Papermaking Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Papermaking - Research Paper Example However, prior to the discovery of the paper making technology, writing and reading was a very cumbersome process that involved scribbling on wooden tablets, woven papyrus reeds, and other expensive materials1. As such, writing was only left for a few individuals in the community who could afford accessing the expensive writing materials as well as getting adequate space to store the written materials. The invention of papermaking technology is one of the four major inventions that can be traced back to China, alongside gunpowder, compass, and the printing technique. According to Ancient records, the invention of the papermaking technology is accredited to Cai Lun (also Tsa’i Lun), an official working in the Imperial Court during the Han Dynasty2.Reportedly, Cai Lun came up with this invention in the year 105 AD. However, recent archaeological studies have unearthed sufficient evidence pointing to the fact that paper was already being used in China several years before Cai Lun’s reported invention. Nevertheless, the role of Cai Lun in the history of paper making is still relevant in the paper industry. This is because he was the first to popularize the technology by putting together a recipe for the whole process and reporting it to the Emperor3. Cai Lun’s technology quickly became popular in China because it was cheap, reliable, used readily available resourc es, and was easier to make4. The main raw materials for Cai Lun’s paper technology included fishnets, fibres, old rags, mulberry, and hemp waste. The main focus of this paper is to explore the history behind paper making and how it extended from China to the rest of the globe, and how this invention has influenced the world today. Essentially, Cai Lun’s paper making discovery helped to lay the foundation of the technology used in huge paper factories in Europe, America, and other parts of the world today. Cai Lun is

Dickens hard times resonates with the work of his contemporaries Essay

Dickens hard times resonates with the work of his contemporaries particulary in relation to the effects on the enroaching effe - Essay Example Charles Dickens’s Hard Times presents a unique picture of industrialization and urbanization in 19th century England. The sullen atmosphere of Coketown symbolizes suppressed anger of the factory workers and failure to improve their lives and wellbeing. Surprisingly or not, Dickens’s work resonates with and echoes in the works of his predecessors and contemporaries, who discuss the tragic man-city dichotomy and depict the disruption of human integrity by cities. It would be fair to say that Charles Dickens’s Hard Times presents a unique and profoundly philosophic allegory of urbanization and industrialization, which causes encroaching effects on the lives of English class workers and reinforces the sense of human alienation from everything rational and urban. Charles Dickens’s Hard Times is rightly considered as one of the best representations of industrialization and its disintegrative effects on the lives and wellbeing of English class workers. ... Nevertheless, it is due to Dickens’s repulsion toward dry statistics, rationality, and facts that Hard Times turned out to be an excellent source of truth about the disruptive effects of industrialization on workers. In Dickens’s book, urbanization and industrialization are associated with the lack of creativity and everything humane. The family of Gradgrinds exemplifies the utmost saneness and extraordinary rationality with no tint of feeling or romance: â€Å"No little Gradgrind had ever seen a face in the moon; it was up in the moon before it could speak distinctly. No little Gradgrind had ever learnt the silly jingle [†¦] no little Gradgrind had ever associated a cow in a field [†¦] with that yet more famous cow who swallowed Tom Thumb† (Dickens 1854). Needless to say, those are the products of industrialization, which suppress romanticism and create a sullen atmosphere on Coketown. The name of the city itself symbolizes sullenness and intoxication with rationality. This sullenness, however, is nothing but the sign of repressed anger, which finds no outlet but goes unabated (Colon 2006). The implications of industrial sullenness in Coketown are two-fold: on the one hand, it creates and fosters a claustrophobic atmosphere; on the other hand, it indicates and reflects the growing social dissent in the English work class. Excessive rationality leaves workers beyond the boundaries of improved wellbeing and, at the same time, emphasizes an irresolvable man-city dichotomy. The themes of sullenness and workers’ alienation from the processes of industrialization and urbanization resonate with T.S. Eliot’s The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock. Green and Fernald (2003) are correct in that both works create a set of metaphors which

Student will be required to go to zoo observe two types of non human Research Paper

