World War I The Treaty Of Versailles - 2323 Words

World War I was a horrific experience for all of those involved because of the extremely high casualty rates. It was even more devastating for those that found themselves on the losing end of the war, including Germany. Post-war Germany went through a major socialist revolution. One which led to the formation of various communist political systems. Due to the establishment of the Weimar Republic, these politically radical arrangements faltered and dissipated. Soon after its enactment, the Weimar Republic was forced to sign a rigorously binding treaty by the Allied powers. This treaty that was imposed is known as the Treaty of Versailles. Among its ironclad constituents was a clause where Germany was required to accept complete†¦show more content†¦Their intentions included ridding the gaps between religious and social classes, learning how to be the ultimate leader, tolerance of violence against Jews, and discrimination against nations that gained territory at Germanys expense. These sub goals were meant to ensure a â€Å"culture† that depicted Nazism and national pride. Scholars for many years have argued that Nazi propaganda was a sure successor in gaining German support, but recently this argument has been scrutinized. After analyzing many articles and journals, it is clear that the third Reich had failed in their attempts to mobilize public opinion through propaganda. They were unable to mobilize the opinion of multiple social classes that Adolf Hitler was clearly aiming to sway, which results in failure according to his definition of success that will be later analyzed. Scholars including Nicholas O’Shaughnessy argue that the Nazi regime was successful in selling Nazism as the â€Å"Nazi brand† through propaganda. According to O’Shaughnessy, Hitler did not believe that Germany could win the war through military efforts alone, and were required to use propaganda to solicit support and aid in this victory (57). His propaganda was segmented, anti-Semitic, managed, creative, and steeped in manipulation. The propaganda that the Nazi Party propagated was flexible to the extent that they were able to maneuver successfully around any new event that were to surface by creating new arguments related to

A Dolls House Defending Noras Exit - 1112 Words

Elizabeth Horner THE 2300.A02 â€Å"A Doll’s House† Henrik Ibsen The door slam at the end of Henrik Ibsen’s â€Å"A Doll’s House† had been said to echo around the world. Nora leaving her husband was practically unheard of when this play was written in 1879, and it can be argued that this was a catalyst for the women’s rights movement. â€Å"A woman cannot be herself in the society of present day, which is an exclusively masculine society, with laws framed by men and with a judicial system that judges feminine conduct from a masculine point of view.† (Ibsen. 426) This was quite a progressive observation from Ibsen himself, it actually sounds more like a quote from the 1960s than the late 1870s. At that time it was more socially accepted†¦show more content†¦Ã¢â‚¬Å"Yes, so terribly frightened. Let me practice right now; there’s still time before dinner. Oh, sit down and play for me Torvald. Direct me. Teach me, the way you always have.† (Ibsen. 416) Nora does manipulate Helmer to get what she wants. She uses her power over her husband subtly, as women had to do in throughout time. Only recently have women been able to overtly vocalize what they want out of a relationship or marriage, or chose to marry for themselves. I don’t believe that Nora could not think for herself. She took a loan to help pay for a trip for her and her sick husband. She knew to forge her recently deceased father’s signature to obtain the loan. And she worked in secret from her husband to pay the loan back. She was naà ¯ve to think forgery was not a crime because it was done out of love for her husband, but she did it without thinking she would get caught. She would not have gotten caught if Krogstad didn’t get in his own trouble and proceed to blackmail her. So it makes sense that when she has her anagnorisis and realizes that her husband won’t give her the â€Å"miracle† of forgiving her and that she doesn’t even love him, that she chooses to leave him. The only part that does not make sense to me was that she left her husband and her children. As a mother I would never leave my child. But I was fortunate not to have my daughter until I was 28 years old, and had lived and experien ced much, and had plenty of time for self-discovery and selfishness. I

