Importance of Loyalty in the Epic of Gilgamesh :: Epic Gilgamesh essays

Loyalty in The Epic of Gilgamesh The ancient Mesopotamian writing, The Epic of Gilgamesh, gives readers insight into the traditions and customs of the people who wrote it. Like all epics, The Epic of Gilgamesh is the story of a heroic national figure: this epic gives the story of the life of Gilgamesh from his birth as two-thirds god, one-third man to his death. Throughout the epic the importance of loyalty is addressed. In The Epic of Gilgamesh readers see that loyalty is the most important aspect of a Mesopotamian relationship and that there are always consequences for violating trust. Insight into loyalty and the consequences of violating loyalty is first along with the civilization of Enkidu. Before his civilization "Enkidu ate grass in the hills with the gazelle and lurked with the wild beasts; he had joy of water with the heads of wild game" (63). Not only did Enkidu live with the animals of the hills "he helps the wild game to escape; he fills in my pits and pulls up my traps" (64). The animals of the hills trusted Enkidu. No other man would be allowed to run with these animals, but they accepted Enkidu. The young trapper became displeased with the actions of Enkidu. The trapper journeys to Uruk to seek advice from Gilgamesh. Gilgamesh advises the trapper to "go back, take with you a child of pleasure. At the drinking-hole she will strip, and when he sees her beckoning he will embrace her and the game of the wilderness will surely reject him" (64). This passage demonstrates the known consequences of violating a loyalty. Gilgamesh knows that Enkidu will not be able to resist the temptation of a woman. The animals of the hills distrust humans and by being with a woman Enkidu will violate the trust of the animals. The trapper takes a harlot and returns the fields. Gilgamesh's plan works well: "As he lay on her murmuring love she taught him the woman's art. For six days and seven nights they lay together, for Enkidu had forgotten his home in the hills; but when he was satisfied he went back to the wild beasts. Then when the gazelle saw him, they bolted away" (65). Just as Gilgamesh had predicted Enkidu gave into human desire and became civil. The animals were betrayed and no longer accepted Enkidu as of their own.

Essay --

WHAT IS CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR? Consumer behavior is the study or the art of how people buy, what they buy, when they buy and why they buy. It refers to the actions and all the decision process of people who purchase goods and services for personal consumption. Consumption can be in any form and anywhere. WHY IS IT IMPORTANT? Production Concept (consumers buy what is available than what they really want) Product Concept (consumers will buy a product of highest quality, best performance and most features) Selling Concept (consumers mostly buy the product when they are actively and aggressively persuaded) Marketing Concept (marketer must make what sells rather than sell what it makes) Circle of Consumption- VARIOUS OBSERVATIONS AT THE SHOPPING MALL- We in a group had seen a number of things at the Shopping Mall. There were many different types of customs and rituals also and different ways of how people act. On the observation day, there were many people in groups of three or more. Majority of the people walking in the mall are that of the youth and the children who just like to spend their time in any form of entertainment. People are unique in many ways such as different cultures, views, and perceptions. For people to adapt to a new culture, people must learn to understand signs, norms, and social control. These three factors are important and touch almost every aspect of social life and are used in every day to day life. A sign is â€Å"a symbol that stands for or conveys an ideaâ€Å". Signs could be price tag, a slow down sign etc. As signs convey information and are the most common and they make everyone’s life easier. Gesture is an example of signs and linked with body movements. The signs are present almost ever ywhere, it’... ...f use, possession, and maintenance. One caution about customer value: greater customer value does not necessarily equal greater customer satisfaction. Customer value is defined as the difference (or surplus) between benefits and costs; it is a level of return for customer costs. From a cognitive perspective, according to expectation theory, satisfaction is the result of a comparison between what actually occurs and what is expected. Hence the customers' buying satisfaction depends on both their perceived value of the purchase and their knowledge of what a fair level of buying value should be. In short, customers will feel satisfied to the extent that the perceived value of their buying exceeds the standard they hold. From this point of view, exceeding value is the key for customer satisfaction, not customer value per se (a surplus value).

