Critique of Carnap's article on the Confirmation of Laws and Theories.

If you order your custom term paper from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on Critique of Carnap's article on the Confirmation of Laws and Theories.. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality Critique of Carnap's article on the Confirmation of Laws and Theories. paper right on time.

Out staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in Critique of Carnap's article on the Confirmation of Laws and Theories., therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your Critique of Carnap's article on the Confirmation of Laws and Theories. paper at affordable prices!

Introduction

After presenting an outline of Carnap's article, I want to proceed to critique his position. Firstly, I will offer a critique of Carnap's proposition that „science begins with direct observations of single facts". Secondly, I will try to point out the peculiarities and contradictions, that Carnap will necessarily have to fall into by taking on a logical positivistic and empiricist position. Thirdly, I will try to point out the weaknesses of induction and the impossibility of arriving at „theoretical laws" as well as the principle of induction using only the method of induction. At last, I will discuss Carnap's understanding of probability and weather or not his use of it is justified. As a critique I will use Edith Steins „Einführung in die Philosophie", especially in showing that the observation of single facts, cannot be the starting point in science. Fritz Wenisch's „Untersuchung zum Methodenproblem in der Philosophie" will be useful in showing the contradiction of Carnap's assumption that we only arrive at knowledge through induction. Chalmers „What is this thing called Science" I will discuss in so far as it is helpful to clarify the difference between the meaning of Carnap's „theoretical laws", Chalmers concept of „theory" and Hildebrand's demonstration of the a priori. Hildebrand's „Introduction to Philosophy" will be used throughout this essay, in order to elucidate the importance of acknowledging a priori propositions as a foundation of science. Before I proceed with an outline and criticism of Carnap's article, I would like to say a few general things about logical positivism, of which Carnap is a major representative. I. Logical positivism and the claim that all knowledge is achieved through inductionLogical positivism was first introduced in 11 by Blumenberg and Herbert Feigl. It is often referred to as „consistent empiricism", „logical empiricism", and „scientific empiricism". In a wider context, the term is also used to include the „analytic" or „ordinary language" philosophy developed at Cambridge and Oxford. The latter is a direct consequence of the first. We will see why.

Cheap Custom Essays on Critique of Carnap's article on the Confirmation of Laws and Theories.

The logical positivistic position can be seen as the attempt, to account for the general principles of mathematics, logic and theoretical physics, without abandoning the doctrine, that science is the description of experience and the only source of knowledge. The defense of this doctrine of naturalism, which leaves no room for the knowledge gained through insight, must also evidently have an effect on the way language is used. For the logical positivists, the only method of arrived at knowledge is induction the inductive statements can never be necessary, at most only highly probable. Terms like „truth" and „necessity" have a conventional use, but essentially no meaning. We are not so much concern in this essay with the ills of „analytic" language philosophy. I just wanted to point out, that analytic language philosophy is in many ways a direct outcome of the empiricists initial claim „That all science starts with observable events" What I am concerned with, is the initial claim and doctrine, which is implicitly present in Carnap's article. It is not always easy, to realize, that at the basis of all his assumptions lies a faulty epistemology. Nevertheless, it is very important, when reading Carnap, that we keep in mind, that he is making claims, that he as an inductivist cannot adhere to, without falling into contradiction. II. Carnap's confirmation of laws and theories and the method of induction

