Plastic bags should be concerned more before it poisons our planet Term Paper

Plastic bags should be concerned more before it poisons our planet - Term Paper Example There were even 63 identified uses of plastic bags, specifically Walmart bags. (Trucker 2009) However, as the world progressed and the environment began to be clogged by these plastic bags, its harmful effects could not be idly dismissed. It is in this regard that this essay is written to determine the effects of plastic bags in our environment. After briefly tracing the origins of the plastic bags, the essay would initially present its uses and its over-consumption and discuss its ultimate effects in our environment. Finally, this essay would suggest recommendations address the issues concerning the harmful effects of these plastic bags in the environment. The first identified use for plastic bags is to wrap food products. In 1969 Appierdo (2008) presented that â€Å"the New York City Sanitation Department’s ‘New York City Experiment’ demonstrates that plastic refuse bag curbside pickup is cleaner, safer and quieter than metal trash can pick-up, beginning a shift to plastic can liners among consumers†. The 1970s likewise marked more uses for plastic bags as recognized by retail giants such as Sears, J.C. Penney, Montgomery Ward, Jordan Marsh, Allied, Federated, and Hills. (Appierdo 2008) During the 1990s, the technology for recycling enabled the plastic bags to transform its utilization to other productive benefits. Barnard (2007) stipulated that â€Å"with some trial and error we were able to construct a pretty durable and usable shopping bag.

Functionalist Concepts Of The Nuclear Family

Functionalist Concepts Of The Nuclear Family Murdock (1949) studied 250 different societies and concluded that the family is so functional to society, that it is unavoidable and universal since neither the individual nor society could survive without it. He argued that every nuclear family has these four essential functions without which society could not continue sexual, reproductive, and economic and education. All these four functions are essential according to Murdock without sexual and reproductive no member of society would be there, life would stop if there was no economic function that is family providing for its members and without education, socialisation would not be there hence absence of culture. Murdock has been criticised for not considering whether the functions of the family could be performed by other social institutions and he does not examine alternatives to the family. Parsons (1955) studied the modern American family in the 50s. He argued that there are two basic and irreducible functions of the family, these are, the primary socialisation of children which Parsons sees as a responsibility of the family to shape the childs personality to suite to the needs of society. The second function is the stabilisation of adult personalities, the family gives adults the emotional support necessary to cope with the stresses of everyday life. (Taylor and Richardson etl 2002). Parsons as with Murdock has been criticised for showing the picture of the family as attuned children and compassionate spouses caring for each others needs. There is a natural division of labour within the nuclear family, roles are segregated positively and everyone carry out different roles, for example the instrumental male, whose role is to provide for the family thus the bread winner and expressive female whose role is to provide warmth, love and care for children at home. Based on Biology the woman is the child bearer therefore has to look after the child, this role maintains social stability. Family patterns have changed with time such as cohabitation, rise of reconstituted families and increase in single or lone parent in western family life and changes in the law on divorce have made it easier to obtain. Functionalist theory has been criticised to have concentrated on the family being positive and gives little attention to its weaknesses while in feminism the nuclear family is oppressive to women due to gender distinctions in domestic duties. Functionalists argue that the family is of equal profit to everyone, however Marxists argue that society developed by the need of the capitalist economy. It is the bourgeoisie who benefits not the whole society. Functionalists focus too much on the significance that the family has for society and disregard the sense family life has for individual. Radical psychiatric argue against functionalism for ignoring the negative aspect of the family like domestic violence. Functionalists also ignore different types of families by focussing mainly on nuclear family. Interactionist David Clark (1991) identified four types of marriage arguing against functionalist, not all families are the same. Functionalist depicts everything as positive in the family while radical psychiatric looks at the negative side of the family. Feminism is a conflict theory that sees the family as patriarchal. Men gain more in a family than women. They view the family on a macro scale. Feminists shows how men dominate social relationships thus symmetrical conjugal roles is seen as an allegory. Feminist argues that Men oppress women through domestic violence, the economic involvement to society made by womens domestic labour within the family. Liberal feminist Wollstonecraft (1792) wanted equality for women in terms of rights, liberties and vote by the change of law and policy. Radical feminists like Millett (1970) argue that the organisation of society enables men