Constitution in USA Essay

A constitution is either a written (codified) or unwritten (uncodified) body of fundamental principles or established precedents according to which a state is acknowledged to be governed. Generally, a constitution is only written after a major event. In the case of America their constitution was written in 1787, after the American Revolutionary War came to a close. There are a number of issues with America’s constitution which make it, arguably, unfit for the 21st century. The most apparent issue with the constitution is the overall ambiguity that it’s based upon. Take for example the eighth amendment which forbids the federal government from imposing cruel or unusual punishments on American citizens. However, what’s classed as a cruel or unusual punishment? Many have argued that capital punishment can be seen as a cruel punishment, which has led to some states, such as Illinois, abolishing the death penalty altogether. Though, despite eighteen states abolishing the death penalty so far, there has been no move to amend the constitution to include the death penalty as an example of ‘cruel punishment’. Another example of an ambiguous amendment is the first amendment which protects the right to free speech as well as freedom of religion. However, how far this amendment applies has been questioned on numerous occasions. For example, Texas passed a law which prevented flag desecration (burning of the American flag), however the Supreme Court overturned the Texas law due to it violating citizen’s first amendment right as flag desecration is seen as an expression of belief, which the first amendment protects. This has led to numerous calls for flag desecration being outlawed via a constitutional amendment, however just like the eight amendment this would be incredibly hard to achieve. This is purely due to how difficult it is to amend the American constitution. The American constitution’s amendment process is long and difficult, which is mainly due to it requiring a supermajority. A supermajority is where 2/3rds of both houses of Congress have to agree to the amendment put forward. Even if either house falls short by one vote, the amendment is dropped. This process was made to be hard intentionally by the Founding Fathers. This was  because they believed that the constitution shouldn’t be constantly changing, and so they created the need for a supermajority to stop the federal government from making rash, in the moment, decisions which they could grow to regret later on. However, it is this founding belief that has made the constitution, arguably, untenable for the 21st century, which can be contributed to Congress’ explosive growth over the last 200 years. For example, in 1789 there were only 65 Representatives in the House of Representatives, which grew to 435 by 1963 and plateaued due to the House of Representative s being capped in 1911. This is an increase of 370 over a period of 174 years (meaning that there were two new Representatives every year). This continually increased the amount of people who had to work in unison to pass constitutional amendments, and as evidenced by the 1911 Act which capped the size of the House of Representatives, America grew far more than the Founding Fathers had originally intended. The constitution can also be seen as unfit for the 21st century due to an ever increasing political pace, as well as rapidly changing circumstances which have led to very different outcomes when compared to the British political system. This can mainly be seen with gun control which is protected in America by the second amendment (â€Å"Right to bear arms†) despite the amount of shootings which have occurred in recent times. An example of this would be the Sandy Hook shooting, which occurred on December 14th 2012 at an elementary school in Connecticut. This caused nationwide outrage which in turn caused support for disarmament groups to increase. However, after several months the support fell away and no constitutional amendments were put through, despite pledges and campaigns from Barrack Obama and Joe Biden. Now, when compared to England, there was a shooting spree in a Dunblane Primary School in 1996. Following national outrage, much alike that caused by Sandy Hook, guns were criminalised by an Act of Parliament, which was significantly easier to do as the UK does not have a written constitution, rather an unwritten one which is drawn from several sources. However, despite the faults with the American constitution, it must be fit for purpose if it still exists. This is because if it wasn’t fit for  purpose, and didn’t work at all, it would have been scraped by one of the American administrations after its conception. This is mainly aided by the argument that the constitution’s ambiguity is what allows it to adapt to changing circumstances as well as its ability to change without formal review. What is meant by this is the fact that the Supreme Court can uphold or repeal earlier decisions made in relation to the constitution, meaning that if the correct decisions were repealed the constitution could be drastically changed.