The starting point of all science, so Carnap, is the observation of singular events, which he calls facts. „Of course" so Carnap „all our knowledge has its origin in singular statements - the particular observation of particular individuals...science begins with direct observation of single facts. Nothing else is observable." Facts are distinct from universal statements, they are called laws. The statement „this woman is blond" corresponds to the observation of a singular event. To say that „all women are blond" is a „universal" statement. If we are not hallucinating, dreaming or severely projecting something into a fact, we can assume that „this women is really blond". We have to keep in mind, that fact that this specific women is blond, is a contingent one, she could also have red hair; But also the „universal" statement derived from this singular fact is never absolutely true. On the one hand, when we make a „particular statement" about a particular event, we are making nothing more than a statement about a fact that could be otherwise. On the other hand, when we generalize, that all women are blond, we are making a „universal" statement, that can never be absolutely certain. Since by the observation of one singular event we do not see any necessity why all women should be blond, we have to observe many instances, many women, to be able to formulate a highly probable statement, one that we can call a „universal law"; a law that expresses certain regularities in nature, that have occurred so many times, „that we can have complete confidence in its truth" However, since there can be an infinity of instances as long as the world does not cease to exist tomorrow, we can never arrive at necessity, because we can never be absolutely certain to the degree, that we can say that all women are necessarily blond, even if all we see are blond women. Since tomorrow, or in ten years etc. can observe a red haired woman. If this is the case, how can we be justified in making universal claims about all, infinite possibilities, when we have only observed a finite amount of instances. This is what Carnap calls the problem of induction. Personally, I do not see much of a problem in the method of induction, if we treat it as the only source of knowledge. That is, if we accept, what Wenisch calls a chreontic method in philosophy, one that accounts for necessary states of affairs as a fundamental foundation of the inductivist method. We can live with the fact that there are unnecessary and necessary states of affairs, chaotic and random, real-type and necessary entities, as Hildebrand classifies all real and unreal things. If, however, we adopt a naive empiricist epistemology, and Carnap has done just that, then I admit that we run into problems. It will be a major purpose of this essay, to point out the problems that have to arise. Before continue, I want to point out, that Carnap's use of terms like „truth" etc. would seem to be inconsistent with his persuasion that only observable facts exist. It is obvious that we can only have an „insight" into to truth, never empirically observe it. How then is he justified to use the term. Let me just say, that Carnap was aware of this problem, and he spent quite some time of his academic career to figure out, how to rationalize such a „conventional" use of language. For now, we will just accept, that Carnap is using these terms for our sake. Carnap himself will make use of these „senseless" terms, because they are useful, not, however, because they are necessary. I do not want to offer this problem of Carnap as a major criticism, but I do believe that it, nevertheless, demonstrates the difficulties that arise if one refuses to accept a chreontic position, one that will enable us to reach outside of the merely probable. There are two apparent problems that I see, besides the contradictions that arise Firstly, the positivist should ask themselves whether it is really worth it, to stick to a position that poses so many problems. When Wittgenstein realized that his position would make ontological assertions senseless, Carnap went on to suggest, that they were not senseless, but meaningful assertion about language, not statements about a world beyond language. For me, this is just a way of shifting the problem. How can Carnap justify the fact, that the love for his wife (assuming he was married and loved his wife) to show only one example, was only meaningful insofar as it was an assertion about language. Secondly, I find it hard to belief, that Carnap's doctrines will not eventually lead to a denial of the real word all together. Because a more radical skepticism, (logical positivism is already a kind of skepticism, because it denies insight into essential necessities) is the only alternative to a chreontic position, if he is to avoid serious contradictions. Not to say, that even radical skepticism, as St. Augustine has shown in his Si fallor, sum - Argument, at least presupposes ones own existence. (if I doubt, I am). Lets resume in presenting some plain arguments against the most basic assertion of logical positivism. Lets look at it again Carnap states, that „all our knowledge has its origin in singular statements - the particular observation of particular individuals...science begins with direct observation of single facts. Nothing else is observable." Carnap actually asserts three things First, we can only arrive at knowledge through observation. Second, the only thing we can observe, are singular facts in the physical world. Hence, it is clear, i.e. that also our conscious acts are nothing more than an epiphenomenon of physical events. To this I will come back later. Third, since we can only observe singular facts of the physical world, facts which are contingent by nature, (and „universal laws" about frequently observed contingent facts can themselves only be probable) necessary states of affairs are useless. Edith Stein has dealt with the problem of naturalism in her book „Einführung in die Philosophie", and there is one argument which is useful to point out the non-sensical starting point of Carnap. Edith Stein at first explicates two major motifs for having a naive attitude of cognition, which proclaims nature as the only reality. First, our experience and all our conscious activity is in some way intertwined with nature. We are persons that have bodies, and our consciousness is also confronted with things in nature that have bodily form. It is for this reason, that our conscious activity is seen, solely as an epiphenomenon of physical events, such as the events in our body. The second motif of naturalism, and all its relatives (including all forms of empiricism) comes from the ideal that is put into science. Science has to be an exact science, a mathematical science; outside of nature guided by exact mathematical laws, there is no being. We have to keep in mind, that logical positivism is considered to be an exact science, and that the problem starts with their exclusion of one part of reality, that of essential necessities. Stein writes „If the exact mathematical science is not capable of accounting for the whole of reality, it can not yet be concluded, that whatever does not allow for an exact mathematical treatment, does not posses real being." If we look more closely at the assertion, that consciousness is an epi-phenomenon of physical events, we will be able to understand, that Carnap's claim, that all science starts with observable facts, is untenable. If we speak of consciousness as an epi-phenomenon, we speak of it as a side effect or secondary result of physical events. By stating, that it is a side-effect or secondary result, we also state, that consciousness is not the same as the physical events which it is a result of. If we assume that the link between physical events and consciousness is a factual one, we have not yet said that it is a necessary one. „What do you mean, necessary," Carnap could of course reply „there is nothing aside from experience, and experience can never show necessary states of affairs". With this, he falls into a trap, into which all skeptics fall (we have already shown, that logical positivism is only another appearance of skepticism) Carnap's answer denies in content, what he logically presupposes. If he says that there is nothing outside of experience, then he states that „there is something at all" (namely, in experience); and the fact that there is at all, has to be necessarily presupposed. This of course cannot be experience, but only understood by having an insight into the necessity „that there is". Stein concludes, that the mode of experience of facts in nature, that could be or not be, or could be of such a nature or another nature, is not applicable to the mode of pure cognition of our consciousness. „consciousness by its essence, cannot be grounded on nature" Such being the case, we can see, that not the observable facts are the starting point for science, rather it is the „insight" into essential necessary states of affairs, by which our thinking is governed, and which must fundamentally underlie all experience. Let me conclude Steins argument with a passage from Hildebrand's „Introduction to Philosophy" „Empirical observations are not the starting point for induction (author's note consequently, for science.). Rather, with the beginning interpretation of empirical observations, a specifically philosophical (author's note chreontic) cognition sets in, an interpretation, that builds on a priori insights and which proceeds with a definite philosophical method."A more fundamental criticism of the assertion that „all science starts with experienced facts" is offered by Fritz Wenisch in his book „Untersuchungen zum Methodenproblem in der Philosophie" (Invesitgations into the Problem of Method in Philosophy). There, Wenisch shows, that the denial of „insight" as a method in philosophy which that can lead to universal propositions, will inevitably result in a contradiction. Wenisch writes „The thesis, that there is a method of cognition based on insight, is not at all universally accepted today. There are two ways, in which it can be denied First, by making the assertion, that only universal propositions exist, which we arrive at through the principle of induction; second, by denying all together that we can know anything. The former is the thesis of logical empiricism, the latter seems to go into the direction of Poppers thesis..." In this essay, we will not be concerned with the second assertion, instead we will turn our attention exclusively to the verification of the empiricist statement which Carnap himself formulates, and which for him serves as the starting point of science. Before we turn to, what I consider a very strong criticism by Wenisch, I will point to another bizarre fact that logical positivism has to face. As Carnap points out at the beginning of his article, a universal law of science can never be a necessary one. If we want to confirm the law of thermal expansion, we cannot do so by insight, but we have to test many instances, without limiting our testing to metals and solid substances. No matter how many instances we test, we will always be confronted with a finite number. Hence, our assertion can never be absolute ones in the sense that we can say that a „universal law" must necessarily hold for all instances tested in the future. Although we can never be absolutely sure, we can nevertheless arrive at a certain „degree of confirmation". Instead of saying, that a law is „well-founded" or „not well-founded", we can express this degree of confirmation numerically in what Carnap calls logical probability, as opposed to statistical probability. When we role a six sided die, then the statistical probability of number 5 and 6 appearing on the top is expressed in the ratio 6 or 1. Statistical probability is the measurement of absolute frequency. In the example of the die, we are confronted with an absolute number, which is six. In logical probability we are not confronted with absolute numbers. We are confronted with a finite numbers of instances, where actually there are infinite possibilities. When we observe 100 cases of women that are blond, we do not actually have an absolute number of cases past, present and future. Here we are dealing with what Carnap calls relative frequency. Relative frequency expresses the ratio of 100 women to the total possible infinite number of women. What is important, however, is that Keynes, who first came up with the notion of logical probability, insisted that we can only intuit what logical probability is. If, like Carnap, we deny intuition as a means of arriving at knowledge of what logical probability is, then we could only arrive at what logical probability is through induction. But as we have already seen, inductive statements are never necessary, but only probable. In other words, our knowledge of probability will in this case itself only be probable. To make things even more absurd, we can ask ourselves this question „how probable is probability? It is typical from the standpoint of a consistent logical positivist that he refuses, although he acknowledges these problem, to recognize „insight" as a valid method of philosophy, and in so doing end their dilemma instantly. We are therefor not surprised, when Carnap has the following to say about Keynes „His book...gave a few axioms and definitions...but they are not very sound from a modern point of view. Some of Keynes' axioms were actually definitions. Some of his definitions were really axioms. But his book is interesting from a philosophical standpoint..." I for myself, understand Keynes position quite well. For if Carnap thinks that ontological statements are senseless, we might well be inclined to ask, how sensible it is, to make, what Carnap calls „meta-scientific" statements that are expressed numerically in the form of probable logical probabilities? The following quote is from Carnap's article and will not be further commented by me „...we need logical probability. It is especially useful in metascientific statements, that is, statements about science. We say to a scientist, ‘You tell me that I can rely on this law in making a certain prediction. How well established is the law? How trustworthy is the prediction? The scientist today may not be willing to answer a metascientific question of this kind in quantitative terms. But I believe that, once inductive logic is sufficiently developed, he could reply, ‘This hypothesis is confirmed to a degree .8 on the basis of the available evidence.'"(authors comment maybe one day we could even say „My love for you is confirmed to a degree .8 on the basis of the available physical evidence)It is not my intention to engage into polemics; I only wanted to give an example of how far away logical positivism takes us from reality, by denying the essential necessities. Logical positivism cannot really deny essential necessity; they would have to admit that the existence of essential necessities are at least to some degree probable. This points to another peculiarity that we are confronted with in logical positivism. This is an argument that Wenisch gives; It is not as strong an argument, but it useful in pointing out another non-sensical position. Lets look at the statement Carnap makes on page 14 of his article. There Carnap says „The truth of an inductive conclusion is never certain". If Carnap only recognizes inductive-universal conclusions, then the assertion „The truth of an inductive conclusion is never certain" must have been found through inductive reasoning. He could not give apodictic character to this assertion. The fact, that „the truth of an inductive conclusion is never certain" would itself be uncertain. Carnap would therefor be forced to leave open the possibility, that one day, he could come across an example of an induction, that did not have an uncertain conclusion. In other words, he would have to admit, that he could one day have an „insight" that there are necessary „universal" statements. It is, of course, not possible to ever run across an induction, that could lead to subjective necessity; for this reason, Wenisch suggest, it would be more reasonable to admit apodictic certainty to the assertion, that „the truth of an inductive conclusion is never certain".

