The Technological Advance of Religion Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

The Technological Advance of Religion - Essay Example As people gain more technology they gain also a sense of independent conceit that there is no need to depend on God for provision, or to look to God for answers. The more people discover and learn about the things that surround them the more they take for granted they can control and be in charge of these things. Before the time science saved lives through medicine and people were instilled with a God complex because of such triumphs, there was a time when people had less answers, but more certainty; the type of assurance that came from the heart and not from experiments. The era of life lived with more emphasis placed on spiritual meditation than rational inquisition. Before Christianity came onto the scene, paganism was the primary religion which practiced an earth based worship of all aspects of nature. There was a god of rain, a god of sun, a god of harvest, and many other gods they prayed to for prosperity. Polytheistic religion is a religion that believes in multiple gods as pa gans did. This practice was the result of the human need to explain what could not readily be understood in the absence of science. Phenomena such as weather and fertility were attributed to these different gods and could explain the instability in nature. The separate deities needed to be persuaded to provide for humanity, or pacified into not harming them. Polytheistic religions, therefore, had many customs and rituals intended to accomplish this. Worship practices of all sorts were designed, literally, to manipulate pagan gods into making the world habitable, granting its people success. It was also necessary for everyone to follow those practices, since even just one person apparently snubbing their idol might cause that idol to become angry and lash out or fail to provide some needed gift to all humanity. As religion developed, science did too. Because of the exalted nature of religion, questions regarding its validity, especially in its earliest days of expansion were unwelcom e. As science advanced in its expeditions however, more questions regarding the validity of religion arose. One thing religion and science have in common is that neither has all the answers. In religion that is because faith is the platform it stands on. Science in their criticisms and arguments of religion continuously fails to appreciate this. Religion acknowledges a creator, science strives to recreate and comes up short at times in its endeavors to do so. Like Darwin when he proposed his theory of evolution to describe the origin of our species, how we came to exist! Evolution can be briefly summarized in five stages. 1) Variation- there is variation in every population. 2) Competition- organisms compete for limited resources. 3) Offspring- organisms produce more offspring than can survive. 4) Genetics- organisms pass on genetic traits to offspring. 5) Natural selection- Organisms with the most beneficial traits are more likely to survive and reproduce. In every population a mut ation in the gene pool will cause a mutation in the development of the species resulting in a change of the species itself overtime. Survival of the fittest is a Darwin doctrine stating that the strongest will outperform the weaker for available resources such as food and habitat subjecting the weaker of its species to death. The more offspring you have, the more success for your genes to be passed down and to thrive in the specific environment. The claim Darwin makes from evolution suggests humans share its ancestry with apes. The theory of evoluti

The Ku Klux Klan Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

The Ku Klux Klan - Term Paper Example According to Newton (202); however, the activities were surpassed by growing neo – Nazi organizations in the United States in the 1990s and in the early 2000s. The Ku Klux Klan was basically based in the Southern states of America where they targeted the African Americans set free after the American Civil War. The Klan had never considered the former slaves as being free and they terrorized the African Americans to maintain their supremacy as well as to express their anger at the freedoms granted to these former slaves. The root cause for their actions was that although America experienced great economic prosperity after the Civil War, not much of the wealth generated filtered to the South and it was the racism, mixed with anger at their economic plight that inspired the activities of the Ku Klux Klan. The Klan was a violent organization and they burnt the churches of the African American population, murdered, raped and castrated those who they targeted and they were rarely ca ught because most senior law enforcers in the South were also high ranking Klan members or were sympathetic to its aims. According to Bullard (9), the earliest branch of the Ku Klux Klan was created in Pulaski, Tennessee in 1866 and most of its leaders had been previous members of the Confederate army in the Civil War. During the next two years after its founding, they tortured and killed African – Americans and those whites who were sympathetic to them. Immigrants, who the Klan blamed for the election of radical Republicans, were also targeted and between 1868 and 1870, the Ku Klux Klan was instrumental in the restoration of white rule in the states of North Carolina, Tennessee, and Georgia. West (110) states that the original objective of the Ku Klux Klan was to stop the African American people from voting so that white domination of the Southern states would be maintained. After all-white governments had been established in the South, this group continued to undermine the power of African Americans by attacking successful black businessmen and by stifling any attempt to form black protection groups such as trade unions. Since the Ku Klux Klan had achieved its main objective in the Southern states, by the end of 1871, the organization had practically disappeared. In addition, after its formation, the Klan quickly became a terrorist organization in the service of the Democratic Party and white supremacists and that its main goal was to destroy Congressional Reconstruction by either murdering blacks and some whites who were in active Republican politics or educating black children Gitlin (133). They burned churches and schools and drove thousands of people out of their homes and because local law enforcement representatives were incapable or reluctant to stop them, Congress approved the Force Bill in 1871 giving the Federal government the authority to take legal action against the Klan. Dedicated prosecutors managed to win convictions and break up Klan activity and although relatively few people were punished, federal action did put an end to Klan activities, at least for a while. Maclean (23) states that the Ku Klux Klan was reorganized in 1915 by William Simmons, a preacher who had been influenced by the book The Ku Klux Klan written in 1905 by Thomas Dixon and a film version of the book,