It Is Better to Be Ruled by a Philosopher King Essay

If one wishes to perfect one’s soul and reach enlightenment, then it is definitely better for that one to be ruled by a philosopher-king; however, if one’s main goal in life is to live happily and securely without worries, then it is arguably better for that one to be ruled by a prince. One should, however, seek to perfect one’s soul rather than seek for happiness and security alone, hence, it is better to be ruled by a philosopher-king. This paper will first lay out the reasons why one should be governed by either a Machiavellian prince or a philosopher-king, and point out that the different benefits between the two rulers depends on the different sets of priorities in a citizen’s life. Then, the paper will argue why one should pursue the values under the rule of a philosopher-king rather than that under the rule of a prince. Finally, it will look at some counter argument, analyze and assert why the thesis is still superior. If one’s main wish is to live happily and securely, then it might be better for that one to be ruled by a Machiavellian prince, since a Machiavellian prince’s main goal as a ruler is to secure his state. The perfect prince would appear to be â€Å"merciful, faithful, humane, honest, and religious†, but â€Å"know how to enter into evil, when forced by necessity† to â€Å"maintain his state. † Consequently, the people living under this prince would benefit in the peace that comes with his reign. Moreover, the people are free to pursue whatever materialistic goals they want, so long as they do not violate the laws of the prince. The prince is also neither â€Å"rapacious and a usurper of the property and the women of his subjects† nor is he trying to â€Å"maintain a name for liberality† so much that he â€Å"burden the people extraordinarily, to be rigorous with taxes. † Hence, the people living under a prince’s reign will enjoy a sufficient life with stability, security and freedom to pursue their materialistic wants. If ones seek to perfect their souls, to come out of the cave and â€Å"into the sunlight†, then life under the rule of a philosopher-king is ideal. Under the rule of a philosopher-king, the king will try to â€Å"[turn] the whole soul until it is able to study that which is and the brightest things that is, namely, the one we call the good. † To do this, one must first â€Å"rid of [feasting, greed, and other such pleasures]† that one â€Å"had been hammered at from childhood†, and then â€Å"[turn] to look at true things. The philosopher-king, whose visions and knowledge is true and wise, will help educate the people by changing theirs desires, â€Å"[try] to redirect it appropriately. † A life under a philosopher-king will benefit one’s soul rather than one’s materialistic life. It is obvious as explained previously that the key to the desirability of the two different systems, one under the Machiavellian prince and one under the ph ilosopher-king, lies in how the people prioritize what they look for in life; hence, different sets of values will be satisfied by different political systems. Thus, at first look, it seems impossible to determine which system is better because they are based on completely different sets of values. However, as one set is arguably better to pursue than the other, consequently, one political system will be more desirable than the other. The set of criteria in question is that under the rule of the philosopher-king. It is better for a person to pursue a knowledgeable, true, and rational life that a philosopher-king promises to provide than a materialistic and secure life alone that the Machiavellian prince promises. First, it needs to be pointed out that Machiavelli also seems to see there is of little value for a prince to pursue materialistic desires, unless it serves a bigger purpose, such as the acquirement of â€Å"abundance of either men or money† serves to â€Å"put together an adequate army and fight a battle against whoever comes to attack them. † Machiavelli seems to imply that a prince seeks not just power, but also seeks to be more glorious, excellent, and virtuous than ordinary men. He states that as a commander, a prince should have â€Å"no other object, nor any other thought, nor take anything else as his art but that of war and its order and discipline†; and when a prince â€Å"have thought more of amenities than of arms, [he has] lost [his state]. † This seems to imply that a prince should not seek trivial contentment, but only that of commanders; and as a leader, a prince should desire to be esteemed, feared, and loved, and avoid to be viewed as â€Å"variable, light, effeminate, pusillanimous, irresolute. Hence, Machiavelli seems to say that even though not everyone has virtues, thus, those who do will rise and become princes while the rest will be ruled over, it is desirable that one should aspire to become a prince, seek virtues, prove one’s excellence with his prudence. Socrates, hence, also