Student will be required to go to zoo observe two types of non human primates and write two pages on each primate observed - Research Paper Example His movement on the ground is fast and fluid, and he leaps along, using hands and feet, and somersaulting as he goes. He looks left and right all the time, as if to scan for predators, and as soon as he reaches a tree trunk he swings up in an arm over arm gesture. His movement from branch to branch is even faster than his ground movement, showing an adaptation to life in the forest canopy. On the ground slightly apart from the tree equipment there is an older female and a younger orang utan who are engaging in what looks like affectionate teasing. This is probably a mother and child, but the younger individual is not a baby. This may be an adolescent. The pair roll about on the grass, and hug each other from time to time as they do so. Communication appears to be by touch, since they do not have much eye contact, and their interaction is mostly silent. The bond between the two is obviously close. At one point the solitary younger male approaches the two and reaches out as if to touch them, but the two ignore him and he distances himself again from them. None of the orang utans take any notice of the human observers on the perimeter of the enclosure. High up on a shelf there is another adult individual sitting in a crouched position. The full face is hidden, and so it is not obvious whether this is a male or female. It is easy to overlook this one because there was little movement and no sound. The orang utan looked down on the pair playing on the grass, but appeared not to be interested in what was going on. It may be that this orang utan was depressed, or simply bored with the same routine. There were several spells when the young male positioned himself at the edge of the enclosure, looking out and turning his back to the other individuals. This appeared to be a deliberate statement of independence from the rest, as if he were imitating the senior sitting up on the high shelf. He did not sustain this pose for long, however, and soon resumed his hyper-active s winging, grasping the suspended toys, and running along the ground. The key activities viewed were therefore play (both solo and in a mother/child pair) and observation of each other and the surrounding area. There was plenty of independent activity, but only the mother and child had any real close interaction with each other. This suggests that orang utans are fairly solitary creatures outside the mother/child unit. There is evidence of group awareness but it appears not to be the main concern of the orang utans observed. The chimpanzee group is much more vocal and there is a lot of interaction between individuals, with groups forming and dissolving all the time. There is also a larger number present, with at least 12 individuals moving around in a steady walk on their hands and feet. From time to time there is some screeching from one or two individuals, and the rest appear to be uneasy when they hear this. The screeches are made with bared teeth and agitated movements. The other chimpanzees look at the screeching chimpanzee and then look away again, sometimes making lip movements and raising eyebrows. Some chimpanzeess get up and move out of the way when an agitated individual approaches them. Many individuals sit for a time on the grass, picking items up and looking at them which suggests a foraging instinct. They do not appear to be eating what they find. It is not always evident which are males and which are females, especially in the younger individuals. There is one

Adrenoceptors and sympathomemtics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Adrenoceptors and sympathomemtics - Essay Example In the vascular and smooth muscle cell, the alpha-2 adrenergic receptors are located in the postsynaptic terminal. Most of ÃŽ ± 1-adrenoceptors activation are linked to excitation of postsynaptic target ÃŽ ±-2-adrenoceptors usually activates the Gi inhibitory protein that in turn decreases cAMP. The inhibitory function of alpha-2 adrenergic receptors is vital negative feedback system to control of the discharge of presynaptic nerve terminal’s noradrenaline. These prevent prolonged activation of the effector organs such as male sex organs, eyes and veins (Bryant, Knights and Salerno, 2010, p. 209). These alpha-adrenergic receptors usually control the vasoconstriction of arterioles in skin, pupil dilation, gut relaxation and smooth muscle relaxation in the prostrate and bladder neck. Classification of beta-adrenergic receptors into ÃŽ ²1, ÃŽ ²2 and ÃŽ ²3 considers their affinity to agonist or antagonist. Location of site that recognises agonist and antagonist is in the portion of receptor that is membrane-bound. Distribution of Beta-adrenergic receptors is in various tissues. Beeta-1 is in the heart, beta-2 in the smooth muscle and beta-3 in adipocytes cell membrane (Bryant, Knights and Salerno, 2010, p. 210). All of the beta-adrenergic receptors lead to activation of adenylyl cyclase in which the agonists leads to formation of cAMP from ATP. Activation these receptors leads to increase heart beat rate, relaxed bronchus and uterine and vasoconstriction of arterioles supplying blood to skeletal muscle. Sympathomimetic drugs are those designed to act similarly like adrenaline or noradrenaline by their action on adrenoceptors and act in sympathetic stimulation of the system (Bertram and Anthony, 2009, p. 128). The classification of these drugs as direct or indirect agonist depends on their mode of action in stimulation of the neural