The Natural And Human Sciences

The Natural And Human Sciences Our knowledge in the natural and human sciences has evolved significantly over the past centuries. This can be primarily attributed to disagreement within these fields of science. Disagreement can be understood in different ways; it may be over the logic of the arguments or the value of evidence presented or it may also refer to differences among scientists or differences amongst scientists and society. The disagreements may be over in their views of scientific paradigms, assumptions or research methods. However, just because an individuals idea may be rejected, or disagreed upon, in the marketplace of scientific ideas, it does not mean that one shies away utterly defeated. Instead, one can try to increase their efforts to uncover more evidence, or attempt to formulate an experiment that can provide a more rigorous test of the ideas, or try to make a slight modification to the discarded idea to provide an improved fit to the evidence. Through these methods of counteracting disagreeme nts in science, new knowledge or evidence is likely to be discovered. Hence, the knowledge issue that will be focused on in this essay is as follows: To what extent are disagreements useful in the creation of knowledge in the natural and human sciences?  [1]   The generation of new knowledge in the natural sciences can be notably credited to disagreement. For example, before the theories of plate tectonics and continental drift were proposed, geologists assumed that the Earths major features were fixed. Additionally, most Europeans thought that a Biblical Flood played a major role in shaping the Earths surface.  [2]   However, in the early 1900s, Alfred Wegener opposed the logic of these hypotheses and formulated his own hypothesis that a single landmass called Pangaea split up about 40 million years ago, and the resulting continents eventually drifted to their present locations. In contrast to the previous hypotheses mentioned, Wegener provided evidence to support his theory stating that fossils of the same species were found in two different continents, rock sequences were nearly the same on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean and geological structures matched up with one another suggesting that Pangaea once existed. The opposition of Wegners views against the previous beliefs on why the Earth is shaped as it is has proved to be useful in generating new knowledge. His theory of Pangaea has acted as a root on which scientists have branched out to explore. It has revolutionized our understanding of Earth and has provided explanations to questions that scientists had speculated upon for centuries suc h as why earthquakes and volcanic eruptions occur in very specific areas around the world, and how and why great mountain ranges formed.  [3]   In addition to Geology, another natural science where disagreement is beneficial in creating new knowledge is in Biology. For instance, in my IB Biology HL course, it is required to create and conduct your own independent research paper. In investigating the effects of different concentrations of coffee on heart rate, I recognized that I was not getting the desired results, as there was no effect on the subjects heart rate a few minutes after they drank the diluted coffee. However, it has been scientifically proven that coffee, no matter what concentration, will ultimately have an effect on ones heart rate.  [4]  The discrepancy between the data I collected and the already proven science allowed me to learn two things. Firstly, the reason I was not getting the desired results was because any liquid ingested within the body needs about 10-15 minutes to be absorbed by the respective organs hence why the heart rate had not increased. Finally, I was also able to create a new scientif ic method hence demonstrating the new knowledge I acquired through the disagreement of my initial data and previous scientific knowledge. Despite these situations, having demonstrated that disagreement plays a strong role in the formation of knowledge in the natural sciences, this does not hold true for all circumstances. Take, for instance, Global Warming. For the past years, there has been an on-going debate about the causes of Global Warming and whether or not it is man-made. The small percentage of scientists who believe that man-made actions are not the sole cause for this epidemic have used logic to appeal to those who disagree. Their points include that there is measurement technology bias, meaning that improvements in our ability to accurately count or measure a phenomenon is mistaken for a real underlying change in the frequency of the phenomenon. This means that we cannot categorize weather patterns as normal or abnormal since we only have a short history of measurements to support these claims and finally climate is an extremely complex system with many variables changing simultaneously. Even with an appeal to logic, the majority of scientists still disagree with this theory. Therefore, this illustrates that although there was disagreement amongst the views of scientists, it was not useful in creating accepted knowledge as the majority refuted over these claims.  [5]   Similar to the natural sciences, disagreement plays an equally significant role in making new knowledge in the human sciences. Psychology, for example, is divided into many subfields like biological, cognitive and social psychology due disagreements on how to best explain human behaviour. Nevertheless, having these different explanations provides us with more of an understanding of the factors that influence behaviour and consequently aid the pursuit of knowledge regarding human behaviour.  [6]   Furthermore, in the human science of Economics, dispute in the explanation of how economies function led to the formation of two schools of economic thought, namely Keynesian economics and Laissez-faire economics. Keynesian economics holds the belief that in order for an economy to flourish and function, it is necessary that there be a combination of involvement from the government and the private sector. On the other hand, free-market economists believe in the hands off policy where there is no government intervention.  [7]   These two ways of economic thought have allowed me, as an HL Economics student, to gain an understanding of economic concepts. For instance, I realize that although a laissez-faire economy may be beneficial in that it allows an economy to naturally reach equilibrium without interference, an economy with government intervention will ensure that the economy is stabilized with no hyperinflation and a relatively high employment rate thus, making Keynesian economics the more suitable economic choice. Hence, this shows that due to the disagreement between economists on the explanation of how economies function, I was able to create new knowledge as by analysing the pros and cons of each school of thought, I came to the decision that Keynesian economics is the more logical economic choice.  [8]   Although disagreement in the human sciences has illustrated to be useful in the generation of knowledge, there are also times where it has not. For example, in 1996, Mark Rosenweig conducted an experiment on rats to see the effects of enriched environments on rats brains. Despite there being disagreement on the ethical considerations of the use of rats in the experiment, it was conducted anyways. The results from this experiment showed that rats exposed to enriched environments had greater dendritic connections, meaning a greater formation of knowledge compared to the rats that were put in dim cages with no toys or enriching activities. However, despite showing that enriched environments could benefit knowledge acquisition, this experiment was conducted on rats. Therefore, it was not useful in that it could not be applied to humans as the physiology of humans and rats are completely different. Furthermore, this shows that while there was disagreement against the use of rats in Rosenw eigs experiment, it did not create useful knowledge, as the results from the actual experiment were hard to relate to the brains of humans.  [9]   Disagreement has aided the pursuit of knowledge in the natural and human sciences; however, many disagreements are based on ways of knowing like sense perception, reason, language and emotion. For example, even though Einstein and Bohr were able to perceive the data of the double slit experiment in the same way their interpretation of this perception was different due to fundamentally different assumptions regarding quantum physics. Consequently their explanations of the double slit experiment findings were different, even to the point that the terminology they used was different. At times the debate between the two physicists got quite emotional. Einsteins view that God does not play dice annoyed Bohr to the point that he finally responded to Einstein asking him not to tell God what to do. Consequently, disagreements within areas of knowledge are often rooted in differences in ways of knowing.  [10]   While writing this essay I have become increasingly aware of the fallibility and limitations of human knowledge. Even theories that seem most unshakable are changed due to new discoveries. Sometimes these changes result paradigm shifts within an area of knowledge. Subsequently, to ensure progress in knowledge, one should, as a knower, remain both open minded and critical. By entertaining ideas that may initially seem impossible to accept, it is possible to push the limits of ones understanding. Consequently, without disagreement in science, or any area of knowledge, progress would not be possible.

The Loss of the Ideal in A Tale of a Tub Essay -- Tale of a Tub Essays

A Tale of a Tub is a mass of text seemingly thrown together with the purpose of deliberately confusing the reader, but its digressions upon digressions cannot mask the inevitable theme of loss, which is ultimately found in all of Swift's works. The satire holds the present against an ideal of past perfection, and the comparison always shows the modern to be lacking. The church adulterates religion; moderns, the ancients; critics, the author. The narrator of Swift’s text seems to believe that the moment a great work or idea is put forth, it can be pure, but will always degrade with time. Because it is impossible to return to this former state, there is a heavy sense of disappointment that weighs down the more transparent wit and humor. The entire tale could be nothing more than a joke, which is aimed at not only the moderns and the church, but the audience as well.1   But no matter how many quips or crude attacks Swift makes, the purpose of the story is not just to laugh at t he expense of others, but to mourn the fall of an ideal that can never exist again. It is impossible to return to an original source in the Tale because it seems as if the narrator holds a model of a linear time-line in his head. As time passes, the distance between each passing moment and the originating point must increase, and any attempt to return to the beginning must fail. Just as it is impossible for someone living in the eighteenth century to return to the first, a man who is taught to be a modern can never think exactly like an ancient. Because of this view, the narrator can almost be seen as a modern-day phenomenologist. This philosophy asserts the impossibility of observing any object as it actually is, since the viewer is separated from the obje... ...m must fall short of the original. And if his talent cannot be used to add to the glory of the classics, then it might as well be used to condemn the moderns. If all writing is ultimately a corruption of that which preceded it, as the narrator seems to believe, then it is better to write of something that is despised rather than revered. At times the Tale appears to be nothing more than a prank, due to all of the digressions and unintelligible passages that are inserted. Swift states that he is giving his readers exactly what they want, because mankind â€Å"receives much greater Advantage by being Diverted than Instructed,† and happiness â€Å"is a perpetual Possession of being well Deceived† (327, 351). Swift views this as the exact problem that is ruining current learning, and puts it under the readers’ nose to frustrate them with the same method they are promoting   