Difference Between Religion and Spirituality Free Essays

This paper draws from six published works that deal with psychological and scholarly research on religion and spirituality. The works vary in their definitions and use of the concepts and terminology of religion and spirituality. Hood et al. We will write a custom essay sample on Difference Between Religion and Spirituality or any similar topic only for you Order Now (2009) suggest that that social scientists have traditionally been able to make a distinction between religion and spirituality in their research. However, other psychologists contend that the definitions overlap. Therefore, the conceptual and operational definitions have been inconsistently used. This paper examines Hood et al. 2009) research in relationship to other works to suggest that a definitive definition of religion and spirituality should be developed and agreed upon to advance the science of religion. Keywords: religion, spirituality In order to explore the differences between religion and spirituality one must attempt to define these terms. However, religion and spirituality are complex concepts not easily or definitively definable; at least not universally. Their meanings have changed over the course of time. At times they have been used synonymously. Yet, at other times religion and spirituality are considered distinct concepts having no overlap. A Study on Religion and the Role of It on People and Media†¦. iframe class="wp-embedded-content" sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" style="position: absolute; clip: rect(1px, 1px, 1px, 1px);" src="https://phdessay.com/a-study-on-religion-and-the-role-of-it-on-people-and-media/embed/#?secret=K0B3VQCsPT" data-secret="K0B3VQCsPT" width="500" height="282" title="#8220;A Study on Religion and the Role of It on People and Media†¦.#8221; #8212; Free Essays - PhDessay.com" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no"/iframe Furthermore, religion and spirituality are sometimes viewed as if one encompasses the other. It seems to simply be a matter of opinion; who is defining religion, when and for what purpose. To compound this quandary, social Science research suggests that lay people, religious and psychological educators and researchers define religion and spirituality inconsistently. This makes it particularly difficult for the scientific world to even compare research findings on religion and or spirituality. Religion and spirituality are complex and diverse cultural phenomenon. Hood, Hill, and Spilka (2009), stated â€Å"†¦what one person is sure to call religious may be far removed from another person’s understanding, especially when we begin to analyze religion across traditions and cultures† (p. 7). Western societies (especially in the United States) in the not too distant past, typically define religion as an institutionalized set of beliefs and rituals about God that is experienced and or practiced collectively. Conversely, other regions of the world (including eastern Asia) may define religion as encompassing multiple Gods or even no Gods (e. . ungodly supernatural entities) (Hood, et al. , 2009). Hood et al. , (2009) contend that Americans now use the term spirituality in place of religion. Nelson (2009), agrees with Hood et al. , that spirituality has become a synonym for religion. According to Nelson (2009), religion traditionally referred to all aspects of a human’s search for and relationship to a divine or transcendent (something greater than ourselves). Using the terminology of religion and spirituality interchangeably may be common practice but it doesn’t mean that they mean the same things. Like religion, spirituality has been defined in a myriad of ways. In ancient times spirituality was associated with the Hebrew Christian traditions (Ottaway, 2003). Through the 19th century spirituality was often considered to be synonymous with spiritualism. Spiritualism referred to contact with spirits, the supernatural, and psychic phenomena (Nelson, 2009). Hence, spirituality was considered negatively up until the 21st century. According to Nelson (2009), presently â€Å"the term is often used to denote the experiential and personal side of our relationship to the transcendent or sacred† (p. ). Nelson suggests that the people who use this definition tend to view religion as a distinct narrow concept. They typically define religion as â€Å"the organizational structures, practices, and beliefs of a religious group†, (Nelson, 2009, p. 8). The rise in popularity of spirituality in the last two decades has exaggerated the distinction and or lack of distinction between r eligion and spirituality. Whereas, some modern Americans use the terms interchangeably, others (especially those who abhor mainstream religions and all they are associated with) do not. The latter group might prefer to say that they are â€Å"spiritual but not religious†, (Zinnbauer, et al. , 1997). Conversely, people who unknowingly embrace Epstein’s (1993, 1994) Cognitive-Experiential Self-Theory (CEST) may view spirituality and religion as distinct concepts that are nonetheless related (Hill, 1999). I believe that religion and spirituality can be two distinct concepts but that currently the line between the two is too blurry to be able to distinguish one from the other. One could experience religion without experiencing spirituality (e. g. teenager forced to attend church but merely going through the motions). On the other hand, one could also experience spirituality (e. g. a sense of â€Å"awe† in the presence of nature or enlightenment during meditation) in the absence of religion. Additionally, one could experience both spirituality and religion in the context of the other. For example, one could meditate communally with others in an insti tutional setting (typical of a religious experience) and experience spirituality. Another example is that one could attend church (typical of a religious experience) and meditate individually during the church service. At this point in time, religion and spirituality overlap in a plethora of ways. Each can have a reverence to a God, Gods, or a higher supernatural power or powers. Likewise, religion and spirituality can each have private, public, personal, communal, conscious, unconscious, tangible, intangible, subjective