to dominate women. They believed that gender distinctions are politically and socially constructed therefore wanted radical reforms and social change. Kate Millet invented the term The personal is political meaning everything in society is political. Radical Feminists think not just patriarchal men that benefit from family but all men. Sociolist feminists look at gender as the basis. Sociolist Marxists combine gender with class. They argue that there is a dual oppression for women that they have to go to work as well as work at home. Marxists feminist believe that the destruction of the capitalist society brings equality to everything. Lesbian feminists believe society forces them into heterosexuality so that men can oppress them. They challenge heterosexuality as a means of male supremacy. Humanist feminists argue that society only allows men to self-develop not women and that society distorts womens human potential. Marxist feminist Bentson (1972) argues that family responsibilities make male workers less likely to withdraw from labour, with wife and children to support. Ansley (1972) sees the emotional support in family, stabilises male workers thus making them less likely to take their frustration out on the system. Feeley (1972) sees the family as a dictatorial unit dominated by the husband and also the family values teach obedience. Children learn to accept hierarchy and their position in it. Greer (2000) is a radical feminist who believes that family life continues to disadvantage and oppress women. She points out Britain has very high divorce rate thus less stability in families. Marxist feminist like functionalist they tend to ignore the diversity of modern family life assuming everyone lives in heterosexual nuclear family. They paint a very negative picture of family life possibly exaggerated. Unlike functionalists who see male and female roles being different but equal, Marxist feminists believe that men dominate family relationships. Feminist theory discards functionalist view that society as a whole is benefited by socialisation in the family but rather men benefits more. Women are portrayed as passive victims of exploitation, it does not take into account women who abuse men by fighting back. Functionalist believes that norms and values benefits society while for feminist they benefit men more for example obedience, women being obedient to men. Feminists focus on nuclear family only and the negative aspect of it. Increase in awareness of womens rights has influenced the norms of society. Marxists views of family sees socialisation process results in the spread of a ruling class philosophy, whereby individuals are deceived into accepting the capitalist system and the supremacy of the capitalist class thus hegemony.Bourgoisie benefits by creating a labour force and proletariat continue to be exploited. Engel s (1972) argued that bourgeois nuclear family as an institution which oppressed women. They were seen mainly as children bearers, economically dependent to their husbands and remain faithful to them. According to Engels the family is designed to control women and protect property thus men needed to know their children in order to pass on their property. Marxists say the family serves capitalism in four ways. The family acts as a safety valves for the stress and frustration of working class men, the family as a unit of consumption buys the goods and services provided by capitalism. Women domestic work is unpaid which benefits capitalism and lastly the family socialises children thereby reproducing both labour power and acceptance of capitalism false consciousness. Zaretsky (1976) analysed that the family is one place where male workers can feel they have power and control. This helps them accept their oppression in wider society, furthermore Zaretsky sees the family as a main prop to the capitalist economy. Marxists view of divorce in families is seen by increased economic pressure from unemployment this may place added strain and also family members living longer could increase pressure on relationships. Marxists decline the functionalist view that society based on value consensus and thus benefits all. Instead they see the welfare of powerful groups influencing the way society is controlled. Marxist view ignores family diversity it sees the nuclear family as being simply determined by the economy. This theory reproduces conflict between classes bourgeoisie and proletariat while in factionalists family operates as united everything benefits society. Capitalist system is dominated both economically by rich at the expense of the poor but seen as a fair system by functionalists that works together in the interest of all members causing limited conflict in society. Anthropologists have suggested that the emergence of the nuclear family did not actually coincide with emergence of capitalism. Somerville (2000) argues that Zaretsky exaggerates the importance of the family as a protection from life in capitalist society. As with functionalism reproduce social stability, Marxism produces labo ur force and feminism produce patriarchy. Interactionism also known as interpretive humans are seen as symbolic creatures meaning we define what is around us through signs and language. They study families on a micro scale instead of generalising the whole population, they also look at what family live is actually like rather than how it should be or how it is assumed to be.Interactionists view families as different and unique thus there is no one way of family life, like other perspectives would suggest. The