African Americans: Fighting for Their Rights Essay

There has always been a lot of discussion about the perception of African Americans in the media and how it affects their self-identity. It is easy to find examples of bias in portraying African Americans in the media. So what exactly is it that the media does to bring out these stereotypes, biases, and images that tend to stick with a lot of African Americans? The goal of this paper is to explore the different perceptions African Americans have gone through, how it has given them a sense of double consciousness on life, where the media image of African Americans that has stuck with them for so long can, and will go from here. According to the United States Census Bureau (2001), 12. 3% of all people reporting as one race reported they were â€Å"Black or African American†. This ethnic identity is now the second biggest minority group in the United States. It also refers to a group of people that has been in the United States for as long as it has existed. However, through the persecution of slavery, the austerity of segregation, and the continuing underlying prejudice, African Americans are still searching for their true identity. Just as children that were adopted tend to long for a true identity most of their lives, so are the circumstances of the African American. Stolen from their homeland and forced into slavery in a new country, African Americans were basically victims of identity theft. Although a lot of progress has been made in the way of an American identity for African Americans, a true identity has not yet been found. According to W. E. B DuBois (1903) â€Å"The history of the American Negro is the history of this strife—this longing to attain self-conscious manhood, to merge his double self into a better and truer self† (p.68). Many African Americans feel the same as W. E. B. Du Bois when he says, â€Å"After the Egyptian and Indian, the Greek and Roman, the Teuton and Mongolian, the Negro is a sort of seventh son, born with a veil, and gifted with second-sight in this American world – a world which yields him no true self-consciousness, but only lets him see himself through the revelation of the other world. † He also states, â€Å"One ever feels his twoness – an American, a Negro, two souls, two thoughts, two unreconciled arrives; two warring ideals in one dark body, whose dogged strength alone keeps it from being torn asunder. † A quick look at American history makes it easy to understand where this split identity stems from because Du Bois claims that African Americans were always forced to see things through â€Å"white† eyes only and not have a vision of their own. In an effort to rephrase Du Bois’ comment above, the terminology of â€Å"twoness† is really him trying to define double consciousness as a few different things: 1 the power that white stereotypes have on African American’s lives and also having that internal conflict between labeling themselves as African and American simultaneously. 2 it is a sense of awareness of one’s self along with the awareness of how others may perceive one. This in turn leads to conforming based on level of power, which is basically what occurred. PBS’ African American World Timeline (2004) says that there is a large history of not granting African Americans an identity. Before 1787, of course, African Americans were slaves and only thought of as property. In 1787 the U. S. Constitution was approved. It allowed for the continuation of the slave trade for another 20 years and claimed that a slave counted as three-fifths of a man for representation by the government. In 1865 some progress was gained when the Thirteenth Amendment was passed, outlawing slavery and creating a Freedmen’s Bureau to help out former slaves. Also in 1865 Union General, William Sherman issued a field order setting up 40-acre plots of land in Georgia, South Carolina, and Florida for African Americans to settle. But, in 1866, some all-white legislatures in the former Confederate states passed what were known as, â€Å"Black Codes† harshly cutting the freedom of African Americans and practically re-enslaving them. Since that time there has been some progression and also some difficulty for African Americans. Based on the history of the United States’ treatment of African Americans, it is easy to understand how they could struggle for their true identity. James Jones (1991) might say it best when he states, â€Å"Black personality is in part an adaptation to the political contours of racism. The conflict between the freedoms and rights of United States citizens is connected to the denial of freedom and rights that is the history of the African American presence in this country. If we view personality as the resultant of coping pattern and socialization directives, then black personality is, in part, the cumulative representation of the effects of racism over four centuries. It reflects over time, the effects of the form and structure racism takes, and comes to signal the nature of race relations at any point in time (p. 305). † This would lead to accepting of the fact that African Americans do, of course, have an identity, but a lot of the time it is dependent on the identity of White race at that time. Alain Locke (1925) explains the upward moving and upbeat side of African American identity: â€Å"In the last decade something beyond the watch and guard of statistics has happened in the life of the American Negro and the three norms who have traditionally presided over the Negro problem have a changeling in their laps. The Sociologist, The