and objective components to them. One difference between spirituality and religion is that â€Å"spirituality does not require an institutional framework†, (Hood, et al, 2009, p. 11). Another difference is that religion does not require communal practices (e. g. an elderly invalid can religiously pray at home). My views on religion and spirituality are that of a layperson and an aspiring psychologist and are indubitably confusing. However, my view doesn’t seem to differ substantially from others (laypersons, religious professionals and scholars, and social science professionals and researchers), as a finite definition for religion or spirituality is nonexistent (Zinnbauer et al. , 2010; Hood et al. , 2009, Nelson, 2009). According to Hood et al. (2009), a traditional distinction exists between religion and spirituality in the research literature, therefore the two terms are not used synonymously. Hood et al. (2009) explains that spirituality is viewed as personal and psychological, while religion is viewed as institutional and sociological. Basically, Hood et al. (2009), contends that religion is steeped in tradition and institution, whereas, spirituality has to do with a person’s personal beliefs, values and behaviors. This definition seems to be consistent with how religion and spirituality were defined between the 19th and 21st centuries. However, it should be noted, that Hood et al. 2009) also, later state that â€Å"in fact it is safe to say that even we three authors of this text do not fully agree with each other about the meaning of these terms† (p. 11). To compound matters, other psychologists suggest that religion and spirituality are used inconsistently in the research literature. Zinnbauer et al, (1997) argue that although social scientists have attempted to define, study, and theorize about religion and spirituality, they have done so inconsistently . â€Å"Still, the ways in which the words are conceptualized an used are often inconsistent in the research literature† (p. 549). According to Bender (2007) religion has been associated with a formal or institutional system and expression of belief and practices that is corporate, public, and conscious in scholarly studies. Conversely, spirituality has been defined as individual, private and unconscious, (Bender, 2007). Due to the inconsistencies in the definitions and use of religion and spirituality a pilot study was conducted to ascertain how religious professionals defined and evaluated religion and spirituality. The 2006 study conducted by Corine Hyman and Paul Handal at Saint Louis University in Missouri included Imans, Ministers, Priests, and Rabbis. These religious experts were asked to conceptually define religion and spirituality and to identify if there were any overlaps between the two. The study findings indicate that there were overlaps between the two concepts. However, religion was defined in a traditional sense of objective, institutional and ritualistic and spirituality was defined as subjective, internal and divine or transcendent (Hyman Handal , 2006). Another study, this time conducted at the Maryland University, attempted to discern how lay people define religion and spirituality and how they make distinctions between the two. The participants in this study consisted of sixty-seven adults aged 61 to 93 who lived in three different retirement communities (Schlehofer, Omoto, A. M. , Adelman, 2008). The research findings indicate that the participants were better able to define religion concretely, than they were able to define spirituality. â€Å"In fact, some participants were not able to define spirituality at all†, (Schlehofer et al. , 2008). The afore mentioned studies illustrate that defining religion and spirituality is an ongoing task and not easily surmountable. This of course, makes the task of operationally defining religion and spirituality even harder. According to Bender (2007), spirituality is typically measured by asking questions about psychological well-being, experience, and self-identification; while religion is measured by questions about activities and doctrine. Although, many operational definitions have been developed and used to measure religion and spirituality, how does one actually know what one is measuring if the thing(s) that one is measuring is not clearly defined? CONCLUSIONS and Future Study: Ergo, in order to try to understand how religion and or spirituality affect all aspects of a person’s life, it is prudent for the scientific community to agree on what it is that they are actually researching. Once, the terms are defined and agreed upon, then they can operationally define each term. Only then, can psychologists more confidently conduct research and analysis to understand the true effects of religion and spirituality and make comparisons about those findings. ReferencesBender, C. (2007). Religion and Spirituality: History, Discourse, Measurement. Retrieved from http://religion.ssrc.org/reforum/Bender.pdf   Hill, P. C. (1999). Giving religion away: What the study of religion offers psychology. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 94(4), 229-249. Hood, R. W., Hill, P. C., Spilka, B. (2009). The Psychology of Religion, 2, 7-11. Hyman, C., Handal, P. J. (2006). Definitions and evaluation of religion and spirituality items by religious professionals: A pilot study. Journal of Religion and Health, 45(2), 264-282. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10943-006-9015-zNelson, J. M. (2009). Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality. Introduction to Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality. Retrieved from http://ucelinks.cdlib.org:8888/sfx_local/img/sfxmenu/dl_logo_1024.png Schlehofer, M. M., Omoto, A. M. and Adelman, J. R. (2008). How do â€Å"religion† and â€Å"spirituality† differ? Lay Defintions among Older Adults. Jo urnal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 47: 411-425. Zinnbauer, B. J., Pargament, K. I., Cole, B., Rye, M.S., Butter, E. M., Belavich, T.G., Hipp, K. M., Scott, A. B., Kadar, J. L. (1997). Religion and Spirituality: Unfuzzing the Fuzzy. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 36 (4). Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1387689    How to cite Difference Between Religion and Spirituality, Papers