The strongest arguments against logical positivism is the apparent contradiction that it involves itself in. Russell admitted to this contradiction. In his book on the „Problems of Philosophy" he writes „We have already seen, that the answer of the pure empiricists - that our mathematical knowledge is derived through induction from the observations of singular events - is untenable for two reasons First, the principle of Induction cannot itself be validated through induction and second, it is evident, that we can recognize the validity of propositions like x = 4, by looking at one single example." In order to clarify this contradiction, we will again look at the principle that governs inductions. According to this principle, we are justified to grant probability to a „universal" claim about the whole of instances, if the observation of a certain amount of instances will always be the same. If we observe a hundred cases of smart IAP students, then we are justified to grant probability to the „universal" claim, that all IAP students are smart. This principle of induction must have already existed, before any concrete induction was performed. If, however, as Carnap states, we can only arrive at universal knowledge through induction, than the principle of induction must have existed before it existed. This is the apparent contradiction into which the logical positivists fall. It must be admitted that at least the principle of induction is expressed in an non-inductive argument. This being the case, logical positivism is refuted, alongside with Carnap and his rejections of all philosophical question. In light of this evident contradiction it is hard to understand, apart from the two motifs we have already mentioned above, how Carnap can reject synthetic a priori propositions and the necessary states of affairs to which they relate (see p. 1 of Carnap's article). Chalmers' criticism of Carnap and the position of „naive inductionism".

Chalmers' book „What is this thing called Science?" offers some good criticism of what he calls „naive inductionism". And according to his definition of it, we can assume that Carnap is included in this criticism. Chalmer writes „According to the naive inductivist, science starts with observation." Carnap writes „...science begins with direct observation of single facts." (p.1)

We have already criticized Carnap's assertion, that all science „begins with direct observation of single facts". We have also seen, that Carnap presupposes necessary states of affairs, although he denies them. Furthermore we have seen, that the denial of a valid philosophical method based on „insight" must necessarily lead to contradiction. In addition to the circularities involved in attempts to justify the principle of induction, there are other deficiencies involved. For instance, how many observations have to be made, Chalmers poses the following question Should a metal bar be heated ten times, a hundred times or one thousand times, before we can conclude that this metal will always expand when we heat it. Well if the answer is, that we have to observe a large number of facts and not one singular event, what about the explosion of the atomic bomb in Hiroshima. Is it really necessary to repeat this event many times, before we can conclude that it causes a great deal of harm? How many times do I have to stick my hand into the fire, before I can conclude that fire burns and what are the criteria for determining how many times we have to experience events, before we can reach any certain conclusion? Do we arrive at these criteria by method of induction? The answer is clear, that we have to appeal to our theoretical knowledge of things, in order to understand what is significant and what is not. Carnap does not yet disagree. He recognizes that we have to separate „empirical laws" from „theoretical laws"; and that we need theory to discover new empirical laws. But Carnap could never admit „that theory plays a vital role prior to (all) observation. The naive inductivist, cannot afford to make such an admission." In order to go around this problem, Carnap has attempted to show, how „theoretical laws" are only further derivatives of „empirical laws". All science starts with the observation of events that are directly observable. From these observables we arrive at general „empirical laws" which in turn make possible „theoretical laws", such as the theory an the atomic structure of solid substances. We cannot observe the atoms in the substance (they are non-observables), but with the help of other observations and in relying on the probability of „empirical laws", we can make further assumptions. In the case of the law of thermal expansion, which we can directly verify in heating the substance, we can then make further assumptions about inner structure of the substance, and see if these assumption can hold in the light of direct observable facts. Carnap refines his initial starting point, adding that science actually starts with, what he know calls direct observables. Observables are easily explained. If we can directly sense an event, for instance when we sense the voice of our friend, we speak of observables. In the case of atomic particles, which we cannot directly sense, we are confronted with non-observables. For Carnap, this distinction is important to demonstrate, that theoretical laws are not presupposed in the observation of the direct observable color red, for example. It is clear that in the case of the atomic particles, we cannot observe anything directly. Without the help of „theoretical laws" universal laws making predictions about atomic particles could not be formulated in any way. Carnap does not deny that theoretical knowledge is necessary in more complicated in-direct observation. But he claims, that theoretical knowledge is again derived only from directly observable facts „Theoretical laws are related to empirical laws in a way somewhat analogous to the way empirical laws are related to single facts. An empirical law helps to explain a fact that has been observed and to predict a fact not yet observed. In similar fashion, the theoretical law helps to explain empirical laws already formulated and to permit the derivation of new empirical laws." This assertion of Carnap is directly opposed by Chalmers, who grants priority of theory over observation. Chalmers says „Theories may be, and usually are, conceived of prior to the making of those observations necessary to test them." This assertion of Chalmers is not the same position Hildebrand has Hildebrand does not speak of a priority of theory over observation, but of a priori insights that underlie any interpretation of observation. Here we are referring to essential necessary links, that are presupposed in the evaluation of any observable fact. Hildebrand is pointing to the fact, that we could not even interpret observable events, and make sense of them, without relying on a priori insights.The meaning of „theory" in Chalmers is at times vague „It will...become increasingly clear as this book progresses that it is essential to understand science as an historically evolving body of knowledge and that a theory can only be adequately appraised if due attention is paid to its historical context" Chalmers assumption does not yet refute Carnap's position. Since it is possible, that all historical scientific knowledge is initially derived from „empirical laws" that are in turn derivatives of directly observable events. In another instance, Chalmers attempts to refute the inductivist position, in pointing out that we persons can have different experience although the sense-perception is the same. One and the same fact can be observed but experienced differently. He uses the example of a picture of a tree that contains the outline of a human face. In looking at the image, some people will recognize the face, others will only see the tree. „In this example," says Chalmers „what an observer sees is affected by his knowledge and experience...." Although we see the same thing, it does not follow that we have „identical perceptual experience". Chalmers' example is important in showing, that sense perception and experience are not the same. In the light of this example, it will be difficult for the inductivist to arrive at universal laws dependent on experience that can vary given the same sense perception of an object. Chalmer points a very important problem, that an inductivist account of reality will have to face. The inductivist will argue, that the meaning of the simple concept „red", is acquired through observation. There are two difficulties involved in that first, as we have already seen, we have to assume that every sense-perception of the color red equally corresponds to the experience of the color red. Second, the inductivist assumes, that we arrive at the concept red, by isolating among an infinitude of sight perceptions all those, that have the common quality red. But what is the criterion, according to which we can isolate one set of sight-perception from another. The criterion, of course, is that only perceptions of red objects are isolated from the others. But this presupposes the very concept redness, the acquisition of which it is meant to explain. The very fact that we can separate one quality from another, presupposes that quality. Although Chalmers has shown that we cannot experience the concepts „redness" the way the inductivists understand it, he does not answer the question why this is so. It will be helpful to introduce Hildebrand's elucidation of the term „experience". First, experience can refer to the observations of singular events and to induction. Second, experience can refer to the concrete acquisition of a „such being" that cannot be otherwise. (so-sein), as in the experience of the color „red". Yet we have to at least experience it in this way, for the first time. A blind person, will never have a concept of red. But this dependency on experience of a thing the way it is (so-sein), does not imply an impairment of a-priori experiences of color. Having experienced colors, we have an insight into the a priori statement, that „orange lies between red and yellow". This distinction between the two types of meanings of experience is important for the following reasons When Chalmer claims, that we presupposes the very concept redness in the inductivist account of experience, what really is the case, is that we presuppose the experience of a thing the way it is (Soseinserfahrung). The reason why I am pointing this out, is that, an inductionist could one day broaden his account of experience to include the experience of thing the way it is, without having to admit to the insight of a priori necessities. I think it is clear, that logical positivism and their claim „that all knowledge begins with experience" can only be refuted, when point to the existence of necessary entities such as the „principle of contradiction". Only chreontic philosophy can justify knowledge apart from experience and can show that necessary states of affairs are presupposed by logical positivism. We can therefore, as Chalmers does, only speak of „theory" presupposed by experienced, when by „theory" we mean those necessary laws, that govern all being. Carnap, Rudolf The Confirmation of Laws and Theories, in Kournay (ed)Carnap, Rudolf Theories and Nonobservables, in Fetzer (ed)Stein, Edith Einführung in die Philosophie, Herder Wien, 11.Von Hildebrand, Dietrich What is Philosophy?, Kohlhammer Stuttgart 176.Wensch Fritz Untersuchungen zum Methodenproblem in der Philosophie, Habilitationschrift, Universität Salzburg 171. Chalmers, A.F. What is this thing called Science?, Hackett Cambridge, Indianapolis, 176. Please note that this sample paper on Critique of Carnap's article on the Confirmation of Laws and Theories. is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on Critique of Carnap's article on the Confirmation of Laws and Theories., we are here to assist you. Your cheap custom college paper on Critique of Carnap's article on the Confirmation of Laws and Theories. will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.