Philanthropist, the Race-leader are not unaware of the New Negro but they are at a loss to account for him. He simply cannot be swathed in their formulae. For the younger generation is vibrant with a new psychology; the new spirit is awake in the masses, and under the very eyes of the professional observers is transforming what has been a perennial problem into the progressive phases of contemporary Negro life. Could such a metamorphosis have taken place as suddenly as it has appeared to? The answer is no, not because the New Negro is not here, but because the Old Negro had long become more of a myth than a man. The Old Negro, we must remember, was a creature of moral debate and historical controversy. His has been a stock figure perpetuated as a historical fiction partly in innocent sentimentalism, partly in deliberate reactions. The Negro himself has contributed his share to this through a sort of protective social mimicry forced upon him by the adverse circumstances of dependence. So for generations in the mind of America, the Negro has been more of a formula than a human being –a something to be argued about, condemned or defended, to be â€Å"kept down,† or â€Å"in his place,† or â€Å"helped up,† to be worried with or worried over, harassed or patronized, a social bogey or a social burden. The thinking Negro even has been induced to share this same general attitude, to focus his attention on controversial issues, to see himself, in the distorted perspective of a social problem. His shadow, so to speak, has been more real to him than his personality. Through having had to appeal from the unjust stereotypes of his oppressors and Traducers to those of his liberators, friends and benefactors he has subscribed to the traditional positions from which his case has been viewed. Little true social or self-understanding has or could come from such a situation†¦ †¦Until recently, lacking self-understanding, we have been almost as much of a problem to ourselves as we still are to others. But the decade that found us with a problem has left us with only a task. The multitude perhaps feels as yet only a strange relief and a new vague urge, but the thinking few know that in the reaction the vital inner grip of prejudice has been broken. It does not follow that if the Negro were better known he would be better liked or better treated. But mutual understanding is basic for any subsequent cooperation and adjustment. The effort toward this will at least have the effect of remedying in large part what has been the most unsatisfactory feature of our present stage of race relationships in America, namely the fact that the more intelligent and representative elements of the two race groups have at so many points got quite out of vital touch with one another (p. 631). † Even in the premier times of African American identity there were still questions to be answered. Now those questions lead to progressive thinking like Locke’s, â€Å"middle of the road† thinking and â€Å"extremist† thinking. An example of the term â€Å"middle-of-the-road† thinking can be seen in a post by Malcolm Frierson (2004) to a discussion board using the topic of what label to give African Americans. He says: â€Å"It is the right of the individual to be self-defining. Black is a color, not a term for a race of people in this millennium. The word was made beautiful and strong in the 60s and beyond for obvious reasons. That effort was admirable and effective, but now fairly done. It is time to move forward. † The term African American linguistically puts the race on more comfortable ground. It doesn’t seem right or fair to look at four men and call one Italian, one Native American, one Chinese, and the other â€Å"black. † â€Å"Whites† don’t seem to have this concern obviously because they sit at the top of this name issue. The whole system was constructed to glorify the â€Å"whites† (the imperialists) and belittle the â€Å"blacks (the subjects). † Also, many â€Å"whites† and â€Å"blacks† together, beg for an end to this issue because they claim, â€Å"we’re all Americans. † But if we are actually honest with each other, nobody while in contemporary American society, when asked for their race or ethnicity, will never be able to simply label them self as simply â€Å"American. † There will always have to be a distinguishing label put upon everyone. Why is it that â€Å"blacks† have to go through this labeling issue more than any other American subgroup? Asian Americans, Italian Americans, and Filipino Americans often become Asians, Italians, and simply Filipino without ridicule or persecution (Asians further become Chinese, Japanese, Taiwanese, and others). A possible answer to this would be that we all identify with our most dominant ancestral line or native country – German, Spanish, Portuguese, Jamaican, what have you. It should come before the understood â€Å"American† part. But again, we should respect an individual’s rights to be self-defining. One â€Å"black† problem could be that a lot of people really haven’t been to Africa and are in a sense kind of ashamed about or tend to disregard that fact possibly feeling a sense of ignorance in that area. The term African should be proudly used along with the term American just as other foreign groups use their places of origin along with their American status. Unfortunately this viewpoint is just a common middle-ground between the two poles. The other pole is a belief best supported by the All African People’s Revolutionary Party. They say, â€Å"African People born and living in over 113 countries around the world are [one group of] people, with one identity, one history, one culture, one nation and one destiny. We have one common enemy. We suffer from disunity, disorganization and ideological confusion. And we have only one scientific and correct solution, Pan-Africanism: the total liberation and unification of Africa under scientific socialism. † They feel that African people that have been born or are living outside of Africa are intentionally kept from the knowledge of Africa and her achievements through European capitalism. They also feel that people inside of Africa are tricked into living in separate countries because of the â€Å"divide and rule† tactic used by Europeans which basically means it