Karma in Bhagavad-Gita and Shakuntala Essay

In _Bhagavad- Gita_, dharma and karma are two controlling forces of the ultimate destinies of the people to preserve and conserve the Hindu social order. Arjuna, the protagonist, is torn between two choices, either to perform his dharma for the emancipation of the spirit or to fight against his kin that would probably result to evil karma. He belongs to a compelling position in the Hindu social order because of his birth and occupation, making him locked up from the supposed ultimate freedom (Mack, 1995). The dharma of Arjuna complicates his status in the social hierarchy thus makes him doubtful in performing his duties and responsibilities both as a Hindu warrior and a kin. He may have the control over his spirit and he may choose to receive a good karma, but his dharma contradicts and requires him to somehow disobey his self. In addition, according to Krishna, if he will withdraw from action, it is thus an act of self-delusion and the renunciation of moral and social responsibility. Krishna said that he [Arjuna] ‘†¦must learn to endure fleeting things- they come and go!† (2nd teaching: 14). He is convincing him to â€Å"fight the battle† (2nd: 18) and so if â€Å"he has courage, he is fit for immortality† (2nd: 15). He is always reminding him that his dharma requires him to fight. He adds, â€Å"No one exists for even an instant without performing action; however unwilling, every being is forced to act by the qualities of nature† (3rd: 5). Arjuna’s hesitation may be valid in some points but it is orderly since it is human nature. He is overcome by doubts because he does not wish to be guilty of the death of his kin, but Krishna tell him that â€Å"actions imprisons the world unless it is done as sacrifice; freed from attachment, Arjuna, perform action as sacrifice!† (3rd: 9). From the philosophies of Krishna mentioned above, it can be scrutinized that an individual in the Indian society must not think that performing dharma can be immoral once it may result to evil karma, but rather internalize that when performing deeds, â€Å"always perform with detachment any action you must  do; performing action with detachment, one achieves supreme good † (3rd: 19). They are not ruling dharma and karma, but they govern â€Å"to preserve the world† (3rd: 25). _Shakuntala_ also portrays a strong Hindu society and Hinduism. There is sadness and melancholy due to dharma and karma but the ultimate destinies are well-controlled. Hinduism may provide sufficient free will to man but it does not permit him grappling from the moral ambiguities that may lead to tragedy (Yohannan, 1994). Shakunta was punished because she did not able to perform her religious duties. As what Priyamvada told the King, Shakuntala â€Å"†¦has been engaged in the practiced of religious duties†; but because of her fascination and attachment to the King, she forgot her dharma for the first time, leading her to suffer evil consequences (karma). Priyamvada told her assumption to Anasuya when they were in the garden of the hermitage and said â€Å"I fear a terrible misfortune has occurred. Sakoontala, from absence of mind, must have offended some guest whom she was bound to treat with respect†. Shakuntala is the daughter of the hermit leader and a Brahman so she really has to perform her religious duties otherwise she will disobey the norm. Nevertheless, she is not destined to be forever shattered and helpless; she must gain back what and who she deserves to have, and that is to be united with the King. Through the presentation of the fate of the characters, we can say that Hinduism still favors people as long as they keep their faith and deeds according to it. For the question _how can be both paradoxical and at the same time complementary, Shakuntala_ and _Bhagavad- Gita_ have their own ways of portraying an Indian society and its religion. In _Bhagavad- Gita,_ Krishna is really the personal and true-existing (though appeared in a different form) adviser who keeps on reminding and convincing Arjuna to perform his dharma otherwise a great consequence might happen. Arjuna tends to remain in his humanness nature but his dharma tries to desolate him from his morality,  so there is his friend charioteer (Krishna) who keeps on warning him by teaching philosophies. He is overcome by his morality by killing his own kin. On the other hand, Shakuntala has not been warned before she committed such sacred crime. She was more overcome by the humanness nature that she tends to forget her dharma. Her emotions desolate her, so as punishment, her own fault kills the chance to be loved by the King. Because of their social status in the society, their dharma becomes more demanding and regulating. Both show a pleasurable sense of life and their religion guides them not to end up tragically. Both value knowledge as means to salvation and liberation. In _Shakuntala,_ the trial which she brings upon herself matures her in the knowledge of love and prepares her for the life which she is destined to live (Yohannan, 1994). In _Bhagavad- Gita_, â€Å"knowledge is obscured† (3rd: 39), therefore Krishna tells Arjuna that â€Å"kill this evil that wins knowledge and judgment† (3rd: 41) because â€Å"knowing the self beyond understanding sustain the self with the self† (3rd:43)