Pepsi Co Annual Report Analysis Essay Sample free essay sample

An Annual study is a papers that provides information about a company’s annual activities to the stockholders and the populace. An one-year study is comprised of a missive from the CEO. overview of the company’s merchandises and services. direction treatment and analysis. a statement from the scrutinizing house. and fiscal statements. The ends of an Annual Report are to separate the trade name and reassure the stockholders. Recently. the one-year study has used more artworks. colourss. and easy-to-read charts and subdivision headers to catch the attending of investors. PepsiCo’s 2011 Annual Report uses graphs and statistics to showcase its many billion dollar trade names ; it reiterates the word â€Å"Global† to portray planetary invention. and it displays immature grownups to exemplify their mark consumers so that shareholders invest in their stock. PepsiCo’s billion dollar portfolio is presented through graphs and statistics. PepsiCo’s mega brands such as Pepsi. Lay’s and Mountain Dew have found worldwide celebrity and produced the most net income for the company. We will write a custom essay sample on Pepsi Co Annual Report Analysis Essay Sample or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page A good part of the universe does non even know that PepsiCo has other merchandises. In its one-year study. PepsiCo promotes the emerging trade names such as Walker’s. Fritos. and Brisk to shareholders by picturing them on a graph exposing universe retail gross revenues with their other merchandises. These three trade names and 19 others have sold over a billion dollars each worldwide in 2011 organizing PepsiCo’s current billion dollar portfolio. PepsiCo displayed this billion dollar graph in its one-year study to demo shareholders that its three megabrands are non the lone merchandises that are successful. By exposing all twenty two merchandises in PepsiCo’s billion dollar portfolio. the company can reassure shareholders that they are non puting in one successful merchandise but several universe renowned trade names. PepsiCo’s one-year study reiterates the word â€Å"Global† to foreground planetary invention. In the missive to stockholders. Chairman and CEO Indra K. Nooyi uses the word â€Å"global† ten times. The one-year study besides headlines two subdivisions toward the beginning of the papers labeled â€Å"Our Global Business† and â€Å"Innovating Globally. † The message that PepsiCo sends forth utilizing this changeless repeat is to widen its merchandises to new and emerging markets. PepsiCo wishes to distribute its bites and drinks globally and make new spirits that will pull and retain clients. PepsiCo’s Annual Report showcases to stockholders how the company is going a planetary human dynamo. bring forthing $ 66 billion in gross for bites and drinks. In the Annual Report. they include the different spirits of their merchandises fashioned to suit the civilizations of the consuming states. PepsiCo presents to investors that they are introducing their merchandises to conform to foreign markets. This entices shareholders to put in PepsiCo because they will be gaining gross all across the Earth. In PepsiCo’s Annual Report indicates their mark market by utilizing images immature consumers in its one-year study. Since PepsiCo is the younger company when compared to equal Coca-Cola. it tries to maintain a vibrant and merriment c haracter to pull the younger coevals. The image the one-year study uses to expose its mark market involves four immature grownups in a field smile and express joying while a few PepsiCo merchandises are grouped in the corner of the image. Soda and french friess are sloping out of the PepsiCo merchandises to organize a circle around the immature grownups. The message this illustration undertakings is that immature grownups are satisfied with PepsiCo when they consume its nutrient and drinks. By demoing immature grownups in the Annual Report. PepsiCo depicts to stockholders that it is a long term investing because the younger coevals are devouring the undertaking and will go on to make so in the hereafter. By utilizing graphs and statistics to expose their billion dollar portfolio. repeating â€Å"global† to emphasize disposition toward globalisation. and picturing the younger coevals as its mark market. PepsiCo’s 2011 Annual Report encourages shareholders to put in their company. PepsiCo utilizes a saloon graph as a ocular scheme which depicted the 22 trade names that were deserving a billion dollars each. It besides reiterated the word â€Å"Global† as a verbal scheme throughout its Annual Report to emphasize it was ready to introduce globally and to pull shareholders as the gross starts coming in from all over the universe. Exemplifying immature consumers is a ocular scheme that gives PepsiCo a younger feel to do them seem like a successful long term investing for shareholders. These three powerful schemes present a one-year study that is easy to read and influential to its intended audience.