forces large concentrations of power (people) into smaller units of power to constrain them from gaining more power as the larger unit. It is this pole that receives the most voice in the media and also probably this pole which leads to the bias media outlets against African Americans. Perhaps the earliest example of media bias against African Americans, whether intentional or not, came from 19th Century naturalists that divided mankind into Caucasians, Mongolians, Malayans, Ethiopians and (native) American races. The Caucasians were defined as wise, the Mongolians crafty, and the Ethiopians/negro unintelligent. This bias is blunt and disrespectful, but possibly not hateful in intent back in the day. Today our media comes from less than ten gigantic media conglomerates in the United States. Salim Muwakkil (1999) mentions that, â€Å"Virtually all of our information, our cultural narratives, and our global images derive from institutions whose major goal is to pay handsome dividends to stockholders (p. 2). † Which in other words the media doesn’t really care what they say even if it sounds hateful. If it sells and gets publicity, it’s a hit. He also points out that black-owned media operations are becoming increasingly rare as much larger corporations continue to buy out more places and more property. Muwakkil’s fear is that the mainstream will continue to alter the image of African Americans without challenge to the point that their â€Å"anti-black† tendencies will be encouraged and sustained. Muwakkil makes a very strong point when he states the Kerner Commission’s findings: â€Å"The Kerner Commission (formally known as the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders), which was charged with finding the reasons for the long-hot-summer rebellions, had concluded that the United States was headed dangerously toward ‘two societies, one black, and one white, separate and unequal. ’ It blamed the urban unrest on persistent racial discrimination and a historical legacy of disadvantage, but it also singled out the nation’s news media for censure. The media treated African Americans as invisible, the commission concluded, and failed to communicate to white audiences â€Å"a feeling for the difficulties and frustrations of being a Negro in the United States (p. 1). † In the book, The Black Image in the White Mind: Media and Race in America, Robert Entman and Andrew Rojecki (2000) point out some surprising statistics from studies done on American television. While Black actors are now more frequently appearing in films, it’s a debatable question as to how well they’re being represented. In the top movies of 1996 representation of African American Females and Caucasian females was drastically different where statistics from differences in using profanity, to physical violence were very often a difference of 70% or more between the 2 races with African Americans being in the higher percentage of the two for those certain areas. Television ads now show, hidden patterns of differentiation and distance pertaining to African Americans. Not surprisingly, for instance, Blacks do not touch Whites in the majority of television ads, but as opposed to Whites, they rarely even touch each other, expressing a slight message assuming that Black skin would be taboo. A ranking of racial preference is implanted within the casting of commercials. Network news also tends to place a â€Å"ghetto† label or more urban image on African Americans. Increasingly, African Americans appear mostly in crime, sports and entertainment stories. Rarely are Blacks shown making an important contribution to the serious business of the nation. The exception of blacks rarely being shown in a positive fashion contributing to the nation would be President Obama, which will hopefully turn the stage for this image stereotype. Unfortunately however, that negative image is not the only blunt indication of a media stereotype. It is noticed by a lot of different people that African American athletes tend to receive a bad representation by the media, pointing out that when they get into any level of trouble, it is reported significantly more and also perceived in a much different way than when White athletes behave in the same manner or worse. It also is sometimes apparent that sportscasters tend to point out solely the athletic abilities of African American athletes in contrast to their tendency to point out the intelligence and savvy of White athletes. It is a known stereotype for quarterbacks on football teams for example, people perceive this position to demand a much more mental capacity and take a much more conscious effort as opposed to other positions on the team. Therefore the stereotype has often been viewed as teams primarily consisting of white quarterbacks. This tends to lead people to believe that black athletes achieve greatness by some coincidence or by simply their natural physical makeup instead of just assuming they are talented and hard working. There are several more examples of media bias against African Americans and there are far too many to speak on individually. Ultimately the point that is trying to be made is that there is a high level of publicity and strong case for media bias against African Americans. Any actor or famous person for that matter will almost always tell you that no publicity means bad publicity. It is logical then, to see the media (whether its biased or not) as a great tool for providing a voice to the African American community. It is also logical to say that a more biased media representation gives African Americans more publicity as Americans simply love bad press because â€Å"dirt† on other people sells, and the media has never cared about ones feelings if it means for them to make money. Ultimately, where I see this issue going from here has everything to do with President Obama. With the world-wide publicity he received for his changing of history for our country, I really feel this will open up many doors into the media for African Americans to have their voice, and create and defend a sense of identity that is much more positive than any other that has been labeled upon them. Obama is the best thing that has happened to African American media and just them as humans because he is what