Journal Topic 2-B Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Journal Topic 2-B - Essay Example sted at least of five basic elements: Indians, the slaves imported from Africa, the first wave of colonists; political and economic elite of an Anglo-Saxon origin; the waves of immigrants not only from the European, but also from Latin American and Asian countries. Trying to create a uniform and solid society and the state, America in many respects was guided by the French way, having officially chosen assimilation, which received the well-known name â€Å"melting pot†. 100% Americanization had to become an ultimate goal of the carried-out compulsory assimilation. However, despite all the efforts, by the middle of the XX century it became clear that â€Å"melting pot† policy didnt bring desirable results. Searching for the way out of the current situation led to the emergence of multiculturalism. The main reasons and contradictions, which brought multiculturalism to life, arose together with formation of the American state and continued to exist till rather recent time. American multiculturalism pays much attention to culture and identity, thus the American identity can be kept through art, especially through films (Benshoff & Griffin). Multiculturalism continues and strengthens the line of a cultural relativism extending it to e very national culture, keeping the principle of equality of all cultures and supplementing it with the principle of cultural

Deep analysis one of looney tunes characters Essay

Deep analysis one of looney tunes characters - Essay Example Coyote (Book Rags: Personality, par. 1). When one of the creators, Tex Avery was asked regarding the characterization of Bugs Bunny, he averred that â€Å"he was going to be a smart aleck rabbit, but casual about it, and his opening line in the very first one was `Eh, what's up, Doc?† (Warner Brothers, 1). It was actually admitted that his character was influenced from another Disney character, Max Hare, where Tex Avery admitted that the design was copied and â€Å"I practically stole it. It’s a wonder I wasn’t sued. The construction was almost identical" (Book Rags: Early Influences, par. 1). Bugs personality exemplified being detached and manifesting a clever and witty stance. It was also during the mid1930s that he received his official name from the creator Ben â€Å"Bugs† Hardaway for the rationale that â€Å"’Bugs’ or ‘Bugsy’ as a name also fit the Bunny's early characterization, as it was popular vernacular for "crazy"â €  (Book Rags: Early Influences, par. 2). Bug’s character fitted the American society in the 1930s, which was basically the time identified as the Great Depression.

Pricing strategy Article Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 1

Pricing strategy - Article Example the nearby neighborhood, while a bigger retail chain can focus on its promoting towards neighborhoods in a larger city , while disregarding clients in different landmasses. Geographic Segmentation is imperative and may be viewed as the first venture to worldwide advertising, emulated by demographic and psychographic division. The utilization of national guests is the institutional utilization of geographic division, despite the fact that geographic sections may be grouped by recognized land districts. Demographic division is isolating markets into diverse gatherings as indicated by their epoch, sexual, pay, ethnic group or religion of the commerce segment and the life cycle of the family. The U.S. Evaluation utilizes demographic division to archive and fragment the individuals living in the U.S. Lifestyle division, which is some of the time called psychographics. This is measured by considering the exercises, investment, and assessments (Aios) of clients. By recognizing and comprehension buyer lifestyle, organizations can create limited time blends and product offerings, which tailor to their needs. In Sales Territory Management, utilizing more than one paradigm to portray the associations accounts, for example, fragmenting deals accounts by government, business, client, and so on and record size/term, in exertion to expand time proficiency and deals volume. A standout amongst the most widely recognized pointers of high-hazard clients is a drop off in utilization of the organizations administration. For instance, in the Mastercard business this could be motioned through a clients decrease in using on his or her car Peer Reviewed: Fruit and Vegetable Pricing by Demographic Factors in the Birmingham, Alabama, Metropolitan Area, 2004-2005. 2014. Peer Reviewed: Fruit and Vegetable Pricing by Demographic Factors in the Birmingham, Alabama, Metropolitan Area, 2004-2005. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2901576/. [Accessed 28