way a family behaves and interacts is based on interpretation of meanings and roles. We are products of our culture what we take as common sense or reality varies according to the culture we live in. Goffman (1969) compares life to drama, we are actors who take on roles and act them out as public performances. Each role has its own script which tells us how to act and what cues to expect from other members involved in our interaction. Bauman (1990) argues that roles and relationships learnt in the family are essential to shaping our future. Not all families are close and warm family metaphors are often used to represent closeness, for example using the term brother and sister amongst members of political organisations. Kellner (1964) looked at socially constructed roles in a marriage, argues that the reality of marriage is an ongoing construction which needs to be reaffirmed, negotiated and renegotiated. Clark (1991) conducted a study of how couples constructed a meaningful marriage. He identified four types of marriage. Drifting marriages where meanings and ideas of the future are unclear, surfacing marriages often made up of people who have been married before, establishing marriages newly wed couple for long term future and lastly struggling marriages financial problems often from unemployment causes tension and anxiety. The conjugal roles in interactionism show that the roles of husband and wife are constantly evolving. For example both husband and wife working and sharing domestic tasks. Interactionist view families on a micro scale so can discover how individuals make family life based on interactions with each other. They are not interested in generalisations about family life but seek to understand how families are unique. They go further than the common sense view of families that functionalism believes in and look at the meanings of what family life is actually like. Unlike functionalism, Marxism and feminism where there is a set function of the family, interactionism is different for there is no one set function of the family. Families can differ based on their interactions, meanings, roles and culture. The discovery of four different types of marriage offers an opposing argument to functionalism, not an ideal nuclear family. It has been criticised while concentrating on meanings, motives and action it ignores the wider structures in which families operate and are shaped. Sometimes generalisations of families are useful as they allow the development of political social policy. Interpretive approaches try to comprehend the family from the perspective of its members. This research should give you an insight on how the families have changed with time. From different views and approaches, understanding families from traditional way of views to modern familys ways of view.

Fission Or Fusion :: essays research papers

Fission or Fusion I think that right now, fission is the only way that we can get more energy out of a nuclear reaction than we put in. First, the energy per fission is very large. In practical units, the fission of 1 kg (2.2 lb) of uranium-235 releases 18.7 million kilowatt-hours as heat. Second, the fission process initiated by the absorption of one neutron in uranium-235 releases about 2.5 neutrons, on the average, from the split nuclei. The neutrons released in this manner quickly cause the fission of two more atoms, thereby releasing four or more additional neutrons and initiating a self-sustaining series of nuclear fissions, or a chain reaction, which results in continuous release of nuclear energy. Naturally occurring uranium contains only 0.71 percent uranium-235; the remainder is the non-fissile isotope uranium-238. A mass of natural uranium by itself, no matter how large, cannot sustain a chain reaction because only the uranium-235 is easily fissionable. The probability that a fission neutron with an initial energy of about 1 MeV will induce fission is rather low, but can be increased by a factor of hundreds when the neutron is slowed down through a series of elastic collisions with light nuclei such as hydrogen, deuterium, or carbon. This fact is the basis for the design of practical energy-producing fission reactors. In December 1942 at the University of Chicago, the Italian physicist Enrico Fermi succeeded in producing the first nuclear chain reaction. This was done with an arrangement of natural uranium lumps distributed within a large stack of pure graphite, a form of carbon. In Fermi's "pile," or nuclear reactor, the graphite moderator served to slow the neutrons. Nuclear fusion was first achieved on earth in the early 1930s by bombarding a target containing deuterium, the mass-2 isotope of hydrogen, with high-energy deuterons in a cyclotron. To accelerate the deuteron beam a great deal of energy is required, most of which appeared as heat in the target. As a result, no net useful energy was produced. In the 1950s the first large-scale but uncontrolled release of fusion energy was demonstrated in the tests of thermonuclear weapons by the United States, the USSR, Great Britain, and France. This was such a brief and uncontrolled release that it could not be used for the production of electric power. In the fission reactions I discussed earlier, the neutron, which has no electric charge, can easily approach and react with a fissionable nucleus ,for example, uranium-235. In the typical fusion reaction, however, the reacting nuclei both have a positive electric charge, and the natural repulsion between them, called Coulomb repulsion, must be overcome before they can join.