seems to agree with Machiavelli that one should seek more in life than the satisfaction of one’s instinctive desires. However, Socrate s disagrees with Machiavelli on two points. First, Socrates disagrees that only a few has virtues but everyone is capable of achieving more in life but rather everyone is capable of pursuing virtues. Second, he believes that there is only the â€Å"virtue of reason† that, unlike others that â€Å"aren’t there beforehand but are added later by habit and practice,† has always been there intrinsically inside of everyone. He states that this virtue â€Å"never loses its power but is either useful and beneficial or useless and harmful, depending on the way it is turned. † Socrates, thus, might argue with Machiavelli that the virtues that he assigns for the perfect prince are derivatives of this single virtue of reason, which is â€Å"forced to serve evil ends. † Hence, the perfect prince is capable of horrid things, but still very clever to maintain his image. Socrates perhaps can conclude that the prince described by Machiavelli is a case where the virtue of reason is turned to the wrong way. Thus, Socrates reasons that everyone is capable of pursuing this virtue of reason, and hence, capable of greatness, but they need guidance and education to â€Å"[turn] around from darkness to light. † Machiavelli then might agree that everyone might be capable of greatness, but he still disagrees as to why any person with the virtue of reason should not become a prince to dominate others, but agree to be governed by the philosopher-king. Now, assume that Socrates’ model of the human soul is correct and sufficient; it might give an answer to this problem. Socrates reasons that a human’s soul consists of three parts, a human who represents our virtue of reasons, a lion which represents our beastly power and aggression, also courage and nobility, and a multicolored beast with â€Å"a ring of many heads that it can grow and change at will† which represents our various desires, â€Å"some from gentle, some from savage animals. With the previously established argument that Machiavelli and Socrates may agree that the satisfaction of materialistic desires holds little value, hence, the scenario that the multicolored beast is in control can be eliminated, and so, the argument may be narrowed down to Machiavelli wanting the noble and courageous lion to dominate, while Socrates remains that the rational human should be in control. The initial description of the lion seems to match the dominant characteristics of that of the Machiavellian prince; however, as Machiavelli says himself, a prince needs both natures of man and beast, since â€Å"one without the other is not lasting. † The prince, hence, is still governed by both the man with virtue of reasons and the lion with courage and nobility. He uses the virtues of reason to acquire other virtues to become a prince, but he is still driven by the instinct of the noble lion to achieve glory and conquer others. As the human is the â€Å"best part of [a human soul]† it is still best to have the human part be in control over the bestial parts, because then, the â€Å"entire soul settles into its best nature, acquires moderation, justice, and reason. † Thus, people should seek to achieve this state of the soul where the human part is in control, it then takes care of the multicolored beast â€Å"as farmer does his animals†, and tends to the lion so that â€Å"the lion’s nature [becomes] his ally. This form of goodness of the soul is â€Å"the last thing to be seen, and it is reached only with difficulty. † Hence, the people will want and need the help of a philosopher-king. Since â€Å"a democratic man like a city ruled by a democracy, and similarly with the others†, the life under the rule of a philosopher-king will be similarly to the life which the philosopher-king rules himself. He will ensure by laws or otherwise, that his subject citizens will b e â€Å"the slave of [the philosopher-king] who has a divine ruler within himself. A philosopher-king does not wish to enslave the people to exploit from them, but only to help nurture and bring out the best of the people. When the people are ready, are equipped with â€Å"guardians and ruler similar to [the philosopher-king],† then the people will be set free. It will be ideal for everyone to be ruled by his own divine reason within himself. In conclusion, it is better to be ruled by a philosopher-king because one should goes after the values that the philosopher-king promotes. That is, one should find the virtue of reasons, and by the power of this virtue and the help of the philosopher-king, pursue the ideal balance of the soul, where the human part governs his consciousness and reins in the beasts. The Machiavellian prince is still governed by both the lion and the human, and he lets the people indulge themselves in their desires, hence, the prince is not the best choice of ruler, for himself and for his people alike.