Refer to assignment criteria Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words - 1

Refer to assignment criteria - Essay Example The paper says that the person sharing the shelter may sometimes pay the mortgage instalments or bear the expenses for the extended portion of the home. Sometimes the person may bear the household expenditure in lieu of the shared shelter on some understanding. Over a period of time, it is creating problems over the ownership of the house when the sharer dies or leaves the shared home for another place (Sharing Homes, The problem). The discussion paper sources these problems to the ambiguity of the current law guiding these shared homes. The present law is not very clear on payments made by the sharer on behalf of the owner. For instance, mortgage payments made by the sharer are enough for staking a claim on the home. But, sometimes, the sharer regularly pays the household bills enabling the owner to pay the mortgage instalments. Sometimes, the sharer may look after the household work like As per the law detailed in the discussion paper, a person who is not a legal owner but sharing the shelter in a home can claim an interest on it only when there is an equity arising by proprietary estoppel, when a resulting or constructive trust has arisen in his / her favour or when the sharer becomes a beneficiary under an express declaration of trust. In any of these circumstances, the sharer has to prove his / her right with sufficient proof. Because of these limited options available to the sharer, the law is termed as complex, arbitrary and uncertain in application. It is also ill suited to determining the proprietary rights of the home sharers. The discussion paper is of the opinion that the rules of implied trusts and proprietary estoppel are not as clear as they should be (Sharing Homes, Part I, introduction). An express trust arises when a person expressly declares that he or she holds property on trust for another or transfers property to another expressly subject to a trust. A

LPN to RN transition Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

LPN to RN transition - Essay Example LPNs perform the role of providing the basic nursing care to their patients. This mainly involves monitoring of patient’s health, providing basic care like inserting catheters or changing bandages etc., and discussing and reporting patients’ health concerns to RNs or doctors. RNs on the other hand perform enhanced functions like recording patients’ symptoms and medical histories, setting up care plans for patients, assistance in performing diagnostic tests and administering medications and educating patients and their families. Additionally, they have the responsibility to arrange consultations with doctors and also with professionals of other disciplines in a given health care setup. The transition from the role of LPN to RN demands that a better understanding of the ‘family as unit’ is developed. With the improvement in health care delivery services, the role of family in the overall process of care continues to play a critical role (Duncan & DePew, 2011). A registered nurse is therefore expected to take into account the function of the family to get an insight into the health status of her patient. Since the focus of job shifts from mere reporting to analysis of clinical situations, the professional role of RN is attributed to the development of more enhanced analytical skills. The habit of thinking critically, to derive useful results from clinical information is essential, if the role of a RN is to be performed effectively. It should be understood that transition is divided into three distinct phases: endings, neutral zone and beginnings (Harrington & Terry, 2009). For a transition to begin, it is essential that the connection with a previously ongoing process be brought to an end; this may equate to separation from a previously established social condition, losing older identity, disenchantment and disorientation. This follows a condition when the person in transition is ‘in limbo’; this allows renewal and