Severn Suzuki Article Essay Example for Free

Severn Suzuki Article Essay WE are responsible for our Planet Our planet Is getting more and more dirty. The earth Is full of waste and the temperature Is getting higher and higher. Would n It be nice to live on a clean and comfortable planet, where you can feel the nature with all its beatiful sections. Earth Summit, that is the name of a UN conference in 1992 met in Rio de Janeiro to consider the urgent need for development in developing countries. They are planning, not to destroy the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Earth Summit wants all people to fix the lifestyle, maybe only a little bit, and save the orld. A girl named Severn Suzuki paid for the trip to Rio herself and wanted to let people think about our Situation with the earth and talked In a public speech to all people. She wants to change the habits of adults and children. Severn says, that she found fish with cancer. Is this the way we want to eat fish? We really have to think of what we can make better in waste seperation. So if for instance plastic is thrown in the sea, the fish will eat the plastic, and we eat the fish. Horrible! Another problem is the buying of unnecessary things. We buy and throw away. Why don t we think of what we really need? In my oplnlon the arguments from Severn Suzuki are still a big problem nowadays. Actually the problems got worse. If the society does not change their lifestyles, maybe we are all killer. Because we killed our children or grandchildren. Firstly the production of plastic and other nonbiodegradable waste increases. And secondly the waste seperation is not important for the people any more, because they do not realize the danger. To sum up we all have to work and clean our planet, f we want to live on the beatlful earth. We can not only use and use and giving nothing back to regenerate, so It Is on our planet.

