Two Gallants Are Callous Men Essays - Dubliners, Two Gallants

Two Gallants Are Callous Men 'Two Gallants are Callous Men' Try not to let the title fool you. Two Gallants, written by James Joyce, is a short story centered around two callous men. One, Corley, is an older man of some rudeness and has a taste for womanizing. The other is a self-conscience, older man of some weight, named Lenehan. The story begins with a light approach, description of the evening weather and the ?illumined pearl? lamps of the street. All of Joyce's stories found in the work, The Dubliners, have a poetic quality that makes the simplest of remarks, beautiful. This story in particular has the evident use of eloquent and flowing language but, in keeping with Joyce's style, is used to mask the perverse subject matter. Underneath the language and examining the adolescent drives in two grown, callous men, is where the real story lies. As told by Joyce, Corley is an entertaining man who gives the reader pause as pertaining to his adolescent treatment of women. As read by a careful eye, Corley seeks the company of well-to-do girls as a prize and pay off. Through the beginning of the story, he tells his companion, Lenehan, about his latest encounter and his eminent one as well. Often referred to, is the question, as Lenehan puts it, ?Corley I suppose you'll be able to pull it off alright(31), this referring to Corley's congress with the girl. Lenehan's interest stretches to the point where he wishes permission to see the girl up close, by walking by the two as a stranger, and even follow the two. This voyeurism displays as evidence of perverse subject matter in the piece. The title is meant as an obvious joke because the two characters are as far from gallants as horses are from dogs. This show of cynicism reflects throughout the story not only the conversations between the main characters but also in Joyce's prose. Corley begins his journey as a night walk with his girl, departing from Lenehan who in turn, after following the two like a spy, makes his way to a bar. Lenehan has spurts of contemplation in which time he criticizes his own habits, vices and position in life, ?He was tired of knocking about, of pulling the devil by the tail, of shifts and intrigues. He would be thirty-one in November. Would he never get a good job? Would he never have a home of his own?(35)? This criticism reflects the need for the ?two gallants? to moralize their dealings with the opposite sex and the world at large. When Lenehan is at the spot the two, Corley and himself, had agreed upon to meet, he is made to wait ten or fifteen minutes. During this short span of time, Lenehan speculates the reason of his friend's lateness. Ideas so far fetched that Lenehan begins to think that Corley will abandon the agreed plan and him. This distrust existing in Lenehan's mind, of his own friend, edifies the presence of immoral drives and values. Although his paranoid speculation was unwarranted, it still existed as a possibility in Lenehan's stout mind. The last the reader sees of the ?two gallants? is outside the girl's house. Here is the place in the story the reader is lead to the assumption that Corley is paid for his company. The girl is lead to her home and although she enters, Corley stays outside on the sidewalk. His waiting is met by the re-emergence of the girl, who now carries in her hand a gold coin. The two exchanges the gold coin and Corley walks to meet his fellow ?gallant?, which waits, watching the two, from across the street. When the question, is again, put forth by Lenehan, ?Did it come off Corley's only reply is the raising of the gold coin. Book Reports

Philosophies of the Mind Essay Example

Philosophies of the Mind Essay Example Philosophies of the Mind Essay Philosophies of the Mind Essay Name: Tutor: Course: Date: Philosophies of the Mind Analogy of the Cave Q1 Explain what the analogy of the cave means. Plato describes the Analogy of the Cave in his book, The Republic. The author illustrates the Analogy of the Cave’s concept through a conversation between Socrates and Glaucon. In Book VII of this publication, Plato describes how people live confined in a dark cave with chains around them. He describes the life of a prisoner in an attempt to explain his theory. In his book he writes, â€Å"Behold! Human beings living in a underground den, which has a mouth open toward the light and reaching all along the den; here they have been from their childhood, and have their legs and necks so that they cannot move† (Kessler 373). Moreover, the prisoners only have the ability to see what is in front of them due to their chained necks. Additionally, the conditions in the cave worsen due to the large fire at the rear of the cave. Plato also talks about a path bordering the fire and the prisoners. With nothing else to do, the prisoners observe the shadows of the people passing on the path cast in front of them. Furthermore, echoes from the passers-by fill the cave. In this analogy, Plato compares illusions to shadows. According to the author, the shadows and echoes are all that is familiar to the prisoners since they have never left the cave. The prisoners even compete in identifying the objects casting various shadows on the wall of the cave. Consequently, they perceive these illusions as the reality. Through their conversation, the two describe the possible outcomes of their release. In the analogy, the prisoners would not recognize the same objects that cast a shadow in the cave’s wall. Socrates asserts, â€Å"And you may further imagine that his instructor is pointing to the objects as they pass and requiring him to name them, – will he not be perplexed?