The Nature Versus Nurture Debate Essay Example for Free

The Nature Versus Nurture Debate Essay What makes you who you are? This question is the essence behind the nature versus nurture debate. It is also a question that has plagued scientists for centuries, and philosophers before that. Recently, the debate has raged over which of two major factors has the biggest impact on one’s development. With advancements in genetics, such as the mapping of the human genome, scientists have a better understanding of what traits are inherited. Obviously, certain physical characteristics, such as hair, eye, and skin color, are defined by genes passed on from one’s parents. However, the line is not so clear when it comes to psychological conditions, behavior, and intelligence. The environment in which a child is raised also includes a number of influences, such as their parents (or lack thereof), relatives, socioeconomic status, and resources. The debate had centered on how much of those characteristics are determined by genetics or from one’s environment. Advances in modern science suggest neither nature nor nurture is exclusively responsible in favor of an interactive relationship between our genes and environmental influences. While this proposed compromise would be immensely complex, where one helps to shape the other in ways scientists have yet to completely understand, it would essentially end the debate once and for all. The term â€Å"nature versus nurture† was coined by Sir Francis Galton in 1871, but the debate actually dates back to ancient Greek literature and philosophers who questioned the nature of fate versus free will (Lewis). Galton referred to the phrase as a â€Å"convenient jingle of words, for it separates under two distinct heads the innumerable elements of which personality is composed† (M.  S. , M. B. ). The mindset of this phrasing stuck with the debate, carrying the notion of two separate and opposing scientific views, and extending his influence long after his controversial work had been published. Many of the theories Galton developed were heavily influenced by his cousin, Charles Darwin, whose works on evolution and natural selection were controversial in their own right. At the time, the most commonly held idea was that â€Å"a child was born into the world a blank slate, a ‘tabula rasa’ in the words of British Empiricist David Hume† (Lewis). This belief, also known as environmentalism, is synonymous with what became the nurture side of the debate. Galton’s Hereditary Genius became a source of controversy by resisting this notion and claiming that biodeterminism was responsible for the most eminent, or intelligent, men of his day. By applying Darwin’s theory of natural selection to human intelligence, Galton’s ideas gave birth to the debate as well as a number of other brands of science, such as genetics, psychology, and eugenics. With the scientific developments in genetics over the past century, the debate is cast in a much different light today. Although Galton and Darwin’s ideas were highly controversial and not well-received immediately, they grew in popularity towards the second half of the 19th century. Scientific understanding of genetics and inheritable traits grew over the next century with Abbot Gregor Mendel’s work establishing the principles of genetics (Lewis). Scientific development during this time laid the ground work for processes, such as genetic recombination and genetic mapping, which have become increasingly important in recent decades. The Human Genome Project was completed in 2003 by an international team of scientists, but there is still much to learn in the field of genetics. Scientists continue to study how genes interact with each other and influences from external stimuli and conditions. One such emerging, yet controversial, field in modern genetics is eugenics, or the ability to engineer a baby’s DNA to promote or suppress certain traits or inherited conditions. By the 1920’s, Galton’s ideas about eugenics had begun to gain considerable ground both here in the United States and in Europe. His claim about the inheritance of intelligence among the eminent men of society naturally led to plans to consolidate this genetic advantage in order to improve the human gene pool, falsely giving racism and discrimination some scientific backing. The culturally biased IQ testing of immigrants began to become more frequent. Essentially, the field could be divided into positive eugenics, which seeks to promote good genes, and negative eugenics, aiming to suppress less desirable genes. There were several horrific applications of negative eugenics during the early 20th century, most notably the Holocaust, in which Nazi Germany sought to eliminate the entire Jewish people and pursue their version of a pure race. Today, negative eugenics has fallen out of favor, but genetic screening and engineering has given positive eugenics a new and growing application. In addition to the advent of genetics, psychology developed in order to study the behavioral and personality impacts from both genes and the environment. Perhaps the most controversial of Galton’s claims was that intelligence was an inheritable trait, and thus passed down from the elite of society. He conducted a number of surveys and studies to better understand human intellect and also coined the term mental test† (Lewis). This belief about intelligence, while not as prominent, still