Monumental Architecture Essay Example for Free

Monumental Architecture Essay Monumental architecture is large man-made structure of stone or earth. I live in New York, one of the largest cities in the world. We have many examples of the monumental architectures. The top ten of them are the Statue of Liberty, Grant’s Tomb, Grand Army Plaza, Washington Square Arch, Columbus Circle Fountain, The Grand Army Plaza, Literary Walk, Richard Morris Hunt Memorial, 107th Infantry Memorial, and the 911 Memorial. I have been living in New York City for the last twenty years. On September 11, 2011, I arrived at work as usually fifteen minutes earlier and while I was parked my car I heard on the radio that one of the airplane struck the World Trade Tower. I came to my floor and told all my workers about it. Our building was located in the East part of New York; we could see the Twins Towers from our windows. From our windows, we saw how the second airplane struck the second tower. Panic struck everyone. In the Towers and the area surrounding, there were friends and relatives, we feared for their lives. We tried to reach them but the phone lines were over-flowing and we cannot reach them right away. From the windows in our offices we saw how the building collapsed. After that our director decided to close our office early in order for us to go be with our families. From work I went directly to school to pick up my daughter and on our way home I tried to explain to her what happening in the morning. My friends and relatives safely escape from the area of Twins Towers but many other lives were lost. As a tribute of remembrance and honor to the lives lost on September 11, 2001, a memorial was built by the name of the 911 Memorial. This memorial is located at the World Trade Center site, the former location of the Twin Towers. The memorial contains two square pools in the center, where the Twin Towers once stood surrounded by the forest of trees. The design of memorial is thirty feet below street level which was started in the year of 2006. This design contains the footprints of the buildings that stood. On September 11, 2011, a dedication ceremony was held at the memorial. The memorial officially was opened to the public on September 12, 2011. The museum of this tragedy opened around September 11, 2012. Many people now visit the memorial to remember not only the lives lost but of the heroes who went into the buildings to save others. www.911memorial.org http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/29/us/new-york-911-memorial/ http://timeline.national911memorial.org http://www.nationalgeographic.com/remembering-9-11/place-of-remembrance/ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44483977/ns/us_news-9_11_ten_years_later/t/memorial-plaza-nyc-opens-public/#.UP7cZ_JX-KI Rttp://gswho went into the firre

Arranged Marriage In Midnights Children Essay example -- essays papers

Arranged Marriage In Midnights Children â€Å"Arranged Marriages in Midnight’s Children† An element of Midnight’s Children, by Salman Rushdie that I particularly enjoyed was the recurring theme of loving someone in pieces. There are two instances where this is prevalent, one being the interaction between Aadam Aziz and Naseem Ghani. It is stated that: â€Å"In short: my grandfather had fallen in love, and had come to think of the perforated sheet as something sacred and magical, because through it he had seen the things which had filled up the whole inside him†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Through the perforated sheet, Aadam Aziz never saw his bride until he asked for her hand in marriage. Instead, he fell in love with â€Å"the softness of her ticklish skin, or the perfect tiny wrists, or the beauty of her ankles.† Aadam Aziz, who had concentrating on loving the pieces of Naseem, was ill prepared for her presence in its entirety. Naseem and Aadam’s marriage â€Å"rapidly dissolved into a place of frequent and devastating warfare under whose depredations the young girl behind the sheet and the gauche young Doctor turned rapidly into different stranger beings†¦Ã¢â‚¬  The question, or rather statement made here by Rushdie, is whether or not it is possible to love someone in pieces, without knowing their whole being. When examining the relationship between Naseem and Aadam Aziz, it seems as though Rushdie is stating that one cannot love someone through a perforated sheet, without knowing their soul. Aadam...