† (Kessler 374). Additionally, he perceives that the released prisoner will believe the shadows and echoes as real as opposed to the physical objects causing these illusions. This is evident when he says, â€Å"will he not fancy that the shadows which he formerly saw are truer than the objects which are now shown to him?â €  (Kessler 374). Moreover, he states how the fire light that was familiar to the prisoner while in prison would stress his eyes when he physically looks at it. He also describes how the light from the sun would make him uncomfortable. Nevertheless, the analogy indicates that the prisoner would assimilate reality, as opposed to illusions in a slow pace and after some time abandon all illusions. Moreover, he states that the prisoner will no longer have problems in viewing the sun light or the fire upon getting used to the outside world. Socrates states, â€Å"He will require to grow accustomed to the sight of the upper world. And first he will see the shadows best, next the reflections of men and other objects in the water, and then the objects themselves; then he will gaze upon the light of the moon and stars and the spangled heaven, and he will see the sky and the stars by night better than the sun or the light of the sun by day?† (Kessler 374). He goes ahead to describe how he would appreciate his newfound reality and even pity those still imprisoned in the dark cave. The prisoner would regret the period he dwelt in the world of illusions. He would not comprehend how he felt comfortable in his previous state of mind. This is according to the analogy of the cave where Socrates affirms, â€Å"And when he remembered his old habitation, and the wisdom of the den and his fellow- prisoners, do you not suppose that he would felicitate himself on the change, and pity them?† (Kessler 375). In this publication, Plato creates a picture of the possible events upon return of the free prisoner to the dark cave. He would no longer be able to identify the people an objects casting shadows on the cave’s wall. Furthermore, this ancient philosopher illustrates how hard it would be for the returned prisoner to participate in the cave dwellers’ competition of identifying shadows and echoes. In addition, the rest of the prisoners would view him as disadvantaged. Furthermore, they would view him as partially disabled. Upon seeing the state of the different prisoner, they would increase their hate for the outer world. This is evident where the author writes, â€Å"Men would say that up he went and down he came without his eyes, and that it is better not even to think of ascending; and if anyone tried to loose another and lead him to the light, let them only catch the offender, and they would put him to death† (Kessler, 375). The author of this book uses a prisoner to describe the famous analogy of the cave. This analogy argues that both realities and illusions are in one’s mind. Depending on the surrounding environment, one can decide to take certain illusions as the reality and stick to it. In order to shift from these illusions, the victim must go through an acclimatizing period.The author uses symbolism to explain the analogy of the cave. He uses objects that everyone can relate to in an attempt to analyze this theory. For example, he relates cave to the concept of vision and fire light to the sunlight. Moreover, he uses the upward journey to intellectual levels. This is clear in the portion where he indicates, â€Å"This entire allegory, I said, you may now append, dear Glaucon, to the previous argument; the prison-house is the world of sight, the light of the fire is the sun, and you will not misapprehend me if you interpret the journey upwards to be the ascent of the soul into the intellect ual world† (Kessler, 376). The Analogy of the Cave entails reality and illusions. Plato uses the story of the prisoner to contrast the two worlds. Moreover, he tries to convey his belief in the power of illusions. This renowned philosopher believes that the world of reality is created from illusions and forms. Additionally, Plato uses prisoners to illustrate the ignorance of individuals living in the world of illusion and their comfort in this situation. According to the author, the world of reality is relative to an individual. Moreover, the strong believer of the world of forms relates the reality and illusion worlds to the five senses in a person. This is according to his argument in the book, â€Å"Anyone who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments of the eyes are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true of the mind’s eye† (Kessler 376). According to his theory, the real world is a rational form of the illusion version of an object. As such, the world of forms is crucial in creating the real world. It is through these illusions that make objects appear real. Moreover, the world of forms improves one’s intelligent through the five common senses. Additionally, this philosopher identifies one’s soul and mind as the forces behind the real world. The analogy states, â€Å"Whereas our argument shows that the power and capacity of learning exists in the soul already; and that just as the eye was unable to turn from darkness to light without the whole body, so too the instrument of knowledge can only by the movement of the whole soul be turned from the world of becoming into that of being† (Kessler 377). Q2 Why do you agree or disagree with the analogy of the cave? The Analogy of the Cave is one that achieves its objective of explaining the occurrence in our environment. It describes these occurrences in details in an attempt to eliminate people’s confusion on nature. The analogy makes it clear that our thoughts relates to one’s soul and mind. Moreover, the improvement of our intelligent levels relates to the mind and soul and can determine our personality. The author of this philosophic book states, â€Å"And whereas the other so-called virtues of the soul seems to be akin to bodily qualities, for even when they are not originally innate they can be implanted by habit and exercise, the virtue of wisdom more than anything else contains a divine element which always remains, and by this conversion is rendered useful and profitable† (Kessler 377). The Analogy of the Cave is, therefore, one that creates a sense on the human nature. It helps understand the different perspectives and views of people. In conclusion, the Analogy of the Cave is relevant in the explanation of human thinking. Rene’s First Principle Q1 Explain how Rene arrives at his 1st Principle The First Principle by Rene, according to Meditation I and II of Descartes, seeks to protect the fields of science and religion from irrational critics. This principle supports the non-questionability of theories in the two fields. According to Rene, one can only consider something as true or false upon gathering sufficient evidence to support the claims. This principle works against premature judgments on various ideas. Moreover, Rene campaigns for detailed analysis of ideas and concepts before making conclusions from them. Rene came up with this principle upon his dissatisfaction with the western philosophy that tried to connect science and religion. In his publication, â€Å"the western philosophy did not produce anything that was not in dispute and consequently doubtful† (Kessler 6). Being a staunch catholic as well as a scientist, the philosopher believed that the two fields were independent of each other. Moreover, he believed that the concepts in these fields needed sufficient proof in order to be termed as true or false. As such, this principle prevents review of these concepts based on one’s thoughts and opinions. His issue with science-based arguments was due to their concentration on the past’s ideologies while leaving no room for recent observations. Upon identifying the gaps in the existing philosophy, Rene decided to create a principle against this philosophy in order to eliminate prejudgments in these fields. He used his own self as a study tool to create a principle that controls criticisms on science and religion. In his book, â€Å"I eventually reached the decision to study my own self, and choose the right path† (Kessler 7). This detailed study gave rise to the famous ‘first principle’. Q2. After reaching the 1st Principle, Rene then asks what the â€Å"I† is. Rene goes through several possibilities, and concludes that he is a thinking thing. Explain how Rene arrives at this conclusion from the 1st Principle Rene used himself as a study tool to formulate his first principle. According to him, human beings use their minds to argue certain concepts and theories. He illustrates thinking capability as the main difference between human beings and other creatures. According to Rene’s principle, a human being’s mind is immortal as opposed to the body. He is of the idea that the mind control human beings. This explains his belief that the soul of a human being continues to exist even after one’s death. This belief in this concept relates to his strong catholic faith. The catholic denomination believes that the soul is the core of a human being. As a result, his religious history influenced the formulation of his first principle. In his principle, â€Å"our souls can exist without our bodies† (Kessler 10). This evidence satisfies the affirmation of Rene in his publication, â€Å"I think, therefore I am† (Kessler 12). Q3 Do you agree that humans are essentially minds or souls? According to Rene’s first principle, humans are mainly made of minds and souls. This principle describes the human body as physical. Because