America needs to not only fix the economic and other issues in this country but most importantly bring the people of different colors together even closer than ever before to becoming one country where everyone is separate in color, but equal in representation and voice. Works Cited Du Bois, W. E. B. The Souls of Black Folk. Chicago: A. C. McClurg & Co. ; [Cambridge]:University Press John Wilson and Son, Cambridge, U. S. A., 1903; Bartleby. com,1999. P. 68. Entman, R. M. and Andrew R.. (2000). The Black Image in the White Mind: Media andRace in America. University of Chicago Press. Frierson, M. (2004) Black, black, or African American? Feedback Poynter OnlineRetrieved May 10, 2009 from http://www. poynter. org/article_feedback/article_feedback_list. asp? id=51320 Fudjud, D. (2003) Black, black, or African American? Feedback Poynter OnlineRetrieved May 11, 2009 fromhttp://www. poynter. org/article_feedback/article_feedback_list. asp? id=51320 Jones, J. (1991). â€Å"The Politics of Personality: Being Black in America. † In ReginaldJones (ed. ) Black Psychology 3rd Edition, 305-318. Locke, A. (1925) Enter the New Negro. A hypermedia edition of the March 1925 SurveyGraphic Harlem Number Retrieved May 12, 2009 fromhttp://etext. lib. virginia. edu/harlem/LocEnteF. html Muwakkil, S. (1999). Corporate Media, Alternative Press, and African Americans Media Alliance, Retrieved May 11, 2009 fromhttp://mediaalliance2. live. radicaldesigns. org/article. php? id=535 PBS. (2002) African American World Timeline. Retrieved May 11, 2009 fromhttp://www. pbs. org/wnet/aaworld/timeline/early_01. html U. S. Census Bureau (2001) Overview of Race and Hispanic Origin. Census 2000Website Retrieved May 11, 2009 from http://factfinder. census. gov/servlet/ThematicMapFramesetServlet? _bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-tm_name=ACS_2007_3YR_G00_M00628&-ds_name=ACS_2007_3YR_G00_&-_MapEvent=displayBy&-_dBy=040. Woods, K. M. (1995) An Essay on a Wickedly Powerful Word Poynter Online RetrievedMay 11, 2009 from http://www. poynter. org/content/content_view. asp? id=5603.

Secession of the South: Causes for Tension

Throughout the 1840’s and 1850’s a growing tension developed between the Northern and Southern states of America. That tension was primarily focused on the existence of slavery in the Southern states. Most Northern states had abolished slavery by 1850 and made a promise to the people to end slavery completely. They wanted the South to begin to become similar to the North, and to live under the concept of free labor, and not rely on slavery for productivity. The resentment for the interference of the North angered southerners because they felt that it was not the place of the federal government to interfere.Ever since the American Revolution sectional differences arose, the first being those favoring greater states rights and those favoring greater federal rights. Ever since the Revolution more and more dissimilarities arose between the North and the South due to differences in modernization and societal development. These different ideals caused tensions between the two sections and difficulties in staying together as a single union. The Southern ways of life were being targeted and altered by the North’s inconsiderate decisions of their societies foundation, though the North had a strong basis.The southern secession in 1860 was in direct result of the inability for the North and South to cooperate and coexist, and was the only possible alternative, in the minds of the southerners, for the different methods of living to remain. There were many aspects that varied among the North and South states that lead to the Civil War and among these were economic, social and political differences. Economic and social divergences between the North and the South were one of the most prominent factors leading to Southern secession.The Southern economy was heavily supported on cotton, due to Eli Whitney’s invention of the Cotton Gin, which made cotton extraordinarily profitable for most southern plantation owners. The southerner’s focus shift ed from all other previous crops to cotton, but cotton still required labor to be taken from the fields. Slavery became an institution that, in a sense, was the foundation for southern economy because of the fact that it was an inexpensive and vastly available labor source. Completely opposing southern society was that of the North, which was an industrial based economy instead of an agricultural one.The North utilized the raw materials and turned them into finish goods, making slavery neither an immediate necessity nor a foundation for their economy. The economic attitudes that differentiated the North and the South were exceedingly dissimilar and there was not a great deal flexibility for change. The southern reliance on slavery for labor and the northern perception of the institution as cruel and inhumane, were conflicts that challenged the southerners’ way of life and arose much tension between the two.Social differences between the North and the South coincided with thei r economic differences. The South, being agriculturally based could not relate and could not be related to by the North. The North experienced industrialization and drastically modernized, but the South continued with the traditional plantation system and strict social order it had began with, creating the lack of connection between the two due to two completely polar opposite societies. The North’s attitude towards the South was perceived as the attacking of another societies lifestyle and existence.With the limitations on the expansion of slavery, the growing abolitionist movement in the north and the election of Abraham Lincoln, secession was the only way to escape the North’s condemnation of the South as a whole. States rights versus federal rights, was a problem that arose from the time of the Revolution, a problem that undermined the union of the north and the south. After independence from Great Britain was acquired, the issue of states rights versus federal rig hts was in need of a solution.The Articles of Confederation was the first government succeeding the Revolution, in which states rights were favored, and states were united under a weak confederation. Ultimately failing due to