Ontology in Anselm, Descartes and Kant Essay

Ontology is a purported proof that God exists. The ontology provided by St. Anselm in the eleventh century set the standard in Western thought, and on which all subsequent ontology attempted to measure itself. Before the renaissance and the age of reason it was generally agreed that only a fool would deny the existence of God. Accordingly the ontology of St. Anselm employs the attitude of a fool – meaning some one without any of the higher concepts of philosophy – as the crux of the argument. The argument commences with a definition of God: â€Å"Now we believe that [the Lord] is something than which nothing greater can be thought† (81). The association made is to perfection, for only in perfection can we conceive nothing beyond. In traditional attempts at ontology the strategy was to find God amongst the splendor of his creation. Anselm, however, eschewed the evidence of experience and tried to affect a proof from pure thought. It is placed in the head of a simpleton, and in this way is made to appear as stemming from the innate mind, and not clouded by the errors of perceptual understanding. Anselm’s fool wants to cling to the idea that â€Å"God is not!† But such atheism does not strangle the thought processes inside the head. It necessarily searches for perfection, that being the natural inclination of man, which is to seek happiness, comfort, order, and so on. Can the fool imagine perfection, asks Anselm. The answer is that he cannot. For whatever ideal it fixes on, the mind surges past it for something even better. However, this relentless ascendancy within the mind presages the existence of perfection therein, for otherwise the mind chases after nothing. Now, since we have already identified perfection with God, the mind imagines God, and indeed strives towards it. Existence in the mind will not suffice as ontology. Therefore, as the next step in the argument, Anselm attempts to measure the idea with reality. We must next consider whether that which has been imagined as perfect has a corresponding reality beyond the mind. If it does not then we have a contradiction. For being in the mind alone we are then able to imagine something even greater than it. That which was imagined as perfect now turns out have something that is more perfect than it. Anselm is sure that he has found a contradiction here. So he proceeds to conclude:   â€Å"Therefore, there is no doubt that something than which a greater cannot be thought exists both in the understanding and in reality† (82). Descartes, though largely accepting this ontology, doesn’t accept the contradiction derived in the final step. He argues that reality has not been introduced at all, but only an idea if reality. In the final analysis the entire ontology is taking place in the head. It is an imagined God that Anselm proves, says, Descartes, not a real one. His correction, therefore, was to consider the phenomenal world after all. In this manner he laid out what has famously come to be known as â€Å"Cartesian doubt†. The world of sensory experience, when examined philosophically, naturally induces doubt, for all perspectives are subjective. It is impossible to construe an objective form subjective sensory experience. But instead of holding back doubt Descartes allows it full reign. He starts to explore what else can be doubted. Soon it is found that not only material reality, but also all the perceptions and ideas of the mind must also be doubted, for they all stem from the same faculty of understanding. But his doubting reach must come to and end eventually, when he comes to consider consciousness itself. Descartes discovers that he is unable to doubt the â€Å"I†, for it is the â€Å"I† itself that is doubting, i.e. thinking. Thus his famous conclusion, â€Å"Cogito, ergo sum† – I think, therefore I am (68). From the proof of self-existence to the proof of God is a simple step. A self that is subject to doubt is imperfect, and therefore implies the existence of Creator who is perfect. Kant, in turn, comes to dismiss both these attempts at ontology on the simple premise that existence is not a predicate. In other words, it is meaningless to say simply â€Å"God is.† Our concepts of understanding allow us to apply reason in the form of sentences that contain both subject and predicate. So that we can say that ‘God is good’, or that ‘God is merciful’. But simply ‘God is’ is not meaningful, and human understanding does not allow such speculation. In effect, Kant is saying that ontology is not possible. This is in concord with the rest of Kant’s philosophy, which emphasizes that we are not able to pronounce on the noumenal world, i.e. on â€Å"things in themselves†. He describes three categories of noumena – the soul, the material world, and God, the last being the source of the first two. Therefore God is definitely part of Kant’s philosophical scheme, only that he remains beyond human understanding, and we cannot even pronounce on God is the simplest form – ‘God is.† Just as we cannot know anything about the soul, or the material world, as things in themselves, but only come to know the consequences of them. Our understanding is limited to the phenomenal world, where practical reason applies. Kant also speculates on the existence of a transcendental â€Å"pure reason†, that which overcomes the anomalies of practical reason. Pure reason is identified as an end in itself, and is thus identified with perfection. He stipulates it as a moral imperative that we pursue â€Å"pure reason† as the highest goal. Yet he refuses to identify this perfection with God, and differs with Anselm on this point. He also differs with Descartes’ ‘cogito, ego sum’, and complains that logic is being applied to derive existence, the rationale being that the part cannot be used to explain the whole. The least objectionable ontology, in my opinion, is that of St. Anselm’s. To make this point I will show that the refutations put forward by Descartes and Kant are not appropriate. Descartes’ complaint was that the proof given by Anselm is wholly ideal, without reference to the phenomenal world to give it substance. But Anselm does indeed refer to the phenomenal world, when he introduces the postulate that the ideal of perfection has no corresponding existence in the real world. In fact on this postulate the entire argument hinges, for it is used to derive the contradiction, from whence the ontology ensues. â€Å"Cartesian doubt† a merely a long-winded way of coming to the same conclusion. Kant’s complaint, on the other hand, is not really an argument at all, but rather a boast that he has not has to use the words â€Å"God exists† anywhere in his philosophy. For to pick on the grammar of â€Å"God exists† on the justification that the noumenal world is unknowable is taking matters too strictly. Even accepting Kant’s theory, it is not right that we desist from pronouncing the existence of God. He may not have done so explicitly, but Kant does indeed pronounce of the existence of God in the implicit sense. As a moral precept to action he gives us the categorical imperative: â€Å"I am never to act otherwise than so that I could also will that my maxim should become a universal law† (13). The universal law is pertaining to the moral law, which is described as an end itself, and therefore is no different from the idea of perfection. An imperative is only categorical when it works universally, without contingency. To paraphrase Kant, the rationale of human existence is to pursue the moral life in order to attain to perfection, in other words, God. Other than the fastidious insistence of grammar, Kant does not really object to Anselm’s ontology. With both Descartes’ and Kant’s objections discredited, Anselm’s ontology must stand as the best, being the simplest and most intuitive. Works Cited Anselm. Basic Writings. Translated by Thomas Williams. Boston: Hackett Publishing, 2007. Descartes, Rene. Meditations on First Philosophy: With Selections from the Objections and Replies. Translated by John Cottingham. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Kant, Immanuel. Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing, 2004.   

