I am going to be looking at different theories. The theories that I am going to be looking at are: Functionalism Marxism Labelling Theory Chicago School Functionalism This is a theory which was developed from Emile Durkheim (1858-1917). Emile Durkheim theory was all based his own theory that people want to be able to live and work, they need to have a strong sense of social order. This means that there has to rules and regulations, and there is always either a right or wrong answer. He thought they needed rules because people will abide by them, he thought that if there wasn’t any rules or anything everything would break down. Crime is universal and normal Durkheim has come to the conclusion that crime is normal because it happens everywhere in every country, all over the globe. He thinks that it is normal because it has always happened and probably will always happen. Crime is relative: This is where the rate of crime is changing all the time. It will change because crime depends on certain factors. Factors that it depends on are things like time, culture, society, and etc. culture might affect the amount of crime because some cultures are more into crime than other cultures. Crime is functional and necessary Durkheim also thinks that crime is necessary in some ways because when people are committing crimes, the government are making new laws to try and punish people when they do commit that crime. This will show criminals that are thinking of committing a crime will not want to because they know what the punishment. It sets boundaries for people and if they commit crimes they will be punished. Functionalism and anomie: This is where there is a major change in society. This will affect people in different ways it all depending on what changes. An example of this is depression, they will lower their sights and expectations but if there is a boom people will react completely different and they will set their sights higher. This will affect functionalism because it will affect the way people live and work. It will either make it better for them or worse. My own view When it comes to functionalism theory I think that some of the aspects of the theory are right but some aren’t. I agree with the fact that we need rules and regulations to live are lives and that if there wasn’t any, everything would break down. I also agree with bringing in laws to stop people from committing offences. I think that if someone has committed a crime that they should be punished for it. So that I agree with basically all of the aspects of the theory. Merton’s strain theory This is another theory that Durkheim came up with. This theory is all to do with where they took the anomie theory further and developed it. This theory is all to do with anomie and how it encourages people to do better. It encourages for people to strive for wealth. The only thing that it won’t be the same from person to person. It all depends on the person. Not everyone will strive to achieve the same thing. Durkheim came up with this theory in 1938. This theory breaks down into five sections. He talks about 5 different ways in which people are able to adapt to the change when the strive comes. Conformity- this is where they accept what they have been given and get on with it. An example of this would be in work, they have been given a task to do and they accept that they have to do it and just get on with it. Innovation- this is the opposite of ritualism. Innovation is where they will accept the cultural goals and they will stick to them but the way in which they achieve it like the traditional way, they will reject it and achieve them in their on way. They might resort to illegitimate ways or illegal ways. Ritualism- this is where they will reject the cultural goals that are there but they will accept and comply with the means of completing something. This would be the traditional ways of achieving things that they have to do. This would be known as bureaucrat. This is where they will do the job to what it is worth they will not put any more effort than what is needed to complete the task. Retreatism- this is the less extreme form of rebellion. They will not accept the social goals, aims and method. They will not comply with them. They will be a drop out of society. Rebellion- this is where they will not accept any of the social goals, which means that they will go by their own rules and do what they want. They will do what they want, not what other people tell them to do. An example of this would be terrorists because that is going against the social goals and rules. When it comes to relating this to crime. You can relate it because he came up with within the theory that people who are in lower classes are more likely to commit crimes because they have more of a strain than people in higher class. They also came up with a theory that working class is more likely to commit crime. The only thing that also he could not find out when it comes to crime is that is nothing to do with finance and people in classes. They can not explain why people are killed and assaulted when it isn’t anything to do with money. He also found out that not everyone has the same goals; it all depends on a lot of factors like living, finance, religion and many more. Merton could not explain why people will choose one adaption other another one. My own view I agree with the theory, the only thing that I don’t agree with is that I don’t think that people are split into some many groups. I think that there should only be three groups. The three groups that I think there should be are conformity, ritualism and also rebellion. Marxism This is a theory that Karl Marx came up with in (1818- 1883). This theory includes information about the new criminology, Critical criminology, Radical criminology, Left realism, Conflict theory. His theory wasn’t much to do with crime, it was more so to do with economics and ownership are the power influences in society. Examples of this that the more land you own the more powers you have. They will employee people to work on the land. Which also help with the theory that they will have more power than the people working on the land. The Bourgeoisie are the owners of the means of production. The Proletariat are the working classes. He believes that there is always a conflict between classes which will lead to social change. It is basically a conflict between bourgeoisie and proletariat. Bad behaviour was seen as things someone does that the people in power do not approve of. The people in power will bring in laws if they think that the people who are behaving in a bad way are at risk of taking over. Crime comes from the unfairness and also the corrupt nature of the society. The way in which working people were treated. The reasons why working people committed crime was because they were fighting against the repression. The bourgeoisie decided what should be laws and what shouldn’t be. The proletariat listen and just thought they were normal. The reasons why the bourgeoisie brought in the laws was to make sure