Order your authentic assignment and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!

Comparison

If you order your custom term paper from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on Comparison. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality Comparison paper right on time.

Out staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in Comparison, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your Comparison paper at affordable prices !

Cousin Kate is a pity-full and sympathetic poem.

Cousin Kate makes me feel sorry for the main character because of the language she uses like Now I moan, an unclean thing, who might have been a dove .

The Poem "The Seduction" is a sympathetic poem, but you feel that the girl is a bit stupid.

The poem The Seduction makes me want to tell the girl how silly she was to do what she did when she was drunk and not to realise how untrue the boy's intentions were. It is hinted at that the two only met on the night of the party because there is no name given, no history given and the girl would have been shown where the boy went when he skipped school before that.

What happened that night led to her becoming pregnant By stupid , stupid promises only tacitly made She feels more hurt as the young girl doesnt love the boy and thinks that there is no possible chance that the two would do this together . She is also afraid about what others would think of her. When she throws her high white shoes at the wall, it really shows that she is very regretful of the night, as the shoes were part of the night and she wants nothing to remind her of it, and the shoes were considered to be worn by girls that would do anything just to sleep with a man. Also the final stanza of the poem describes what the young girl is feeling. It implies that the girl does not want this child at all Better to starve yourself, like a sick precocious child

Another way that the poems share similarities and have differences is how each of males in the poems felt about each of the girls and what the local people thought of them. The Lord in Cousin Kate did not have true feelings for her and used her. The narrator was a cottage maiden and she was unaware of how pretty she was and hadnt experienced love before He wore me like a silken glove . When the Lord showed her feelings she fell for him because of the things she said and did. Also the lord found it easy to get the narrator because of her situation fill my heart with care. When he had finished using her he went on to her "Cousin Kate" but treated her differently, and as far as we know treats her with care and respect, but in the end, the girl feels almost as if its all worth it, because she has a beautiful young baby boy and the lord and "Cousin Kate" have been together for ages now, and there is no sign of Kate becoming pregnant.

Please note that this sample paper on Comparison is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on Comparison, we are here to assist you. Your cheap custom college paper on Comparison will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.

Order your authentic assignment from and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!

Essay of New Zealand's National Identity

If you order your custom term paper from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on Essay of New Zealand's National Identity. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality Essay of New Zealand's National Identity paper right on time.

Out staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in Essay of New Zealand's National Identity, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your Essay of New Zealand's National Identity paper at affordable prices!

Essay of New Zealand's National Identity A countries national identity is the way a nation perceives itself in relation to the world. Three of New Zealand's main national identity features are the migrant society, the sporting nation and the arts culture. Each of these features are special to New Zealand's society in different ways. By the end of this essay you will see why these are important to the identity of New Zealand. The migrant society of New Zealand is an important identity feature. New Zealand is made up of many diverse ethnic groups. They come to New Zealand from many different countries for example, Asia, Pacific Islands, European countries, Middle East etc. Migrants are important to New Zealand for various reasons. They bring different cultures, which help new Zealand people experience different ways of life. They also bring knowledge, different types of food and business, which help with the economy of New Zealand. For example generations of New Zealand people now grow up and experience new and diverse cultures everyday because New Zealand is now such a multicultural country. We can see the different ethnic groups in Auckland alone by the pie graph below.Pie graph showing ethnic groups in Auckland

Cheap Custom Essays on Essay of New Zealand's National Identity

Migrants continue to migrate to New Zealand because of our clean and green environment and our loyal and respectful reputation. This causes our ethnic diversity to keep on growing and is becoming a greater part of New Zealand's identity everyday.New Zealand is known to be a very sporty nation and is defiantly a main aspect of our nation identity. We have many different sports that we are well known for such as Rugby, Netball, Sailing, Hockey, Basketball and Soccer. However our national sport that we are well known for is Rugby. Our recognised Rugby team ‘ The All Blacks' is one of the top teams in the world. In 106 the All Black returned from a worldwide tour with a triumphant 1 out of wins. And over the last few years they have been in the final or semi-finals for the world cup. Being such a small country, an achievement as great as this is definitely something to be proud of. Other than Rugby New Zealand does well in other various sports for example in 15 50 years ago from now Sir Edmond Hillary (now a well known New Zealander throughout the world) was the first man in history to conquer the highest mountain in the world Mt Everest.Another sporting event that New Zealand takes pride in is The America's Cup which in 17 and in 000 we victoriously won. Overall New Zealand sporting is very important to our identity more than other aspects because we are a very competitive country and are determined to always do our best also because of our size we strive to be recognized by the rest of the world. We do this best through our sport.Another main aspect of our national identity is our art culture. Many of our artists show deep subliminal messages about the cultures of New Zealand, through different types of art. Behind each piece of New Zealand art work there is a story to be told due to most artists using the lands natural sculpture as a base to their artwork since that most New Zealand artists are very in touch with our beautiful innate surroundings. For example as you can see in the picture below by Robyn Kahukiwa he uses significant symbols of New Zealand Tapu (sacred) Objects such as the moko (Maori face tattoo) the greenstone tiki, the flax piupiu (traditional Maori skirt), the feather cloak that only Maori chief wore and the New Zealand flag in the background.

Robyn Kahukiwa - Woman In PiupiuAnd this is only one of the many artists of New Zealand. The art culture is so important to the identity of New Zealand because it is what carries on the legends of New Zealand and makes us all remember our ancestry and our beautiful country.In conclusion New Zealand has many identities but

- The migrant society

- The sporting Nation- The art culture are the ones that stand out as the most important national identity aspects. These are the most important because our main qualities as New Zealanders are our accepting, competitive and creative personalities and these compliment our most important national identity features.

Please note that this sample paper on Essay of New Zealand's National Identity is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on Essay of New Zealand's National Identity, we are here to assist you. Your cheap custom college paper on Essay of New Zealand's National Identity will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.

Order your authentic assignment and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!

A&P

If you order your custom term paper from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on A&P. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality A&P paper right on time.

Out staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in A&P, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your A&P paper at affordable prices!

A&P

I thought the A&P was a pretty good story. It took me back to the way I used to feel about my summer job a couple of summers ago. In this story you can see that Sammy was sick of his job and was either going to get fired or quit. He eventually quit before he got fired on the spare of the moment trying to impress the girls which two of them he put down the whole story

In this story Sammy is like a male chauvinist. It doesn't seem like he has much respect for all women because he had funny nicknames for all of the girls just about as soon as the entered the A&P. The first was nicknamed Plaid "a chunky kid, with a good tan and a sweet broad soft-looking can." The second girl he nicknamed Big Tall Goony-Goony. She was described as "one of those chubby berry-faces, a tall girl, and a chin that was too long." He claimed that "she was the kind of girl other girls think is very striking and attractive but never quite makes its." The last girl he described was the main girl that he liked. So atleast he doesn't completely dislike women. He nicknamed her "Queenie" "She wasn't quite as tall, she had sort of oaky hair that the sun and salt had bealched, done up in a bun that was unraveling, and kind of a prim face.

Cheap Custom Essays on A&P

In this story I got the idea this was around the place and time that the younger generation started going against the social standards. For example, Queenie came in her bathing suit with the straps down. He even said she was bold for that. "I suppose it's the only face you can have." Speaking of her prim face. Even Sammy just up and quit the A&P on the spare of the moment. I might have seemed like he was planning this or it was just the perfect setting for him. "One advantage to this scene taking place in the summer, I can follow this up with a clean exit, there's no fumbling around getting your coat and galoshes." He clearly was ready to quit at anytime but it was just perfect to him quit right there. He wanted to feel like hero saying "I quit" quick enough for them to her him "hoping they'll stop and watch me, their unsuspected hero."

