Learning English Essay Example for Free

Learning English Essay Life long learning is the concept that it is never too soon or too late for learning. Lifelong learning is attitudinished that one should be open to the new ideas, decisions, skills or behaviours. English is neccessity of life and the same as lifelong learning when you want to live in the real world; English is very important and neccessity in your life. For example, when I was young I could not speak any language and then after I grew up my parents, my teachers; they tried to teach Thai language to me because they knew if I cannot understand Thai language it would be very difficult to live with another people when I grew up where I studied my teacher taught English to our students because he knew English is very important in the world, but I did not know why at that time I did not study hard. Sometime, English was boring; this is the reason why I did not have interest to study it, perhaps I think, I am lazy and it is not good for me. English is important key to success. If you want to do anything in the world such as, to study, to do your business, to make a new friends, to go aboard etc. Especially when you go aboard to study another course. It is teach in English and then when you graduate and want to get a good job, it is very important for you to do anything in your business. You can use it to make new friends from all over the countrys in the world for your business. It has an adventure over than somebody cannot use English. Your business has a good chance for your success. The real world has a lot of business competitors if you cannot use English maybe you get someone who want to do business with you and may decieve you and then your business may fail or bankrupt. Whatever English enlightens us about how to succeed in the real world eventually I want to study English, but according to my chance when I live in India. My disere is simutnious about studying English and to write research proposal an apply to study in some course at the university because i will hope it would be good for me to improve my English and I will finish maybe it has been good. When I have finished. I will get a good job and I can communicate or contact with foriegners who give a good chance and good work for me. Though I will achieve good things or bad experiences but I think, English is meaningful and worthwhile to study. I will want to study all the time, it cannot stop to learn probably if i will study for a long time, it will help me to succeed in anything. I am hopeful it can improve my life although it is very difficult and very complicated for me, but I will want to try and study. It  has worthiness or worthless it depends on you. If you think and do in the right way it is good for you and anybody, but on the other hand it is good for you only and then it can destroy someone.

Poverty in Australia Essay examples -- Poverty Essays

Poverty in Australia Before discussing the extent of poverty in Australia, it is first crucial to mention the difference between absolute poverty and relative poverty. Absolute Poverty is a situation where deprivation is extreme because people do not have access to the basic necessities such as food, clothing, and shelter. In contrast Relative Poverty is a situation in which the incidence of poverty is measured relative to things such as average weekly earnings or income per head. Therefore poverty, as talked about in Australia is the state where income is insufficient to meet the minimum needs of the household or individual. The Poverty Line is the level of income below which the income of the household or individual is inadequate to meet the essential needs of the household or individual as determined by society. The Poverty line is determined by a percentage of average weekly earnings. In 1966, the original poverty line for Australia, was set by Professor Henderson as basic wage plus the child endowment payable for two children. There is a definite lack of recent data on poverty in Australia, therefore we have to look back as far as reports from the 1970’s, in order to find any relevant information on poverty in Australia. In 1975 there was a report made on the extent of poverty in Australia by Professor Henderson. It has since been known as the Henderson Report. The Henderson Report found that 8.5 per cent of Australians were living under the poverty line. It also found that: â€Å"Most of the poor suffer from one or more of the following disabilities: old age, lack of a male bread-winner, a large number of dependant children, recent migration to Australia, or prolonged illness. The incidence of poverty was much higher in these categories than among those without any of these disabilities.†(Henderson 1975) At the time of this report average weekly earnings in Australia were $165 per week, the poverty line for a single person was set at $49.60 for a single person, and $93.20 for a couple w ith 2 children. (Jackson, McIver 1998) A report similar to the Henderson report was carried out in 1987, where the poverty line, still using the original method used in 1966, had been raised to $146 per week for a single, and $274 per week for a couple with two children. (Jackson, McIver 1998) Although the poverty line had risen due to economic grow... ... every fortnight without fail, and without the hassles of having to go to work every morning. Whilst the Australian Welfare System is not perfect it does without question assist in its main objective which is reducing inequality of incomes, and therefore the level of poverty. Although there is no current data on the amount of Australians living under the poverty line, and it is very difficult to estimate, it appears likely that using Professor Henderson’s original method, the increasing inequality in the distribution of household incomes has caused the percentage of Australians living below the poverty line to increased substantially. Bibliography: Collier, B. 1992. Introducing Economics. Sydney, New South Wales. Anzarut, D. 1985. Senior Economics. Melbourne, Victoria. Lipsey, R. Langley, P. Mahoney, D. Positive Economics for Australian Students, Sydney, New South Wales. National Coalition against Poverty. 10 September 2001. URL http://www.bsl.org.au/ncapwebsite Trends in Income Inequality in the 1990’s. 15 September 2001. URL http://www.natsem.canberra.edu.au/pubs/cpol.html. Pearce, Y. August 20 2001. â€Å"Poverty level ‘Just hot air’† The West Australian.