An Analysis of ISIS and its Relation to Traditional Islam

In today's world it is easy to assume that ISIS and traditional Islam are the same thing. The news often reports phrases like â€Å"radical Islamist terrorists† and â€Å"radical Islam.† Has society made a correct assumption? Are all people who follow Islam potential terrorists? Does Islam seek to promote such terrorist behaviors? This paper seeks to address these questions and uncover the differences between the two, if any. Traditional Islam Traditional Islam began over 1,500 years ago and currently has around 1.6 billion followers. The word â€Å"Islam† actually means â€Å"submission to God.† Therefore, a Muslim is someone who strives to submit to God. Islam has spread completely around the world. You can find Muslims in North and South America, Western Europe, Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. Their principal homelands lie in the area commonly referred to as the â€Å"10/40 Window† (between 10 degrees latitudinal north and 40 degrees latitudinal north ranging from the eastern side of North Africa to the western side of Asia). Majority of Muslims are Asian (60%) and the rest are Arab (22%) sub-Sahara African (12%) and Eastern European (5%) . Islam was founded in 610 A.D. by a man named Mohammed. During Mohammed's time, polytheism reigned, and people were worshipping many gods at the same time. Mohammed had a vision from a being he thought to be an angel who told him, â€Å"There is only one God, and His name is Allah. Worship Him.† Islam, at its core, is a religion based on faith, life, piety, freedom, religion, peace, and morality. Researcher Sohaib Sultan states: â€Å"Islam believes in a God of mercy, a scripture of mercy, and a Prophet who was sent as a mercy to all the world.† ISIS ISIS began in 2003 as a â€Å"blowback† of the U.S. invasion and dysfunction of Iraq. In the earliest stage there were several Sunni extremist groups who were fighting back with the U.S. in hopes to provoke a civil war. The group, at that time, was called al Qaeda which was in Iraq with Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in command pledging allegiance to Osama bin Laden. Zarqawi was killed during a 2006 U.S. airstrike, but the group continued . ISIS is a post-al Qaeda terrorist group. With over 30,000 fighters, ISIS holds territorial lands in both Syria and Iraq. It maintains an extensive military operation, controls communications, controls infrastructure, and funds itself. It can be said that ISIS is a pseudo-state which is led by their military. The goal of ISIS is to control certain territories thereby creating a â€Å"pure† Sunni Islamist state that is governed by a strict interpretation of Sharia Law. It also seeks to remove the political borders that the Western governments created in the Middle Eastern regions. ISIS seeks to become the sole political, military, and religious authority over all the Muslims in the world. ISIS core message is more about power and revenge than anything else. Differences Between ISIS and Traditional Islam In the first section of this paper we saw that traditional Islam is a relatively peaceful religion that stresses mercy and peace. This is significantly in conflict with the agenda of ISIS. Where do these two paths cross? What is the relationship between terrorist groups such as ISIS, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al Shabab in Somalia, the Taliban with traditional Islam? Many people believe that ISIS is a group that is based on the religious beliefs of Islam including following the examples of the Prophet Mohammed . This is where most of the confusion comes into play. ISIS uses Islam as a vehicle to carry out their political agenda by reinterpreting the fundamental meaning and purpose of Islam. In other words, they are twisting the Quran to say what they want it to by weaving lies in with the truth and preying on the ignorance of the people. The message of ISIS is vastly spread not only by social media, but through certain mosques as well. Researcher Ian Pelletier suggests the motivations of ISIS are:â€Å"Market and Reinforce: Emphasizes consistency of Islamic State's strategic objectives with mainstream Islamic Law.Obfuscation: Ignores/blurs contradictions between Islamic State's strategic objectives and mainstream Islamic Law.Leveraging: Connects areas in which Islamic State strategic objectives are consistent with mainstream Islamic Law to social movement catalysts in order to gain momentum.Reinterpretation: Justifies a radical reinterpretation of Islamic Law as essential to address past issues or current shortfalls within society and achieve the strategic objectives of the Islamic State. â€Å"ISIS interprets Islam from a very radical point of view that is rooted in the extremist fraction of Salafi/Wahhabi Islam within the Hanbali Sunni tradition . The strategic goals of ISIS are as follows:â€Å"Permanently break down political boundaries and cultivate conditions for government failure and regional sectarian civil war in Iraq and Syria.Establish the Islamic Caliphate by controlling terrain across Iraq and Syria, governing the population within, and defending against external threats.Bring like-minded people to fight alongside and settle within the Islamic Caliphate.  