After quiting Sammy had some second thoughts but thought to himself "It seems to me that once you begin a gesture it's fatal not to go through with it."

The A&P was a great story that was giving a basic thought process of just about all males. Even though this story took place before I was born I can relate now to what Sammy was thinking 0 years ago. He might not even have disliked women as I stated in the beginning of this paper. He could have just been bored and was thinking what any other male in his position would have, its not like he said these things out loud. So maybe Sammy wasn't as bad as the story kind of made him look.

Please note that this sample paper on A&P is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on A&P, we are here to assist you. Your cheap custom college paper on A&P will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.

Order your authentic assignment and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!

Reason for the emigration of Mennonites from Russia to Manitoba during the 1870s.

If you order your research paper from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on Reason for the emigration of Mennonites from Russia to Manitoba during the 1870s.. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality Reason for the emigration of Mennonites from Russia to Manitoba during the 1870s. paper right on time.

Out staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in Reason for the emigration of Mennonites from Russia to Manitoba during the 1870s., therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your Reason for the emigration of Mennonites from Russia to Manitoba during the 1870s. paper at affordable prices!

AbstractThe history of Mennonites in Manitoba, part of a larger, North American group of Mennonites, is closely linked with their past in other countries. What is examined in this paper is the link between these histories - a period of emigration in the late 1th century, from Russia to Canada and the United States. The investigation is into the true causes of this emigration, and why other Mennonites of Russia chose not to leave.Many possible causes are examined, and among them are religious and moral concerns, a growing problem of landlessness in Southern Russia, control of education, and a the possibility of entering into a favourable agreement with the Canadian government. Each of these causes represent changes from another time in Russia, when the Mennonites had a different agreement with the Russian monarchy which guaranteed certain freedoms and privileges.The Mennonites who chose to stay in Russia have their own perception of each of these causes. Evaluation of these causes leads to conclusions about the distinction between the two groups of Mennonites, with those departing holding a more conservative view of their faith and of the way Mennonites should strive to live.

Buy custom Reason for the emigration of Mennonites from Russia to Manitoba during the 1870s. term paper