New Historicist Criticism: Macbeth and the Power Essay

Stripped of Shakespeare’s poetic style and skilful characterization, Macbeth is revealed as little more than a petty tyrant. Like Machiavelli’s Prince, Macbeth seeks power as an end in itself and sees any means as justified provided it helps him achieve his goal. It is a standard image of power: an individual, or small group, occupying a position of authority from which he (seldom she) attempts to force his will upon others. Today’s equivalent of a feudal monarch is the power-hungry politician, the cult leader, or the ruthless business tycoon. But the new historicist conception of power is different; rather than being a top-down affair that originates from a specific place or individual, power comes from all around us, it permeates us, and it influences us in many subtle and different ways. This idea of decentralized power, heavily indebted to post-structuralist philosophy (see Derrida and Foucault), is sometimes difficult to understand because it seems to have a n intangible, mystical quality. Power appears to operate and maintain itself on its own, without any identifiable individual actually working the control levers. This new historicist notion of power is evident in Macbeth in the way in which Macbeth’s apparent subversion of authority culminates in the re-establishment of that same type of authority under Malcolm. A ruthless king is replaced with another king, a less ruthless one, perhaps, but that is due to Malcolm’s benevolent disposition, not to any reform of the monarchy. Similarly, the subversion of the play’s moral order is contained, and the old order reaffirmed, by the righteous response to that subversion. In other words, what we see at the beginning of the play–an established monarch and the strong Christian values that legitimize his sovereignty–is the same as what we see at the end of the play, only now the monarchy and its supporting values are even more firmly entrenched thanks to the temporary disruption. It is almost as if some outside force carefully orchestrates events in order to strengthen the existing power structures. Consider, for example, a military leader who becomes afraid of the peace that undermines his position in society. In response to his insecurity, he creates in people’s minds the fear of an impending enemy–whether rea l or imaginary, it doesn’t matter. As a consequence of their new feelings of insecurity, people desire that their leader remain in power and even increase his power so that he can better defend them from their new II enemy. II The more evil and threatening our enemies are made to appear, the more we believe our own aggressive response to them is justified, and the more we see our leaders as our valiant protectors (Zinn,Declarations of Independence 260-61,266). Military or political power is strengthened, not weakened, when it has some kind of threatening subversion of contain ( Greenblatt 62-65). The important point about the new historicist notion of power, however, is that it is not necessary for anyone to orchestrate this strengthening of authority. Duncan certainly doesn’t plan to be murdered in order that the crown will be more secure on Malcolm’s head after he deposes Macbeth. The witches can be interpreted as manipulating events, but there is nothing to indicate that they are motivated by a concern to increase the power and authority of the Scottish crown. It is not necessary to believe in conspiracy theories to explain how power perpetuates itself; the circular and indirect, rather than top-down, way in which power operates in society is enough to ensure that it is maintained and its authority reinforced. The theater illustrates this point in that the Renaissance theater–its subject matter, spectacle, emphasis on role-playing–drew its energy from the life of the court and the affairs of state–their ceremony, royal pageants and progresses, the spectacle of public executions (Greenblatt 11-16). In return, the theater helped legitimate the existing state structures by emphasizing, for example, the superior position in society of the aristocracy and royalty. These are the class of people, the theater repeatedly showed its audience, who deserve to have their stories told on stage, while common people are not worthy subjects for serious drama and are usually represented as fools or scoundrels. Revealing the inherently theatrical aspects of the court and affairs of state runs the risk of undermining their authority–if people on stage can play at being Kings and Queens, lords and ladies, then there is always the possibility that the audience will suspect that real Kings and Queens, lords and ladies, are just ordinary people who are playing a role and do not actually deserve their position of wealth and privilege. But the very existence of the theater helped keep the threat of rebellion under control by providing people with a legitimate, though restricted, place to express otherwise unacceptable ideas and behavior (Mullaney 8-9). Within the walls of the theater, it is acceptable to mock the actor playing a king, but never the king himself; it is acceptable to contemplate the murder of a theatrical monarch, but never a real one. Macbeth deals with the murder of a king, but Shakespeare turns that potentially subversive subject into support for his king, James I. Queen Elizabeth died without a direct heir, and a – power vacuum is a recipe for domestic turmoil or even war. The consequences of Macbeth’s regicide and tyranny illustrate the kinds of disruption that were prevented by the peaceful ascension to the throne of James, son of Mary, Queen of Scots. The â€Å"good king† of England ( 4.3 .147) who gives Malcolm sanctuary and supports his cause as the rightful successor to the Scottish crown is an indirect reference to James I. Macbeth is about treason and murder, but Malcolm’s description of the noble king (147-59), and the stark contrast between him and Macbeth, reinforces the idea that good subjects should see their king as their benefactor and protector. Shakespeare was not coerced into flattering his king. There was official censorship in his time, but it is unlikely that he needed anyone to tell him what he could or could not write; he knew the types of stories that were acceptable to authority and desirable to his paying public. Whether or not Shakespeare felt constrained by these limitations, or even consciously recognized them, is not the point; the point is that he worked within a set of conventions and conditions which relied upon and reinforced the governing power relations of his time, and so there was no need for him to be manipulated by a government censor looking over his shoulder. If Shakespeare had not known the boundaries of the acceptable, or had not conformed to the demands of power, he would never have become a successful playwright. According to new historicism, our own relationship to power is similar to that of Shakespeare’s: we collaborate with the power that controls us. Without necessarily realizing what we are doing, we help create and sustain it, thus reducing the need for authority figures to remind us what to do or think. Once we accept the cultural limitations imposed on our thought and behavior, once we believe that the limits of the permissible are the extent of the possible, then we happily police ourselves. .