Expand the territory of the Caliphate to connect with the wider Muslim community. â€Å"Traditional Islamic Law (Sharia) is based on the Quran which follows the hadith or the teachings of Mohammad. It is traditionally viewed as a statement of relatively easy limits and not a source of rigid and inflexible rules to be imposed in any circumstance . It is supposed to be based on the premise of justice and equality for everyone . Historically it has been determined that Islamic Law had the most humane and liberal fundamental principles as it fostered peace with se lf and society. Groups such as ISIS use Islamic Law instead for harsh discipline and to control the people. Sharia, as it was originally intended, was used as a guideline for societal norms and values. It served as a model in which one could pattern their life after. Some of the many positive attributes of Sharia are: a belief in God, daily prayers, asking/receiving forgiveness, freedoms of choice, strong sense of community, love your neighbors, exercise self-control, do not abuse religion to exploit or abuse others, and must respect the rights of others. Conflicts Between ISIS and Mainstream Moderate Muslims There have been many practicing Muslims who do not agree with nor adhere to the beliefs of extremists' fringe groups such as ISIS. In an open letter from 120 Islamic scholars and clerics to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, they challenged ISIS's ways as being un-Islamic. They further claimed that ISIS routinely twists and perverts Islamic Law selfishly to achieve their own agenda. The letter went on to illustrate the contradictions between ISIS's theology and that of traditional Islamic Law. The scholars accused them of citing only portions of the Quran without taking the whole spirit of the Quran and Hadith into account. It was also noted that ISIS had a practice of killing innocent people and that jihad was only meant for defensive measures during a war. Offensive measures of Jihad, without proper cause, was equal to criminal conduct and was not acceptable in traditional Islam . The letter also went on to say that Islam forbids the mistreatment of Christians and no one can be forced to convert to Islam against their will. Author Wael Hallaq states that, â€Å"Sharia is not a rigid unchanging ‘Law of God' and when applied correctly, it is flexible. The way it is interpreted and implemented by ISIS makes it a little more than a list of fixed punishments, ritual requirements and oppressive rules that are enforced with coercion upon a marginalized group of people. In addition, it is increasingly clear that ISIS selectively interprets Sharia.† One may ask how ISIS is able to get away with using Islamic Law to achieve its objectives. They accomplish this by convincing people that their views are in fact inline with mainstream Islamic traditions. They have a knack for rationalizing any perceived contradictions that are found within their belief and the traditional teachings. Al-Baghdadi, while addressing his fighters said, â€Å"Beware, O lions, the state that they reach a Muslim woman or child or sheikh without you, for if this happens, then, by God, you have no excuse for yourselves before me. Look to yourselves and do not be a place of blame. Put their bodies before yours. Their blood before yours and their fortune before yours, and beware of being happy to live in a day when the honor of a Muslim woman is transgressed, or the blood of a child is spilled, or an elderly sheikh is insulted, for what deliciousness can there be in life if this is in it or even a part of it?