that the proletariat don’t try and take over and take their place. Crimes of the Bourgeoisie Crimes of the Proletariat tax fraud benefit fraud embezzlement theft pollution assault corporate crime vandalism This table shows the different types of crimes that both categories are most likely to commit. The bourgeoisie group are most likely to create pollution because if they own factories as their own business. They will have fumes coming out and if there are too many they will be polluting the surrounding area and the earth. The proletariat group are most likely to commit crimes like theft because they don’t get paid much money for doing jobs for the bourgeoisie. This means that they may not be able to provide for their families properly which might force them to commit crimes. The two group’s crimes are so different, the bourgeoisie will do because they know they can get away with it and save more money but the proletariat might do it so they can live properly and provide for their families. Labelling Theory This is a theory that a theorist called Becker came up with. His theory was completely different to the other theory because they blame crime on society where as in this theory it is all to do with people who label people. This is where people label an act as a criminal offence. If people didn’t label them people wouldn’t think they were a criminal thing or a wrong thing to do. It won’t be a crime till we say it is. In this theory they say that it is not the criminal who is responsible, it’s the society. He pointed out that most people have committed a crime in their life at some time, big or small. Most people have been caught for doing it so they haven’t been labelled. The only difference between people and criminals is that they have been caught for it and labelled as a criminal. My own view I agree with this in some ways but I don’t agree in others. I agree that some crimes should be labelled because some people might look at it and think that it isn’t a crime but it actually turns out to be. I don’t think that some crimes don’t need labelling because everyone morally knows what is right and what is wrong. So everyone knows that killing someone isn’t right so I don’t think crime with seriousness of that doesn’t need labelling. Chicago School This is a theory that was made by the Chicago school developed. It all came about in the 1930’s in America. It relates to Robert Park’s theory where he talked about urban ecology. They looked at the people and what happen when there are ecological changes in the environment. This could result in people competing for space, invasion of territory and also dominance of other groups of people. This pictures shows where crime is more likely to happen. It is based on a concentric zone theory where different zones and Burgess points out that more crime will be committed in ‘the loop’ and the zone ‘in transition’. (Criminology_theories and effects on portal in crime and its effect on society folder.) My own view I agree with this theory in the fact that the area that people live can affect people to commit crime, but I think it is to focused around that one aspect why people commit crime. An example of this would be peer groups, family etc. Psychology Theories of Crime There are two different parts of psychological. The two different areas that I am going to be looking at are: Psychoanalytical theory Social learning theory Psychoanalytical theory Psychoanalytic theory which is also known as Freudian theory is where they think that people are being dominated by unconscious forces and driven by sexual and aggressive desires. The theory also says that we are not free and we aren’t in charge of ourselves. So something else does everything for us. Freud came up with three state of the mind: The id: the childlike demanding side of a person The ego: the rational logical side The super ego: the moral part of our personality He came up with the theory that if parents do not socialise with their children enough, they will not be able to develop the super ego properly which might result in them not being able to control their ID. Which means that it can lead to bad and also destructive behaviour. My own view When it comes to this theory I don’t agree with it in the sense that it is all to do with sexual and aggressive drives. I think it is just to do with thoughts not sexual or aggressive thoughts. I also disagree in some ways with if the parent don’t show enough attention to their children they would stay in the ID stage. I think that they might slightly be affected but not to the extent that he says it will be. Social learning theory This is all about behavioural psychology. Behavioural psychology is where they people learn behaviour and they are able to maintain it by rewards and also sanctions. When this comes to crimes, they say that crime has either been learned or it is a failure of socialisation process. This is where they were never taught what was right or wrong. They say crime is a learned behaviour, which doesn’t differ from any other learning experience. Criticism of the social learning theory The criticism that was made was that people are very different and no-one is the same and that you don’t know how someone will react to punishment. Someone might be happy but some people might not. All depends on the person. The theory assumes individuals are passive and unquestioning. It neglects the influence the influence of media and wider culture Other contributing factors to crime There are other factors that affect why people commit crime than the ones that I have covered. The other factors that might affect people are: Family Farrington and West (1990) they found that a small amount of people will commit crime because of their family. They account for the large proportion of criminal activity. Families account for a small amount of it though. (UK most crime committed by 10% of the population). Economic factors this shows that people from low economic are more likely to commit crime or involved in criminal activities. Benyan (1994) and Harrower (1998) looked into this theory and found that the nature been poverty and crime will never be a rock solid evidence to prove why people commit crime. Peer pressure this is where friends and also peer groups influence people to commit crime. They might do it because they want to be in a group. Or they feel like an idiot if they don’t do what everyone else is doing. This would normally happen in gangs. Education a poor education can affect it because if they don’t like it. They might not go which might turn them to committing crime because they have nothing else to do. My own view I think that these all contribute to crime in a major way. I think that normally most contributes to crime would be peer pressure because you will be with your friends and other peer so they affect a lot of different things you do and also how you live your life. I think that family is close behind because they will teach you what is right and wrong when you are younger so that you know for when you are older.