Crusoe’s Island as an Allegorical Expression of Locke’s...

Alexander Wilson Dr. Victoria Myers GSHU III 10 November 2011 Crusoe’s Island as an Allegorical Expression of Locke’s Theories on Property and Government Two prolific writers captured what was pressing to the economic and political zeitgeist of 18th century England. John Locke’s ideas on property influenced readers like Thomas Jefferson who would be a prolific politician involved in the founding of the United States. Locke’s views on an individual’s right to property is discussed in his Second Treatise of Government. But what also are compelling to readers at the time were issues of independence in regards to morality. Reading Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe, issues like these are discussed in a story about a prodigal son who becomes†¦show more content†¦Government retains consent so long as it protects individual’s rights, and most significantly an individual’s right to property. While in a state of nature, private property does not need to be protected, and a government is useless. When a government does not protect an individual’s property, it makes itself useless. So long as the accumulation of property does not harm other individuals or their freedom to accumulate property, it is morally justified to accumulate property. Locke believes that individuals who labor for their property justly own the rights to the property. Man also has the moral duty of not harming himself or others. Locke’s moral philosophy is one that is based on duty to your fellow man and to yourself. Locke recognizes that when land is left uncultivated or food is left to rot, those that possess them are not doing their duty and inflicting harm on others. When civil society is formed to protect an individual’s property, man gives consent to a just government if he feels that his right to property is protected. To Locke, individuals who labor have a right to sustain themselves and an economy is not morally justified unless it grants all laborers their rights to resources. An economy should be able to provide for all who labor in order for survival. People have the basic r ight to