exists today in underlying notions about immigration policy and social discrimination. There are many who attribute up to 80 percent of an individual’s I. Q. o genetics, leading some to believe certain racial stereotypes about intelligence, while others attribute those trends to social inequalities (Glass). Today, scientists have made a great deal of progress in understanding how certain mental disorders and personality traits can be transmitted genetically or through environmental stimuli. However, there is still a great deal to learn about the causes of psychological disorders and conditions, including how to prevent them and wheth er nature or nurture is responsible. While developing from these relatively new scientific fields, the nature side of the debate has been promoted by those who believe heredity is ultimately responsible for an individual’s characteristics. Modern science has identified a number of physical characteristics which can be definitively tied to specific genetic phenotypes, or genetically-controlled trait, such as blood type and eye color. Those who adopt an extreme heredity position, or nativists, basically assume â€Å"that the characteristics of the human species as a whole are a product of evolution and those individual differences are due to each person’s unique genetic code† (McLeod). They believe that behavioral tendencies and personality traits that even emerge or mature later in life are merely the result of genetic expression tuned to a sort of biological clock, much like puberty in adolescents. This belief supports the notion that certain people are born not only susceptible to hereditary diseases but also behavioral or psychological conditions, such as alcoholism or violent tendencies. While this stance is controversial for many scientists and psychologists, it lends support for positive eugenics’ pursuit of identifying and eliminating these negative traits by genetic engineering means. In many ways, this view is the modern extension of ancient philosophers’ thinking about free will. It brings up a number of difficult questions about genetic fate with few or no clear answers. For example, how many of our everyday decisions are made of our own free will or just an expression of our innate genetic tendencies is a murky subject. Additionally, whether or not it is possible to overcome these influences is another gray area. If genes are solely responsible, then there exists a sort of genetic predetermination, in that who we become has already been determined before we exit the womb. Conversely, if the environment is solely responsible, then everyone starts essentially as the same blank slate and our unique experiences then make us who we are. At this other end of the spectrum is the nurture side, who believe that we are shaped by a number of environmental factors. Proponents of this approach are the environmentalists or empiricists â€Å"[whose] basic assumption is that at birth the human mind is a tabula rasa and that this is gradually ‘filled’ as a result of experience (e. g. behaviorism)† (McLeod). A person’s personality and any behavioral conditions are then acquired or learned from their surroundings. Perhaps the most important environmental factor in terms of influence on a child’s development is parenting. Many levels of infant development come from imitation of and response to its parent or guardian. For example, an infant forms an attachment in response to the love and attention it receives from its mother. Later on in life, broader cultural and social stimuli help shape children according to the norms of the society in which the child was reared. To learn more about the extent of these stimuli versus genetic influences, scientists have turned to a variety of studies and experiments. In order to learn more about the extent of genetic and environmental influences on one’s psyche, geneticists and psychologists alike have searched for a means to isolate one from the other. Identical twins provide a unique opportunity to study the effects of environment on a child’s development by serving as a control, in that their genes are constant. â€Å"When raised together, both identical and fraternal twins (who on average share only half their genes) come as close as any two people can to sharing the identical home environment† (Glass). However, when reared apart, they would share no environmental influences; therefore, any differences that develop between the genetically identical twins would be the result of the different postnatal environments in which they were raised. Theoretically, if there was a â€Å"well-authenticated case of identical twins reared apart between whom a dramatic difference appears should be enough to invalidate the hypothesis that ‘heredity is destiny’† (Gruber). However, finding such a definitive case has proven difficult for researchers, who have struggled to find significantly different environments and unbiased cases. Most separated twins come from low-income families and are often raised under similar socioeconomic conditions. There is also disagreement with what constitutes similarities in both qualitative and quantitative studies of the twins, such as personality and I. Q. tests. These difficulties have not stopped scientists from continuing to pursue research of identical twins in hope of finding conclusive evidence one way or the other. Some of the essential findings from the case studies on identical