The Rush of Amphetamine Use: the Need for Speed

The Rush of Amphetamine Use: The Need for Speed Over the last century, Adderall and Ritalin have transitioned from respectable medications into designer drugs. Chemist L. Edeleano developed amphetamines in the late 1800’s primarily for respiratory ailments, but in time physicians noticed additional behavioral effects. Now, people that are diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder or Attention Deficit Disorder (ADHD, ADD) and narcolepsy use amphetamines to alert and focused (CESAR).According to the Princeton University online dictionary, amphetamines are â€Å"a central nervous system stimulant that increases energy and decreases appetite; used to treat narcolepsy and some forms of depression. † These prescription medications are some of the most popular and widely abused drugs among teens today, and are depended on for better performance in school, on sports field and are even used to aid weight loss. Because amphetamines and similar drugs reduce hunger, inc rease concentration, raise self esteem, and boost performance they appeal to insecure young people.These miracle drugs are most often abused by college and high school students because the medicine provides a sense of security that most users long for. Girls in particular use amphetamines such as Adderall, Ritalin, or Vyvanse for weight loss purposes. If a person takes too many lisdexamfetamines (a chemical like amphetamines in Ritalin or Vyvanse) or amphetamines, his body can build a tolerance which can cause increased dependency. The dangerous use of these drugs without the supervision of a medical doctor can be fatal.Like any other drug, amphetamines can become an addiction that can only be overcome with the assistance of a trained physician. Scientists designed amphetamines to be helpful for those with learning disabilities or mental disorders; however, the abuse of these chemicals causes psychological dependence, physical deterioration, and spiritual destruction. According to e xpert medical journal writer Ellen Bailey, when Dr. Heinrich Hoffman discovered learning disabilities like ADD and ADHD, parents were overjoyed and relieved that there was something they could actually do to help their children.Sir George F. explained to parents through his written lectures that it was not their fault that their children had attained uncontrollable behavior (2). Medical intervention could help, but the temptation to abuse the drugs followed the cure. Finding these drugs can be as easy as finding rock candy in a candy store. Desperate people who want amphetamines find â€Å"hole in the wall† doctors that will give them the prescriptions they need. Doctors who use these methods of treatment, for the most part, have their own practice firms and give the people what they want – not need.Because people love the doctors, they have high satisfactory ratings. Technically they are doing their job, and therefore are not reported for writing fraudulent prescripti ons. There are several ways to take amphetamines; a few ways are: â€Å"ingested orally, crushed and snorted, dissolved in water and injected, or smoked (inhalation of the vaporized drug)† (CESAR). Some students use amphetamines as a shortcut to an â€Å"A† on a test or an easy way out of studying. What is so special about these drugs? What makes them appealing to students and adults without learning disabilities?Achievement through drug abuse is common; athletes use steroids to enhance their performance, and people who suffer from depression have â€Å"happy-pills† to help them be more at ease with themselves. Those who are compelled to over-achieve often use amphetamines. Because of intense peer pressure and a compulsion to achieve, students then fall into the trap of amphetamine abuse in an attempt to cheat the system. Amphetamines do help students and people with learning disabilities by allowing them to focus better and work more effectively.People with ADD and ADHD are missing certain chemicals in their brains that drugs like Vyvanse and Adderall can help. Margaret Lahey and Shari Rosen  from the Bamford-Lahey Children’s Foundation explain that the part of the brain that controls concentration uses a chemical called dopamine. It is an important neurotransmitter that does not work properly for people with learning disorders (Par 9). Adderall and other amphetamines supply this chemical for those people so that they are able to function as normally as possible.The outcome is the ability to function without restriction. Some suffering from anorexia nervosa have discovered another abuse of amphetamines in the form of dieting pills. Leading scientific experts Dr. John E. Blundell and Micah B. Leshem agree that hunger is severely suppressed while using amphetamines. In a recent study, the two scientists determined the following: The effects upon food intake of three dose levels of fenfluramine and amphetamine were compared in rats with bilateral or unilateral lesions of the lateral hypothalamus. †¦.At 8 weeks after operation amphetamine anorexia was significantly diminished in bilaterally lesioned animals whereas fenfluramine anorexia was significantly enhanced. Further tests carried out at 14 and 20 weeks after operation showed that amphetamine regained its anorexic potency in lesioned animals, while the enhanced potency of fenfluramine remained. The results are consistent with the belief that these two anorexic agents operate through quite separate sites and mechanisms of