Why You Should Write Practice Tests While You Study

One of the best ways to score high grades is to create your own practice tests. It’s a little extra work while you’re studying, but if that investment results in higher grades, it’s definitely worth it. In their book, The Adult Student’s Guide to Survival Success, Al Siebert and Mary Karr advise: Imagine that you are the instructor and have to write some questions that will test the class on the material covered. When you do this for each course you will be amazed at how close your test will match the one your instructor creates. Creating a Practice Test While youre taking notes in class, write a Q in the margin beside material that would make a good test question. If you take notes on a laptop, assign a highlighter color to the text, or mark it in some other way that is meaningful to you. You can find practice tests online, but these will be tests for special subjects or exams, like the ACT or GED. These wont help you with your particular test, but they can give you a good idea of how test questions are stated. Remember that your teacher wants you to succeed. The best way to find out what kind of test he or she gives is to ask. Explain to him or her that you want to write your own practice tests, and ask if they will tell you what format the questions will take so you can make the most of your study time. Siebert and Karr suggest that as you read your textbooks and lecture notes, jot down questions that occur to you. You’ll be creating your own practice test as you study. When you’re ready, take the test without checking your notes or books. Make the practice as real as possible, including giving partial answers when you aren’t sure and limiting the time allowed. Suggestions for Practice Tests In their book, Siebert and Karr make a few practice test suggestions: Ask at the beginning of the course when tests will be given and in what formatWrite your practice tests in the format your teacher will use (essay, multiple choice, etc.)Ask the librarian if there is a collection of old exams you can studyFind out if there is a student manual that accompanies your textbookAsk former students about the kind of tests your teacher givesAsk your teacher for suggestions for test prepAsk a friend, family member, or fellow student to quiz you Test Question Formats Familiarize yourself with the different kinds of test question formats: Multiple Choice: You are given three or more choices and must select the correct answer. Sometimes, all of the above is a choice.True or False: These are usually used when you are being required to memorize facts. They are often tricky. Read them carefully.Fill-in-the-Blank: These are similar to multiple choice except that you must know the answer without being given choices.Essay or Open-Ended: These questions test your comprehension of a subject. Youll be given a question that you must answer at length, giving specific examples, or you may be given a statement to agree or disagree with. These may sound challenging to you, but if you know your stuff, this type of test question also allows you to shine. Be ready and make the most of the opportunity. Source Siebert, Al, Ph.D. The Adult Students Guide to Survival Success. Mary Karr MS, 6th edition, Practical Psychology Press, July 1, 2008.