of this state, the body is mortal, and upon one’s death, it completes its functionalism. On the other hand, the soul and mind of an individual are intertwined and the force behind the functionalism of an individual. Moreover, the soul is non-physical and immortal. This makes it continue functioning even after the death of an individual. Rene argues that comprehension of events in one’s environment is the responsibility of the mind and not the body. By the use of the candle wax melting process as an example, Rene cancels out the idea that the five senses are responsible for articulation of events in the surrounding. He argues that these sensory organs are just vessels that direct information from the mind to the body. Q4 Rene asks: â€Å"Then what was there in the wax that I comprehended so distinctly?† Explain how Rene answers this questionIn the experiment of the wax, Rene analyses the concept behind his identification of the physical state of the wax. He says, â€Å"Then what was there in the wax that I comprehended distinctly† (Kessler 13). After his analysis, he concludes that the appearance and characteristics of the wax in its different forms appear due to the action of the mind as opposed to that of the five senses. Rene states, â€Å"What the wax is only with my mind† (Kessler 13). According to Rene’s answer, the mind is responsible for identification of physical objects. To give an explanation to his answer on the wax experiment, Rene divides human beings into the mind and body. Moreover, he explains his theory that minds are more powerful than the bodies due to their non-physical state. According to his line of thought, the mind can influence the body’ s actions although the vice versa is not true. However, this thought has drawn substantial argument from his critics due to his conclusion that the control of the body by the mind takes place in the pineal gland of the brain. This conclusion contradicts his thought that physical objects do not influence non-physical ones. Q5. Explain why you agree or disagree with Rene’s view of the mind and the body and his view of religion and science I agree with Rene’s theory that due to the evidence he uses to support his claims. The mind is a powerful and independent part of humans that control their actions. It aids in differentiating real objects from their shadows. As such, one is able to differentiate the real world from that of illusions with the help of our minds. This is evident from Rene’s first principle. Moreover, his principle aids in eliminating irrational criticism on the fields of religion and science. This is important as some aspects in these broad areas need no baseless criticism. Aspects such as God’s existence depend on one’s faith and relate to the mind. Moreover, his principle on science issues is valuable. People should not base certain concepts related to science on personal opinions due to their complex nature. This principle makes Rene’s thought relevant in the worlds of science and religion. Work Cited Kessler, Gary E. Voices of Wisdom: A Multicultural Philosophy Reader. Belmont, Calif: Wadsworth, 1992. Print.

Biogeochemical Cycles Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Biogeochemical Cycles - Research Paper Example le covers different regions from ocean to sky to earth and it covers all the Earth systems such as atmosphere, hydrosphere, lithosphere, and biosphere. â€Å"The movement of water in the hydrological cycle extends through the four parts of the total Earth system—atmosphere, hydrosphere, lithosphere, and biosphere—and strongly depends on the local peculiarities of these systems.† (Kuchment, 2004, p 2). The importance of the hydrological cycle to life’s processes is generally recognized as all living organisms, including humans, depend on the hydrologic cycle for water and different activities of humans such as drinking, respiration, perspiration, and elimination of wastes form part of this cycle. Significantly, human activities have a great impact on the functionality of the hydrological cycle and those activities that change the land cover of river basins and are aimed at regulating the water fluxes in nature can greatly change the hydrological cycle of th e separate river basins, and even of large regions. â€Å"Due to human activities, the natural hydrological cycle of most river basins is becoming more and more transformed and regimented†¦ The major effects of reservoir construction on the hydrological cycle (excepting runoff control) are an increase of evaporation and a rise of groundwater table.† (Kuchment, 2004, p 30). Similarly, the impact of irrigation on the hydrological cycle is especially informative in the arid regions, although it is also substantial in regions with moderate climate where irrigation is of supplementary character. In conclusion, human activities have a great impact on the functionality of the hydrological cycle. Kuchment, Lev S. (2004). â€Å"The Hydrological Cycle and Human Impact on it.† Water Resources Management. Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems. p 2. Retrieved 07 October, 2009, from