twins have revealed a number of expected tendencies, as well as a few surprising trends. Behavioral geneticist Nancy Sega has found that twins raised apart are just strikingly similar in personality to twins raised together, and that biological siblings reared apart are also more similar than adoptive siblings raised together (Glass). Julia Glass’s article references a famous long-term study of Minnesotan twins reared apart who shared almost bizarre similarities: Jim Springer and Jim Lewis, who met for the first time at age 39-and discovered they both drove the same type of Chevrolet, chain-smoked Salem cigarettes, and, as sports fans, liked stock-car racing and football. Both had married women named Linda and then, after divorcing, married women named Betty. One Jim had named a son James Alan; the other Jims son was James Allan. As kids, each of the twins had a dog theyd named Toy; as adults, each had vacationed at the same three-block strip of Florida beach, practiced woodworking in his basement, and put up a circular white bench around a tree in his front yard. Although this is a very unique and special case, some researchers would argue that some of their similarities are coincidental and overlook quite a few differences between the twins. Many critics point out that even identical twins raised together differ, sometimes significantly, especially in personality and temperament. Dr. Susan Farber believes this is a special process, known as twinning, which takes place in the unique environments that twins raised together create for one another. Often, twins deal with their unique identity problems by accentuating similarities and cultivating differences (Gruber). She also believes that twinning can occur between twins reared apart if they know of the others existence through letters or another means of communication. But even Dr. Farber has stated that the best case of twin studies leaves much to be desired in terms of conclusive evidence favoring either genetics or the environment. The studies likely have ruled out any complete responsibility from one side or the other in favor of a broader debate focused on how much each is responsible during development. While the debate has shifted from exclusive responsibility to degrees of influence, other scientists have been studying how genes and environmental factors may interact and influence each other. They have researched how the environment interacts with DNA, from drugs to psychotherapy, in order to determine whether someone will suffer from psychological disorders. This field, known as epigenetics, has finally begun to address gene interactions that were once against conventional biological wisdom. It was believed that such molecular changes occur in fetal cells but not in mature cells. Recent studies are starting to show evidence that certain environmental stimuli can lead to epigenetic changes that could trigger several psychiatric diseases (Steinberg). Understanding and measurement of these changes could eventually indicate how the environment influences the genetic chemistry that underlies many human behaviors and psychological conditions. The two major psychological disorders being studied in the field of epigenetics are schizophrenia and depression. These conditions have been known to run in families and typically arise in adults or adolescents after puberty, when a change takes place in how the responsible gene is expressed. What causes this change is still an unknown, early studies suggest a number of environmental influences may act as a trigger (Steinberg). Evidence has also shown physical changes in the brains of patients suffering from depression. Antidepressants have been developed to help counteract the chemical imbalances that result from these changes. However, there is still much about the treatment of psychological disorders using drugs that scientists do not fully understand. â€Å"Applying epigenetics to the brain is just beginning, but the field is ramping up as technologies to monitor molecular changes improve† (Steinberg). Ultimately, biology and genetics have proven that neither nature nor nurture is exclusively responsible for our development. While many physical traits have definitive genetic ties and growing up in a certain culture certainly has an impact on one’s personality, modern science has shown that the interactive relationship between these influences is extremely complex. Hans Kummer gave a great analogy of the debate by saying that â€Å"trying to determine how much of a trait is produced by nature/genes and how much by nurture/environment is as useless as asking whether the drumming we hear is made by percussionist or instrument† (M. S. , M. B. ). The majority of scientists have come to accept this notion of two intricate and inseparable influences that make us who we are. The historical nature versus nurture debate is over because science had proven the relationship to be far more complex than many scientists imagined and the phrase simply does not do that justice. The term itself has been outgrown by progress in genetics, and can no longer be simply separated into one versus the other. This lagging behind in the language of genetics has kept the futile debate alive for a long time, and often providing fuel for social agendas. Today, scientists hope that new language can better reflect modern science, and allow new questions to be presented in more productive ways.