action. (Par 1) Because of the severity of the weight loss, it is extremely easy to fall into a deep psychological obsession and addiction.According to student John Monroe, diagnosed last year with ADD, within the first two weeks of taking Adderall, he lost a shocking ten pounds. He realized quickly how dangerous his weight loss would be if he continued taking the medications. Even though weight loss is not a motive for some taking th e medications, the side effect still occurs. However, abusers sometimes take too much too often without even knowing it. Overdose can lead to hair loss, loss of menstruation in women, anemia, euphoria, body twitches, and even heart failure.Amphetamine abuse hurts you in more than the physical level; but also at the spiritual level. When sin entered the heart of man, so did the desire for self-acceptance. With today’s standards, some of the hardest trials a person can go through are perfectionist tendencies, fitting in with the word, and acceptance of self. If abusers have feelings of dislike towards themselves, their minds, or their bodies and do not feel perfect the way they are, they are telling God that He made a mistake in making them.God made each and every person in his image (New International Version Bible, Gen 1. 27); some people have difficulties learning while others do not. The rise of amphetamine usage in 12th graders is especially shocking. According to a recent study from the University of Maryland, 15% of 12th graders were using prescription amphetamines for nonmedical reasons (Cesar FAX). The graph below reveals the percentages of 12th graders using amphetamines to the usage of narcotics and where the students attained them. (Cesar FAX)An assumed argument against whether amphetamines should be legalized is that the medicine is not harmful to anyone if used in moderation and under a doctor’s supervision. If test results from a person without a learning disability reveal normal blood and behavior levels, that should be enough to make doctors realize that, if used under supervision and in moderation, the drug is safe. The medicine is more effective and safer for keeping a person focused and on target than smoking, and it gives the same buzz alcohol can give but without the risk of getting drunk.The danger is still deeper than mood swings or behavior problems. As stated before, Lahey explains that people who have learning disabilitie s have a dysfunctional neurotransmitter call dopamine (Par 9). In simpler terms, it means that the stimulation part of the brain is missing, and as a result, the brain automatically tries to find outside methods to release the chemicals it is lacking. People  with ADD have to fuel up their brains with things like physical activities, movement, and always doing something that stimulates their brains.Such impulsive behavior is not a conscious decision that people  with ADD/HD make; they really cannot help themselves. The behavior becomes a reflex action and they act in a hyperactive manner. The amphetamines help people with learning disorders like ADD and ADHD by supplying the dopamine that their brains are missing. If a person without such learning disabilities has too much dopamine, his or her body can go into overdrive and can create a resistance, causing the brain to need more; it becomes an addiction.One addiction can lead to a door of temptation that swings wide open for oth er drugs. Once one drug is dismissed by saying, â€Å"Oh, it is just a onetime thing†, the drug habit becomes a â€Å"onetime thing. † God provided doctors who can help a person with learning disabilities attain a sense of normalness and those without, He gave teachers, parents, and other people who can support them though any trial that may come God will provide for a person’s needs without using the easy way out and using counterfeit concentration or dieting habits. What many people fail to think about before taking amphetamines without prescription are the consequences. It is not worth losing family, friends, a job, or school and is certainly not worth the consequences of being charged with illegal drug use. Illegal amphetamine use may seem small and insignificant, but once one is addicted, it is nearly impossible to get rid of the ghosts of one’s past. The problem is not the medication, but how mankind uses or abuses the medication. Works Cited Blunde ll, John E. , Micah B. Leshem. Central Action of Anorexic Agents: Effects of Amphetamine and Fenfluramine in Rats with Lateral Hypothalamic Lesions. † ScienceDirect – Home. Elsevier B. V. , Sept. 1974. Web. 04 Nov. 2010. Cesar FAX. â€Å"Friends and Family Are Most Common Source of Prescription Amphetamines and Narcotics Used Nonmedically by 12th Graders. † CESAR (Center for Substance Abuse Research). University of Maryland, 2 Feb. 2009. Web. 21 Nov. 2010. Ellen, Bailey, and Carson-Dewitt Rosalyn. â€Å"Behavior Drugs & Children: An Overview. † Point of View Reference Center. EBSCO, 2009.Web. Oct. -Nov. 2010. Lahey, Margaret, and Shari Rosen. â€Å"Neurotransmitters and Learning, Memory and Developmental Disorders. †Ã‚  Children's Disability Information. Children's Disabilities &Special Needs Information. Web. Oct. -Nov. 2010. Monroe, John S. â€Å"Having ADD. † Telephone interview. 9 Oct. 2010. Princeton University. â€Å"Amphetamine Defini tion. †Ã‚  WordnetWeb. Princeton University. Web. 27 Nov. 2010. University of Maryland. â€Å"Amphetamines. †Ã‚  CESAR (Center for Substance Abuse Research). University of Maryland, 2 May 2005. Web. 27 Nov. 2010.