On a large scale, the Mennonites immigration to Canada is seen as the result of a push and pull effect, with undesired changes by the Russian government providing the push, and the actions of Canadian officials providing the pull.BodyImmigration, even mass immigration, are part of our history and it is not terribly significant that a group would chose to immigrate. However, these immigrations are distinguished by the circumstances which surround them. The circumstances of a particular group of Mennonites, that which chose to leave Russia and settle in Southern Manitoba between the years 1874 and 1880, are in themselves quite unique. It could be said that this group follows a path entirely of its own in that regard.As deeply religious people, the moral and spiritual values which they held would have to have been considered in any important decision which affected the lives of the Mennonites. Therefore it is of some importance to have a certain understanding of their basic beliefs and principles.The Mennonites are Anabaptists, a Christian group which believed that people should live . . . by the teachings of Christ and an ethos of love and community. (1) The fundamental components of their faith which separated them from other Christian denominations at the time were their belief in adult baptism, and their passivism (which entailed a complete and utter rejection of war). This rejection of war is rationalised by an early Anabaptist, Menno Simons, in that true Christians do not know vengeance, no matter how they are mistreated. () This early anabaptist, the namesake for the Mennonites, was a former Catholic priest, born in 146. Although most of the early Anabaptists originated in Switzerland, persecution forced them to flee, following a path which would include a stay in the Netherlands and Northern Germany (Prussia). Later, in the late 18th century, a group of Mennonites were invited by the tsar to settle and farm in South Russia. Some descendants of these would make up most of those who would leave for North America not more than a century later, a large number of which would choose Southern Manitoba, in Canada, as their destination.The question becomes clear what motivation could be so strong so as to cause a large number of people to uproot themselves, and why did other Mennonites of the same region remain? What distinction can be found between them? Clearly, arrangements made previously by the Russian government had much to do with the Mennonites being in that part of the world, so it therefore must be asked what changes were made to inspire the Mennonites to take their leave of that land, and what convinced them so strongly that a new life in Canada was the one for them. essaybank.co.ukIt should become evident that the movement of Mennonites during the period of 1874-1880 from Russia to the farmland of Southern Manitoba, arises from a multiplicity of causes. Reform by the Russian government, coupled with a receptive Canadian government were motives for the exodus, which was carried out by a group which no longer felt they could continue living in Russia.Answering two separate invitations from Tsarina Catherine II, in 176 and 176 (), to anyone, with the exception of Jews, to settle in South Russia, was a group of Prussian Mennonites, who made the move in 178, forming the Chortitza colony. Although the invitations, which included favourable conditions and offers of land, were open to all immigrants with the aforementioned exception, special conditions were offered the Mennonites on the basis of their faith. A confirmation of this agreement was issued by Tsar Paul 1 in 1800. A translation of this document lists several key exemptions granted to the Mennonites, specifically from swearing oaths and from any military service. (4) Some administrative autonomy was also granted, which would mean that the Mennonite colonies would develop virtually independent of the Russian authorities.In essence, a religious freedom not offered elsewhere was held out for them, and the Mennonites actively pursued this opportunity. Tsar Pauls letter lists 10 additional advantages which would be offered to the Mennonites, the first of which reads We confirm the religious freedom which was promised to them and their descendants so that they might practise unhindered their tenets and customs. More importantly, however, in Article 6 of the privilegium, it was assured, with royal word, that . . . no Mennonite . . . will at any time be forced to do military or civil service without their own wish to do so. Having been granted such privileges, including the right of ownership of their land, rather than being chained to serfdom as most Russian farmers were, many Mennonite communities were able to flourish, with little Russian influence in religious or economic domains. wwgc gcw esgcgcs aygc gcba ngc kcgc gcuk.The policy which brought this independence to an end, and also terminated many of the old privileges, was implemented in the latter half of the 1th century. Known both as Russification and Russianization, this policy would have military exemption replaced with universal military training and have Russian replace German as the official language of instruction in the schools (5) (representing a loss of autonomy in control of schools), among other things. No longer did the royal word which promised the Mennonites the exemptions which they enjoyed hold true. The reforms introduced would also curb most of the privileges which the Mennonites had enjoyed, including an existence relatively isolated from their Slavic neighbours. Evidently, given the moral values of the Mennonites and their church, this policy of assimilation was unacceptable. Some even believed that this was a plan by their enemy, Satan, to acquire new brethren. Gerhard Wiebe, an Aeltester or bishop of the Bergthal Colony, writes Now the time had come when the enemy could prepare to attack the sleepy ones or pull them into his net, for the government had observed us closely for several years, and suddenly it was announced that the Mennonite must participate in state service. (6) Although the objectivity of such a statement could be quite limited, it reflects nonetheless a truth that many Mennonites had begun to distrust the Russian government which had begun to assume more powers over them. wwgf gfw esgfgfs aygf gfba ngf kcgf gfuk.The mandatory military service was the most contentious part of the policy of Russification, so some other solution was sought. A compromise was offered the Mennonites, appealing enough that roughly two thirds chose to remain in Russia. It came in the form of alternative service, on noncombatant lines. In fact, work to be performed was outlined Section 157 of the new military law would have that noncombatants should serve in forestry or medical work during war times. (7) (Although the Russians seemed to be upholding the Mennonites freedom from military service, this alternative service did represent a departure from the assertion that they would not be forced to do military or civil service against their will.) Considering their passivism and rejection of war, a value judgement would have arisen here even though they were acting peacefully, was it right for the Mennonites to be participating nonetheless in the war effort? Those who left, numbering over seventeen thousand (8), might then be considered more staunchly adherent to their faith or, in essence, a more conservative group then that which was left behind. wwcb cbw escbcbs aycb cbba ncb kccb cbuk!As exemption was not the sole privilege removed by the newly implemented policies, in can not be the sole reason for the departure of so many people. Since the Mennonites had been invited to Russia on the claim that land would be available to them, it is somewhat ironic that landlessness would become a cause of their departure. Yet, due to the nature of the agreements into which they had entered, this became the case. Land was originally allotted through a contract which allowed for one farm per family This land could not be subdivided. The deed could be passed down from father to son, but due to the large size of some Mennonite families, many young men were left out of the loop. They were either forced to buy up new tracts of land, or become labourers within the colonies. And colonies they were; for the Mennonites lived in isolation from most Russian serfs. In fact, official word was handed down that they were not to become too intimate with the neighbouring serfs. () And although several daughter colonies were established, among them the Bergthal colony which emigrated en masse to Canada (10), few Mennonites would choose to live among the Russian peasantry, a solution which would have allowed for more land to be occupied by the Mennonites. In a sense, a choice was made and most chose community over prosperity. The landless problem was great enough that by the time the first immigrants had left for Manitoba in 1874, approximately two-thirds of the families in South Russia were without land. (11) wwca caw escacas ayca caba nca kcca cauk.Also, the administrative autonomy the Mennonites had been granted, a privilege which amounted basically to independent village-states, was to be thrown out, and local Russian officials were to rule in its stead. Where once they had been able to govern themselves, they now became a rather insignificant minority in the zemstvos, the major bodies of local self-government. (1) This had come about somewhat gradually, following the liberation of Russian serfs in 1861. These became peasants, not unlike the Mennonites (officially Crown peasants). As the Russian peasants could no longer be considered lower than themselves since they had the prospects of owning land, the move towards more equality among Russian subjects now would seem almost inevitable. The reliance which the Mennonites had on the continuation of their privileges might in retrospect seem unwise. The dominant intellectual movements of the time were such that a system which the Mennonites enjoyed should not be likely to continue Russian Liberalism, which followed Western liberal and democratic ideals about the rights of man to individual freedom (1) and the Slavophils, nationalist Russians, who wished to preserve their national institutions and rid their nation of foreign influences. Both of these had come near to the point where they made up an irresistible force. Russia could no longer be governed in away in which foreigners were the recipients of privileges which other Russian citizens could not enjoy, and changes were made. The inevitability of the Mennonites displeasure with the results can not be discounted as a cause for their departure. VnuBmb Visit essaybank aa co aa uk aa for more aa Do not aa redistribute VnuBmb If one is to consider briefly the circumstances to which the Mennonites had grown accustomed, it should come as no surprise that they should not be eagerly accepting of a policy which would have them assimilated with the general population. The advantages they enjoyed were considerable; the Russian government even went so far as to forbid the outsiders to build inns, taverns and other public houses ... without [the Mennonites] permission. (14) Those who could not bear the new conditions would seek an arrangement similar to that which they had been granted by Catherine II (and affirmed by Tsar Paul) as a guarantee for their arrival in Canada. Again they would build an existence which, due to the privileges they enjoyed, was an isolated one; an existence which would be rendered vulnerable by any sudden shift in government policy in regards to the Mennonites.It was not entirely by Mennonite design that their people should enter into what amounted to contracts whereby religious freedom was guaranteed, granted in exchange for the performance of certain duties by them. The Canadian government needed desperately settlers who would build homesteads in the western provinces. At the time, the Mennonites had gained a reputation for their pioneering ability, being able to respond to adverse conditions (like those which one might encounter near the Black Sea in the Ukraine, for example). Such it was that the Canadian government thought it wise to delegate an immigration agent, William Hespeler (180-11), who had been given a special assignment of recruiting or assisting German-speaking immigrants from Eastern Europe (15), as he was himself a recent German immigrant. First contact with the Mennonites led him to engage in what is described by Adolf Ens as energetic wooing (16) of that group, with the goal of having them settle in Western Canada, in the new province of Manitoba (which had entered the Canadian confederation only four years previous to the first major wave of Mennonite immigrants in 1874). Other than causing somewhat of a stir among Russian officials, this had the effect of enticing several groups of Mennonites to choose Southern Manitoba as their destination (approximately 8 000 of the 17 000 who came to North America during the period in question did in fact settle in Manitoba). In fact, during these early years in Canada, Mennonites constituted over half the population of Manitoba. (17) wwdf dfw esdfdfs aydf dfba ndf kcdf dfuk!The negotiations between the Mennonites and the Canadian government would lead to the following arrangement eight townships were to be set aside, for exclusive use of the Mennonites of which a quarter section of land (160 acres) was allotted to Any person who is the head of a family or has attained the age of 1 years as provided for in the Dominion Land Act. An exclusive agreement was offered to the Mennonites which included the right to purchase the remaining three-fourths of the section at One Dollar per acre. If demand should outstrip the availability of land, further townships should be set aside. This is the extent of the land privileges granted exclusively to this group of immigrants. (18) These along with privileges of freedom of religion and education, and an entire exemption from military service . . . by Law and Order in Council granted to the denominations of Christians called Mennonites were outlined in a letter from the Canadian Secretary for the Department of Agriculture, John Lowe, to the Mennonite Delegates from Southern Russia. This letter was regarded by Mennonites as their Magna Carta (1) but in fact, was kept a state secret until 45 years later, during which time a report issued by the Minister of Agriculture, J. H. Pope, which was slightly different in wording from Lowes letter, served as the governments standard. This discrepancy would later be the cause of conflict between the Mennonites and the government, each believing they were in the right because of the agreements which they thought accurate under the law. wwbe bew esbebes aybe beba nbe kcbe beuk;No matter what the land arrangements were, Mennonite leaders were mainly interested in being able to practice their religion, be free from military service and have their children instructed in religion, with classes in German. One must then evaluate whether these freedoms were attained in order to determine the success of the Mennonites immigration. Freedom of religion was never threatened, nor was the military exemption ever in doubt during the first decades of Mennonite