† While his speech is complimentary with Islamic Law in principle, he is trying to energize his fighters to fight in a war that is not justified according to Islamic Law. He stresses that not only is the war just, but it is according to Islamic Law which it a bold lie. They may sincerely believe that their war is justified due to their extremist views, but according to traditional Islamic Law, they are not qualified to wage war with anyone unless it is a defensive measure. ISIS does not engage in defensive measures as a rule—they are very offensive in their tactics. Conclusion Extremists groups, such as ISIS, claim to be Islamic in their beliefs, but they do not adhere to the basic tenants of the faith. They twist and turn the Quran and Hadith to make it say whatever they need it to say that will further their agenda. ISIS is a violent terrorist group that has been attracting many young people. They seek out those who are vulnerable, who are seeking religious righteousness, adventure, power, and a sense of belonging. They are also known for producing sexual opportunities for the young men by keeping women as slaves. This is extremely contradictory to traditional teachings and philosophy of traditional Islam. It is certainly a disservice to the majority of Muslims to assume that all Muslims are somehow connected to terrorist activities. In America, ever since September 11th, 2001, there has been a remarkable increase of violence and hatred against Muslims from such assumptions. Extremists groups are not representative of what it means to be a Muslim in today's world. We need to see them for who they are and not for the vehicle they misuse which is Islam. Furthermore, it is very unhelpful when the media keeps reporting phrases like â€Å"radical Islam† and â€Å"Muslim extremists† as this further perpetuates the discrimination and hatred against innocent and peace-loving Muslims. There is no link between ISIS terrorism and traditional Islam. ISIS fundamentally changes the core beliefs of Islam and inserts their own interpretations to make it into something that is self-serving. Extremists can be found in most religions. The only way to combat this is to be very knowledgeable of your own religion and beliefs so that you will recognize a falsehood when you hear it. Sadly, many people simply believe what they are told and that is it. Such people can be easily caught up in extremist groups as they lack knowledge. The same can be said for Christianity. We are not exempt from those who have perverted God's Word to make it say something that it never was intended to say. This is how cults are formed, and again, is due to a lack of knowledge. The bible says that the people perish due to a lack of knowledge (Hosea 4:6). ISIS operates via intimidation, fear, legalistic authority, assassinations, and bombings . This is nothing like what traditional Islam teaches. In fact, it is quite the opposite. It is not fair to classify all Muslims by such rouge fringe groups. For two years I worked and lived in an Islamic country. I never met anyone who was associated with ISIS nor any other extremist group. I found the Muslims there to be very friendly, eager to help, and welcoming. That experience really helped me to see them for who they really are and without the media bias that was projected to me. Many Muslims do not even consider groups such as ISIS to be true Muslims. They look at them in disdain as the perverters of Islam. Usually these are the more educated people who know what Islam is supposed to be. Sadly, a lot of Muslims have a lower educational level which would be very conducive to being led astray. Many modern Muslims are Muslim in name only and not in practice which makes them an easy target for extremists.

Trying to Find Chinatown

ENG-112-E1 20th March, 2013 â€Å"Trying to Find China Town† For Analysis 1. Benjamin is revealed his ethnic towards becoming a Chinese and how they look and define as a Chinese. Benjamin thinks he knows more because of his knowledge about the history, although he is a Chinese-American. But Ronnie argued he is a Chinese because his skin tone. They both are arguing different things. 2. Benjamin considers himself as Chinese is because he is a Caucasian Asian American and he knows the cultural heritage of Chinese, his identity.But as Ronnie, he just knows a little bit heritages of Chinese and even mixed up with African and European elements. 3. For the second-to-last stage direction, Hwang wants the audience to think about the contradiction between the characters. Actually they both are the same, Chinese, but they did not have the same view. The racial identity should not based on skin tone but connections between culture. For Writing 1. The writer, Hwang, wrote that the ways of speaking are different.Ronnie is more impulsive and exaggerate, like â€Å"Oh, Jesus†. Benjamin is more gentle and nice to Ronnie. He talked with him in a pleasant way instead of rude answering. 2. The characters both disagree about the importance of ethnic heritage to identity. In my opinion, both of them should not judge the other about what their race is. It is because skin tone does not represent one’s cultural. People could not understand what their background is. As the writer wrote, it is important to have the same connection in the same race.