conflicts that developed within the nation, the United States Constitution was established which put power primarily in the hands of the federal government. The new form of government was not popular among many states because they felt that their own individual states rights were being disregarded and lost the ability to act autonomously.The Nullification Crisis, being one of the biggest conflicts, occurred when South Carolina attempted to void and not follow laws implemented by Congress if they were deemed unconstitutional by the state. This problem arose from the Tariff of Abominations, which taxed goods from Great Britain and disrupted the trade of cotton in exchange for manufactured goods. The southern economy was being threatened by the new ideas of the no rth, enraging southerners that the north was abusing the power they had over the country as a whole.The Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 was an addition to the compromise of 1850, stating that if a slave escapes and flees into another state, being free or slave, the return of said slaves was mandatory. The North, being for the most part anti-slavery, defied the Fugitive Slave Act and harbored escaped slaves without returning them (Northern Sate Defies Fugitive State Act, 1). The inability for the North to understand the situation of the South and the South to understand the northern way of thinking added more and more tension to the already unstable union of the two.Western territorial expansion was a major problem among pro-slavery and anti-slavery proponents. The immense amount of land attained from the Mexican war and the Louisiana Purchase was beneficial for the completion of the United States but the slavery issue was only worsened. In 1820, to lessen the tension without creating any hasty conflicts, the Missouri Compromise was passed to decide whether new states added to the Union from the Louisiana Purchase would be slave or free states. The agreement stated, frankly, that states that were admitted to the south were slave states and those of the north were free states.In 1850, after the Mexican war the question arose again whether states would be free or slave states and this time solution was different than the Missouri compromise. The Compromise of 1850 was a bill that clarified the controversies that came with the New Mexico territory and did not follow the aforementioned Missouri compromise. James C. Calhoun, in reaction to the Compromise stated, â€Å"that the agitation of the subject of slavery would, if not prevented†¦ end in disunion† (A Dying Statesman Speaks out Against the Compromise of 1850, 1).The southern pride in their societal and economic structure openly accepted from the beginning that if slavery remains the issue, then secessio n remains the solution. In 1854 the Kansas-Nebraska Act was passed, which repealed the Missouri Compromise and stated that to decide whether these new territories would be free or slave, popular sovereignty among the settlers would be the ultimate decision. The passing of the law was to settle all unfairness and let the people decide, but the law was taken advantage of by pro-slavery Missourians.Kansas immediately was filled with Missourians who wanted to ensure that Kansas was in favor of slavery and intended to do so by increasing the pro-slavery concentration there. Northerners, desiring slavery to be banned and abolished, did the same to ensure that the pro-slavery Missourians did not make Kansas a slave state (Free State Convention, 1). The accumulation of angry pro-slavery southerners and anti-slavery northerners in Kansas resulted in open warfare in the city of Lawrence, Kansas (Kansas Begins to Bleed, 3).This physical conflict, â€Å"Bleeding Kansas†, over the section al differences of the North and South defined the division of the United States as a whole. The Election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860 resulted in the immediate secession of the many southern states, and the formation of the Confederate states of America. Lincoln’s statement â€Å" I believe this government cannot endure permanently half-slave and half-free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved – I do not expect the house to fall – but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all of the other.Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it†¦ or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become alike lawful states, old as well new – North as well as South† (Abraham Lincoln, A House Divided, 1). Stated straightforwardly by the president, Lincoln addressed the issue of slavery and sectional differences by stating that either slavery will be abolished and put into extinction or will be an institution in the North and the South, because â€Å" a house divided against it self cannot stand† (Abraham Lincoln, A House Divided, 1).Abraham Lincoln was perceived by the south as a Republican that would further limit states rights and therefore, acting as the final catalyst, forced South Carolina to secede from the Union. Slavery was not the reason that the American Civil War was fought, but it was an underlying area of focus. Slavery was an institution that was much less appealing to northerners but crucially essential for southerners. The northern intent was to completely abolish slavery but could not completely do so immediately due to the southern dependence on the institution.Southerners knew that if slavery was not permitted to expand with the countries borders then the institution could not progress and would fade away and taking along with it the southern way of life. The tensions arose from the belief that the northerners were dominating the South, and the l ast resort of the southern states, after countless attempts to coexist, was to disaffiliate and form an independent union in which they could live as they leased with no repercussions. The initial and overall conflict for the actual war between the North and the South were the issue of federalism versus anti-federalism and the lacking of a strong connection between the two, making them act as if they were separate entities. The Civil War was fought to keep the southern states from seceding and a consequence of the North’s winning was the abolition of the institution of slavery