settlement in Southern Manitoba, but a question arose over the schools. The Mennonite schools were receiving funds from the Protestant School Boards in the province, and examinations of the teachers were held. This may not seem untoward; it does in fact appear to be entirely logical, a decision taken without malice towards the Mennonites. Yet some of these took offense to the examinations, fearing it would lead to a system of education that would not be to their liking. In the words of Gerhard Wiebe, an early Mennonite pioneer, It did not take long until we realized where matters were leading and we speedily withdrew and accepted no more funds. (0) This man no doubt had a more than healthy bias on these matters because, as a leader, he must sound an alarm to his people so they might understand what is occurring, but to the Mennonites, his concern seemed valid. The Mennonites did in fact begin to refuse funding, so they would be under no responsibility to the boards and the government as it pertained to education. By the very nature of the agreements the Mennonites signed, they did indeed become vulnerable, not necessarily to a shift in the governing structure but simply vulnerable to a policy of which they were not aware.As a final note, there is some irony in the situation of these early Canadian Mennonites. Because they were unwilling or unable to accept reform in Russia under Tsar Nicolas I, they might be considered of a somewhat more conservative nature than others, both in beliefs and practice. But upon arrival, due to the relative scarcity of population, they assumed roles both in business with other communities, often with non-Mennonites - many, in fact, became quite comfortable dealing with ... various cultural groups such as the Anglo-Saxons and French (1) - and in government, positions which would be considered far more worldly than the simple farmers which most of them were accustomed to being. They left Russia, fearing assimilation and the loss of their relative isolation, even fearing that they might expose their young men to evil influences () if an alternative to military conscription were implemented (they would be not be within the control of their community), yet upon arrival in a new land, some were forced into positions which were far more worldly, into dealings quite unlike anything they would have imagined during their one hundred year sojourn on the steppes of Southern Russia. This should serve as proof that the Mennonites were motivated more by their own religious principles than any elitist view that they were wholly deserving of having communities unto themselves.Considering that a desire for isolation can not have been a great desire for the Mennonites, other causes must be determined. There are circumstances which might be considered universal, which can apply to any mass immigration. When the prospects of continuing ones way of life as desired are no longer promising, if in fact there appear to be no such prospects at all, a group may choose to immigrate. Nothing less than this should be significant enough to catalyse such large actions, of grave importance. What else is great enough to overcome the tremendous social upheaval and practical difficulty of such a migration? No singular cause would be enough to motivate the Mennonites to uproot themselves. That decision could only have come with the realisation that the way of life which they desired could no longer be pursued under the conditions which they now faced in Russia. These conditions included the withdrawal of their exemption from military service, less independence in matters of education and government, and a growing problem of landlessness among the second and third generations of Russian Mennonites. But because such a large portion stayed behind, one must conclude that the way of life of the remaining group was different enough from those who departed.The distinction between the departing Mennonites and the non-migrants is revealed when each major cause for departure is analysed. The first distinction is a theological one. It is accepted that Anabaptists, and Mennonites in particular, are entirely opposed to the act of war. However, the issue is muddied when, instead of being forced into full-fledged military service, the Mennonites were offered the prospect of civic duty during times of war. The departing Mennonites did not accept this alternative. Rather, these new terms were offensive enough that many began to see their departure as a divinely inspired exodus. () It could therefore be concluded that they held a more conservative ideology than the Mennonites who remained. This conservative nature could well have been born out of the relative isolation the Mennonites were able to enjoy. This same conservative nature explains the offense certain Mennonites took to the replacement of German in the schools by Russian. The migrants would not have such a drastic change, which represented a loss of control over the education of their children as much as it was a shift away from their traditional language and culture. Resisting a change such as that would have been natural for a conservative group for whom the Russian language and culture was completely foreign. Those who had been more exposed to the language and culture would not have resisted as much, and this is probably the case with the non-migrating Mennonites. wwea eaw eseaeas ayea eaba nea kcea eauk.Similarly, the problem of landlessness could not have so greatly affected the Russian Mennonites who chose to remain Russian. This follows logically as a product of being less conservative and more exposed to their Russian neighbours. The largely agrarian farming villages or colonies in which the Mennonites lived were not well-suited to large-scale prosperity, as long as they maintained their relative isolation. However, as certain Mennonite communities opened themselves to commerce with their neighbours, the relative wealth of these communities also increased. The problem of a lack of land, with money, is easily solved. The purchase of more land would not have caused nearly as much difficulty for this group as for the other, poorer Mennonites who could not face the landless issue for very long, and were therefore forced to pursue residence elsewhere.As mercurial as were the Tsars during the dynasties of the 18th and 1th centuries, it was inevitable that the favourable arrangement which the Mennonites enjoyed should at some point or another come to an end. Because the Mennonites so heavily relied upon the agreements which guaranteed their stay in Russia, it is no great surprise that a departure from the terms of these agreements would force many to leave. Their faith in these agreements was quite strong, not unlike the faith of the selfsame people where their religious was concerned. And yet they would enter into similar agreements with the Canadian government, with seemingly few qualms. wwca caw escacas ayca caba nca kcca cauk.To the Mennonites, these agreements may have been a necessary evil; it was of utmost importance to them that the freedom to practice their religion would be guaranteed. No matter the intent, there is no way to change the consequence that they would become vulnerable to any change from the content of these agreements. By signing the new agreement with Canada, they put themselves in danger of having the same set of circumstances which occurred in Russia repeat themselves. However, this is of lesser importance to our question, which was how a substantial number of Mennonites came to leave their homes in Southern Russia for North America, and specifically, Manitoba. It should be clear by now that reform in Russia, a policy known as Russification which essentially broke the agreements the Mennonites had made previously with Tsarina Catherine II and Tsar Paul I, formed the push of a push and pull effect. The pull came from the West, in the form of an invitation from Canada, which needed settlers for its prairies. The motives of nearly all Mennonites immigrating during this period would be characterized by this perception of a push and pull; from one land they sensed a general disregard for their principles by the government, and from another, in contrast to Russia, a receptiveness and respect for religious principles and willingness to go to no small lengths to secure their passage. Because the new rules so greatly affected the way the Mennonites had grown used to living and in fact would prevent that way of life from being able to flourish or even continue, some felt they could not continue life in Russia. These were the emigrants who would cross the Atlantic to North America, of which approximately seven would begin to call Manitoba home.BibliographyPrimary SourcesTranslation of a letter, from Tsar Paul I to Mennonites in Russia, September 6, 1800 Letter from Secretary from the Department of Agriculture, John Lowe, to David Klassen, Jacob Peters, Heinrich Wiebe, and Cornelius Toews, July , 187. Secondary SourcesDriedger, Leo. Mennonites in Winnipeg. Winnipeg Kindred Press, 10. Dick, Cornelius J. An Introduction to Mennonite History. Scottdale, Pennsylvania Herald Press, 1. Dyck, John. Oberschulze Jakob Peters (181-1884) Manitoba Pioneer Leader. Steinbach, Manitoba Hanover Steinbach Historical Society Inc., 10. Ens, Adolf. Subjects or Citizens? The Mennonite Experience in Canada, 1870-15. Ottawa University of Ottawa Press, 14. Epp, Frank H. Mennonites in Canada The History of a Separate People. Toronto Macmillan of Canada, 174. Francis, E.K. In Search of Utopia. Altona, Manitoba D.W. Friesen & Sons Ltd., 155. Kaufman, J. Howard and Driedger, Leo. The Mennonite Mosaic. Scottdale, Pennsylvania Herald Press, 11. Klaassen, Walter. Anabaptism in Doctrine. Kitchener, Ontario Herald Press, 181. Klippenstein, Lawrence. Mennonite Memories Settling in Western Canada. Winnipeg Centennial Publications, 177. Plett, Delbert F. East Reserve 15 Celebrating our Heritage. Steinbach, Manitoba Hanover Steinbach Historical Society, 18. Schroeder, William. The Bergthal Colony. Winnipeg CMBC Publications, 174. Smith, C. Henry. Story of the Mennonites. Newton, Kansas Faith and Life Press, 181. Toews, John B. Perilous Journey The Mennonite Brethren in Russia, 1860-110. Winnipeg Kindred Press, 188. Urry, James. None But Saints The Transformation of Mennonite Life in Russia 178-188. Altona, Manitoba D.W. Friesen & Sons Ltd., 18. Wiebe, Gerhard, transl. Helen Janzen. Causes and History of the Emigration of the Mennonites from Russia to America. Winnipeg Manitoba Mennonite Historical Society, 181. Appendix A from www.essaybank.co.ukPrivileges granted by Tsar Paul I (translation)We, by the grace of God, Paul I, emperor and ruler of all Russians.This charter received our most merciful ratification to a petition that came to us from the Mennonites settled in the New Russian government, who according to their superiors and because of their outstanding industry and proper conduct server as models to the colonists, deserve our special attention, we have with this charter not only confirmed the privileges and advantages made in earlier agreements but to stimulate their industry and carefulness in agriculture, even more we most graciously want to grant them the following addition advantages1. We confirm the religious freedom which was promised to them and their descendants so that they might practise unhindered their tenets and customs. Also we grant most graciously that, when the occasion demands it in court, their verbal yes or no be accepted as valid in place of an oath. wwbf bfw esbfbfs aybf bfba nbf kcbf bfuk!. We confirm their possession of the specified sixty-five dessjatin of arable land per family as incontestable and inheritable by their descendants in perpetuity. But we forbid anyone regardless of circumstances to cede, sell or deed even the smallest part of it to an outsider without special permission of the authorities set over him.. To all Mennonites already residing in Russia, as well as those who decide to settle here in the future, we grant permission to build factories or carry on any other useful trade, as well as to join guilds and corporations, not only in their own districts but also in cities and towns throughout the whole country.4. According to the right of ownership, we permit the Mennonites to enjoy any and every use of their land, also to fish and brew beer and corn whiskey, not only for their own use but also for retails sale on their own land.5. On the land belonging to the Mennonites we forbid outsiders to build inns, taverns and other public houses and the leaseholders to sell whiskey without their permission. wwea eaw eseaeas ayea eaba nea kcea eauk;6. We assure them with our royal word that no Mennonite neither those that have already settled here nor those who plan to settle in this country nor their children and descendants will at any time be forced to do military or civil service without their own wish to do so.7. We exempt all their villages and homes in their colonies from all types of quartering (with the exception when troops march through in which case the regulations for quartering are to be observed), supplying relay horses, and crown labours. In return for this it is their duty to maintain roads, bridges and the mail coach stations in their district.8. We grant most graciously to all Mennonites and their descendants complete freedom to dispose of their well-earned personal property as each sees fit. However, if one of them after having paid all his debts wishes to leave the country with his possessions, he must pay in advance the taxes for three years on the property he acquired in Russia, the amount to be declared dutifully and conscientiously by him and the village authorities. The same procedure is to be followed with the estate of a deceased whose heirs and relatives happen to reside in another country. In addition, the villages are given the right to appoint guardians according to their custom over the property of minor orphans. wwag agw esagags ayag agba nag kcag aguk. We confirm the tax exemptions granted to them for a period of ten years, and also extend the same to those Mennonites who intend to settle in New Russia in the future.After completing an investigation it was evident that, because of crop failures and diseases among their animals, they were in economic need and because of the crowded settlement in Chortitza it was decided to relocate some of their families. In consideration of their need, it was decided that those who stay on their land will have the exemption extended by five years and for ten years to those who are moved to a new settlement. But, when this period has expired, every family will pay for each of its sixty-five dessjatin fifteen kopeks per year but it is exempted from all other taxes.The loan that was extended to them is to be repaid at the end of the above-mentioned free years, those who stay on their farm in ten annual payments and those who move, in twenty years.10. In conclusion of this our imperial charter granted to the Mennonites, in which we have guaranteed their privileges and advantages, we command all our legal authorities not to hinder them in their peaceful enjoyment of the privileges given to them but in all cases let them experience your help and protection