‘Rime of the Ancient Mariner’ Commentary

Andrew Vollen English Commentary ‘The Rime Of The Ancient Mariner' was written by Samuel Taylor Coleridge in 1791. He was part of the Romantic Era in literature. The ballad is about a Mariner who shoots an albatross, and is cursed forever. This essay will analyze part the seventh. In this extract the Mariner is talking to a Hermit about his travels and the effect it had on him. In the extract he begins by describing the Mariner's repentance and catharsis doings. He later creates a juxtaposition, with a structural shift, between the horrible pain he felt and the happy wedding.Throughout the extract the writer uses religious symbols surrounding his pain or the wedding. This extract is significant in the ballad, because he describes why he is forcing people to listen to his story. It brings a full circle to the ballad, and it returns to the wedding. The Mariner has arrived in England, and he was spotted by a curious Hermit. The Hermit then questions who he is, and he describes the pain he feels. These stanzas are from the middle of part the seventh. Coleridge writes, â€Å"Forthwith this frame of mine was wrenched with a woeful agony, which forced me to being my tale; and then it let me free. In the first line Coleridge writes, â€Å"this frame of mine. † This means he does not belong to his own body. This would be done, because he only lives to warn others of his wrong doings. The Mariner, himself, died on the boat, and only his body exists. This connects with the thesis, because he has become his story, and it introduces the pain he has suffered. In the third line of the second stanza Coleridge writes, â€Å"which forces me to being my tale;† Here, he is talking about the â€Å"woeful agony† he felt as a result of his actions.His tale is the warning he gives to others who must hear, so they do not make the same mistake. The pain he felt creates, and is the reason for his story. This is the origins of the ballad, because he is talking to the wedding guest as a warning. It is also a reason the extract is so significant, because his connection with the wedding guest being the ballad to a full circle. The story has ended back where it began, therefore it is an epic. In the fourth and final line of the extract he says, â€Å"let me free. † Here, he is referring to the previous line about why he tells his tale.By telling the tale it releases him from the pain brought upon him. This life and being has become the telling of his tale. When he feels pain, the only way to relieve it is by telling his story. He was cursed by the god Life and Death after he killed the albatross, which causes the curse. Between stanzas four and five, Coleridge switches perspectives from first person to third person. In doing so he creates a juxtaposition between the horrible pain he felt and the happiness of the wedding. From the fourth to the fifth paragraph the Mariner returned to third person.This caused the scenery of the fifth sta nza to change. The reader becomes aware that the ballad has returned to the wedding. This creates a full circle effect, because the ballad has returned to where it began. This makes the ballad an epic, although an epic must include an educational or emotional experience that the main protagonist had. This was an emotional experience that the Mariner had. His life goal has become warning all those who need to hear about his accident. There is another important technique used in the transition from the fourth to the fifth paragraph.That is the juxtaposition created between the pain of the curse, and the happiness of the wedding. In the third paragraph he describes, â€Å"This heart within me burns. † This describes the immense pain he felt, when the gods want him to tell his story. This pain originally stems from the shooting of the albatross earlier in the ballad. Before this stanza there is no description or understanding of the pain the Mariner has felt all this time. The th ird and fourth stanzas have a claustrophobic feeling to them, to speed up the reading and create an ending to the Mariner's story.In the fifth and sixth stanzas he indicates the change to third person by narrating all of the sounds that are heard. For example, â€Å"What loud uproar bursts from that door! † This makes the reader feel like they are looking in from above. The reader now senses the happiness of the moment by the description of the environment, â€Å"And bride-maids singing are; And hark the little vesper bell,† It creates the scene of the wedding, and the church bells ringing. This is a juxtaposition of the stanza before where he is giving the reasons for the pain he has endured.This connects with the thesis, because the structural shift causes the scenery of the ballad to return to the wedding. This return to the wedding is what causes the full circle effect. Throughout the ballad there are different references to religion, mostly surrounding Jesus and h is execution. There are many different religious symbols in part the seventh, whether in this particular extract or through the part. The first stanza there are two instances of religious references. This is when the Mariner has just arrived in England, and is greeted by the Hermit. He says, â€Å"O shrieve me, shrieve me, holy man! To â€Å"shrieve† yourself, is to purify yourself of wrong doings through pain. This is what Jesus did when he was hung from the crucifix, he purified the human race from their sins. By calling the Hermit a â€Å"holy man,† he sees everyone that is not himself as heavenly. This shows the pain and suffering he has endured. In the third stanza there is only one religious word. He describes the pain that he feels before he warns someone of his past, â€Å"This heart within me burns. † The word ‘burns’ has a correlation with hell. Here, he writes that his heart is burning in hell.The fourth stanza is the returning to the we dding, and there is religious symbols. These include, bride, biddeth, and prayer. The bride is seen as a liberator of his suffering, because she is the first person that he sees after the description of his pain. She is performing the most religious deed, marriage. The final line in the stanza says, â€Å"Which biddeth me to prayer. † This means the vesper bells command him to pray. Praying is a completely religious word and action. In the final stanza the author mentions â€Å"God† himself. Here, he is commenting how on the boat there seemed to be no presence of God.This connects with the thesis, because the use of the religious symbols makes him seem more innocent and guilty. He is guiltier, because he shot the albatross which is depicted as a savior. He is more innocent, because of the comparison between the pain Jesus suffered and his suffering. In conclusion, this extract is significant, because of the Mariner’s painful repentance, the structural shift, and religious symbolism. Each one creates a full circle effect, where the ballad returns to the wedding. There is also an explanation of why he is repeating his story to all those who need to hear.