Please note that this sample paper on Reason for the emigration of Mennonites from Russia to Manitoba during the 1870s. is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on Reason for the emigration of Mennonites from Russia to Manitoba during the 1870s., we are here to assist you. Your persuasive essay on Reason for the emigration of Mennonites from Russia to Manitoba during the 1870s. will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.

Order your authentic assignment and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!

Cit Let

If you order your custom term paper from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on Cit Let. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality Cit Let paper right on time.

Out staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in Cit Let, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your Cit Let paper at affordable prices!

As a citizen of Kennewick for twelve (1) years, I believe a certain ordinance should be reconsidered. This ordinance makes it illegal to fire a paintball, BB, or pellet gun inside city limits. I enjoy responsible shooting of targets with these devices. A paintball, BB, or pellet gun cannot cause serious damage or injury (if and damage or injury) if used responsibly and according to safe gun handling guidelines. Any sportsman knows that BB and pellet guns are not to be aimed or pointed at people, and that paintball guns are only to be shot at people wearing the proper protective wear and from a safe distance. I know these rules are not always followed, but those people who choose not to abide by them are a minority. I believe that the minority should be punished for being irresponsible and that the majority should be allowed to enjoy the privilege of pursuing a sport which they enjoy.

I like the way the moon shines on the river at night and the way the Iron Monkey Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon look at the world. The make cool noises, and the stars twinkle down on the Euphrates. It is very cool how this works, as the romantics use plasma rifles to kill the flood who in turn use plasma pistols to kill the Covenant. If the Iron Monkey Hidden Tiger Crouching Droad dheria ihria ;lipeian trjeisna ft trojan horse kdnak the trojans ate the ghorese

To send this Type this

Smiley -) or ) Open-mouthed smiley -D or d

Surprised smiley -O or o Smiley with tongue out -P or p

Winking smiley ;-) or ;)

Sad smiley -( or (

Confused smiley -S or s

Disappointed smiley -| or |

Crying smiley (

Embarrassed smiley -$ or $

Hot smiley (H) or (h)

Angry smiley -@ or @

Angel smiley (A) or (a)

Devil smiley (6)

Don't tell anyone smiley -#

Baring teeth smiley 8o|

Nerd smiley 8-|

Sarcastic smiley ^o)

Secret telling smiley -

Sick smiley +o(

I don't know smiley ^)

Thinking smiley -)

Party smiley o)

Eye-rolling smiley 8-)

Sleepy smiley |-)

Coffee cup (C) or (c)

Thumbs up (Y) or (y)

Thumbs down (N) or (n)

Beer mug (B) or (b)

Martini glass (D) or (d)

Girl (X) or (x)

Boy (Z) or (z)

Left hug ({)

Right hug (})

Vampire bat -[ or [

Birthday cake (^)

Red heart (L) or (l)

Broken heart (U) or (u)

Red lips (K) or (k)

Gift with bow (G) or (g)

Red rose (F) or (f)

Wilted rose (W) or (w)

Camera (P) or (p)

Film Strip (~)

Cat (@)

Dog (&)

Telephone receiver (T) or (t)

Light bulb (I) or (i)

Musical eighth note (8)

Half-moon (S)

Star ()

Envelope (E) or (e)

Clock (O) or (o)

MSN Messenger icon (M) or (m)

Snail (sn)

Black Sheep (bah)

Dinner plate (pl)

Bowl (||)

Pizza (pi)

Soccer Ball (so)

Auto (au)

Airplane (ap)

Umbrella (um)

Island with palm tree (ip)

Computer (co)

Mobile Phone (mp)

Stormy (st)

Lightning (li)

Money (mo

Please note that this sample paper on Cit Let is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on Cit Let, we are here to assist you. Your cheap custom college paper on Cit Let will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.

Order your authentic assignment and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!

Cry the Beloved Country

If you order your essay from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on Cry the Beloved Country. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality Cry the Beloved Country paper right on time.

Out staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in Cry the Beloved Country, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your Cry the Beloved Country paper at affordable prices! The novel, Cry, the Beloved Country, written by Alan Paton, and the short story "By thewaters of Babylon", written by Steven Vincent Benet, have many similarities anddifferences. The literacy elements in both stories that are similar are Characters, Conflict,and Theme. The literacy elements in both stories that are different are setting and plot.

Order College Papers on Cry the Beloved Country

Thought both stories are different I learned that everything is an adventure you shouldlearn from.

The literacy elements that are similar in both stories is characters, conflict, andtheme. The characters in the stories are both priests. In the story "By the waters ofBabylon", at a young age the boy realizes he will become a priest. A quote thatemphasizes this is, " he knew that I was truly his son and would be a priest in my time.The main character in Cry, the Beloved Country is a very respectful priest. This is shownwhen a little girl delivers a letter to him, "The small child open the door, carefully like onewho is afraid top open carelessly the door of so important of a house.

The conflict is in similar in both stories being Man vs. Himself. In the story "By theWater of Babylon the main character has conflict with himself to go "safe" west or to goeast and sees what journey may come. He said, "My heart was troubled about going east,yet I know that I must go. In the book Cry, The Beloved Country, Kumalo struggles withhimself either to go to Johannasburg , where his sister is ill or to stay home. A quote hesays to his wife that shows his conflict reads "This is a journey I have been fearing of foryears".

The Literacy elements that are different in both stories is setting and plot. Cry, TheBeloved Country takes place in South Africa in a city called Johannesburg. Johannesburgis a corrupt city were segregation and poverty is everywhere. Any one who goes toJohannesburg never returns people say. A quote from the book that is an perfect exampleof this city is "When people go to Johannesburg Please note that this sample paper on Cry the Beloved Country is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on Cry the Beloved Country, we are here to assist you. Your persuasive essay on Cry the Beloved Country will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.

Order your authentic assignment and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!