Montage Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Montage - Essay Example In Chantal Akerman’s film, two outstanding instances of assemblages are evident; the interview with Akerman’s mother, Natalia, and the inclusion of a hierarchy of images where a car accident or kiss is positioned high than washing up. Inclusion of Natalia’s interview revealed how much people were speaking about women, and this presented a perfect ground for the production of the film. The long static shots were meant to ensure that the audience is always conscious of the character’s position, and the position of women in the society (Akerman N.pg). Moreover, the "hierarchy of images" places a kiss high than the chores that were stereotypically believed to be women’s not accidentally but intentionally to show the position of women in the society. The director wanted to illustrate that women’s works originates from oppression and what comes out of oppression is motivating (Akerman N.pg). The oppression that women were subjected to create a sens e of bitterness and togetherness in them, a factor that eventually empowers them to start fighting for their own liberation as depicted by Jeanne’s mother, a prostitute, when she fatally stubs a client on the 3rd day with a pair of scissors. A seditious element of Daisies is evident in its treasonous duplication, profane citation of intertexts from both low and high cultures and dissolute textual association in the realm of performing feminity. Through ridicule and parody, the director defiles the symbols of male supremacies and reputation while rendering the outrageous extravagances of its protagonists as heroic by montaging images from low and high cultures (Katarina 43). While one might argue that Daisies condemns the capitalist ideology through inclusion of excess food and eating that depicts conspicuous consumption, it also pampers women’s avaricious nature. For instance,

Characteristics of a homeless man Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Characteristics of a homeless man - Essay Example As he saw me, he shouted. Beggar: Oye, watch what you are doing man. You just twisted my leg and I have got it fractured for sure. Owoo†¦owooo.ooo. It hurts. You owe me several hundred dollars. I gotta go and get it fixed. Owooo†¦owoo. Oh my God, I thought! One moment ago, I adored the beauty of the Arch, and one moment later, I curse having visited it. Does the Arch make home to such people? I could never think of it. And this beggar, this liar, is indeed a big threat to my bank account. All of these thoughts suddenly flashed in my mind with instincts. I was dumb-founded. I talked to the beggar in reply. Me: I owe you nothing. Its your fault if you are sleeping in a common walkway, with your leg extended in the middle of the path. And I was too conscious to put complete weight over my foot as soon as I realized there was something underneath it. You lie. I did not fracture your leg. Indeed, you are perfectly alright. This is indeed, a new way of begging in the town, isn’t it? Me: Oh my God, you liar, you cheat. You have had your leg fractured ever since this report was made, and you intend to sue me for that? And then you show me the report as well. You know what? I pity you! Here†¦take