Summary of Critical Theory

Summary of Critical Theory The Central Claims of Critical Theory In order to understand the central claims of Critical Theory, it must first be defined. What is Critical Theory? Critical Theory first coined as such in 1937 is a name given to a series of new approaches to the study of culture, literature and thought that developed during the 1960’s primarily in France (Leitch, 2001). It refers to a series of pathways for intellectual inquiry that first emerged with the end of the 18th century European Enlightenment (mid 1600’s to late 1700’s) (Nowlan, 2001) in which the causes associated with it were legal equality, the right of ordinary Europeans to hold their rulers to account, the rule of law, transparent government, freedom of expression, the right of nations to self-determination and to freedom from colonial domination – and they are as relevant today as they were two hundred years ago (Glendening, 2003). Critical theory questions and challenges that which seems obvious, natural and simple in the world around us â⠂¬â€œ the conviction that what is, or what is in the process of becoming, or what appears to be, or what is most commonly understood to be, or necessary and inevitable – it does not accept any of this (Nowlan). The Frankfort School is the name given to a group of German Jewish intellectuals associated with the Institute for Social Research (Institut fur Sozialforschung) founded in 1923. Their work was an attempt to integrate psychoanalytic insights and the domain of culture into a Marxist analysis of twentieth century societies. The group composite was that of thinkers such as Horkheimer, Adorno and Marcuse (Agger, 1993). According to these theorists a â€Å"critical† theory may be distinguished from a â€Å"traditional† theory according to a specific practical purpose: a theory is critical to the extent that it seeks human emancipation, â€Å"to liberate human beings from the circumstances that enslave them† (Horkheimer, 1982, 244). Theories aim to explain and transform circumstances; critical theories provide the descriptive and normative bases for social inquiry aimed at decreasing domination and increasing freedom in their forms. A clarification is given to what is not clearly understood or is questionable. Theories arise in many ranges – anthropology, film, religion, linguistics and political science – and even family lifestyle. Critical theory is not a system, nor it is reducible to any fixed set of proscriptions (Bronner, 2002). Today, social theory is in crisis because of growing dissatisfaction with the dominant methodologies and conceptions of social theory and research. The 1960’s is when Stephen Eric Bronner became interested in critical theory as new theoretical paradigms emerged that questioned prevailing quantitative, empiricist, and positivist conceptions of social theory. But where did the central claim of critical theory begin? Since the Frankfort School was the first Marxist-oriented research center affiliated with a major German university directed by Carl Grunberg, it tended to be empirical, historical, and oriented toward problems of the European working class movement. Works by Karl Korsch, Georg Lukacs and others also had works published in its journal Archiv fur die Geschichte des Sozialismus und der Arbeiterbewegung. Grunberg retired in 1930 and Max Horkheimer became the director. Under Horkheimer, the Institute sought to develop an interdisciplinary social theory which could serve as an instrument of social transformation publishing a journal Zeitschrift fur Sozialforschung (1932-1941) that contained a wholesome collection of articles and book reviews. These compilations detailed social theory and defined any misconceptions of their meaning. Horkheimer, upon assuming his position as Director, delivered an inaugural address on January 24, 1931, entitled â€Å"The State of Social Philosophy and the Tasks of an Institute for Social Research (Bronner and Keller 1989: 25-36). Within the contents of the text, he defines social philosophy as an attempt to elucidate the â€Å"fate of human beings, insofar as they are parts of state, law, economy, religion, in short, with the entire material and spiritual culture of humanity. He criticizes Kant for grounding social philosophy in the experience and faculties of the particular individual (Ibid: 33) and praises Hegel’s theory as an improvement but yet questions speculative metaphysics and their tendencies to celebrate a higher transcendental sphere of Being and meaning over concrete existence. (ibid:38-39). Horkheimer continued to defend the importance for critical social theory and envisaged a program of supra-disciplinary research which would investigate current social an d political problems. Philosophers, sociologists, economists, historians, and psychologists would be united in and ongoing research community who would do together what in other disciplines one individual does alone in a laboratory, which is what genuine scientists have always done: namely to pursue the great philosophical question using the most refined scientific methods; to reformulate and to make more precise the questions in the course of work as demanded by the object; and to develop new methods without losing sight of the universal (ibid:41). Hence we see the first steps toward the formation of critical theory in the making. It is impossible to characterize the â€Å"Frankfort School† as a whole since its work spanned several decades and involved a variety of thinkers who later engaged in sharp debates with each other. Rather, one should perceive various phases of Institute work: 1) the empirical-historical studies of the Grunberg era; 2) the attempts in the early to mid-1930’s to establish a materialist supra-disciplinary social theory under Horkheimer’s directorship; 3) the attempts to develop a critical theory of society during the exile period from about 1937 to the early 1940’s; 4) the dispersion of Institute members in the 1940’s and the new directions sketched out by Horkheimer and Adorno; 5) the return of the Institute to Germany and its work in Frankfurt during the 1950’s and 1960’s; 6) the development of critical theory in various directions by Fromm, Lowenthal, Marcuse, and others who remained in the U.S.; 7) the continuation of Institute projec ts and development of critical theory in Germany by Jurgen Habermas, Oskar Negt, Alfred Schmidt, and others in the 1970’s and 1980’s; and finally 8) contributions to critical theory by a variety of younger theorists and scholars currently active in Europe and the United States. Kellner believes that a crisis of critical theory emerged with its fragmentation after World War II. Social theory stopped developing despite some empirical research projects and sustained meta-theoretical analyses be certain of its members, especially Adorno (Kellner, 1989). He believes that critical theory provides the most advanced theoretical perspectives within contemporary social theory from the 1930’s through the early 1960’s; new socio-cultural developments since then have rendered obsolete some of its theses concerning on-dimensional society, the media, technology, and so on. In particular, critical theory has not continued to theorize new technologies, new developments in the media, changes in socialization practices, and new cultural developments. This is surprising as earlier contributions were precisely in these areas (Wiggershaus, 1986). Adorno did a great deal of work in social theory in the 1950’s and 1960’s, as well as turning out an incredible profusion of texts in the areas of literary criticism, cultural critique, philosophy, and aesthetics. His work turned from supra-disciplinary research to philosophical reflections (Kellner, 1989). Herbert Marcuse argued that Marxism had degenerated into a rigid orthodoxy and needed concrete experience to revivify the theory and that it neglected individual’s problems. He was concerned about individual liberation and well-being in addition to social transformation. The intentions of his writings were of great interest, yet many were unpublished and unknown (Kellner, 1984). The theory of hegemony by Antonio Gramsci reserves a place for the intellectuals in society. Men find themselves born in a process independent of their will, they cannot control it, they can seek only to understand it and guide their actions accordingly was noted to be economic determination by Marx. Gramsci was concerned to eradicate economic determinism to develop its explanatory power with respect to super-structural institutions. His holdings were that class struggle must always involve ideas and ideologies, ideas that would make the revolution and also that would prevent it. He stressed the role performed by human agency in historical change: economic crises by themselves would not subvert capitalism. He was more â€Å"dialectic† than â€Å"deterministic†: he tried to build a theory which recognized the autonomy, independence and importance of culture and ideology (Strinati, 1995). The works in the last decade relative to critical theory has followed Habermas in attempt to develop a more adequate philosophical aspect of critical theory (Heinemann, 1986). A deficit of social research and elaboration of new theoretical perspectives has come about with contributions from members of the postmodern camp who attempt to theorize the impact of new technologies, the media, and other socio-cultural developments (Kellner, 1988 and 1989). The focus on democracy as the location for cooperative, practical and transformative activity continues in the work of Jurgen Habermas, as does the attempt to determine the nature and limits of â€Å"real democracy† in complex pluralistic, and globalizing societies. Habermas’ work is concerned with rethinking the tradition of critical theory and German social philosophy. He has advanced that tradition in distinctive ways. His rationality consists not so much in the possession of knowledge and thus primarily concerned with the consistency and conten of one’s belief’s, but rather in â€Å"how speaking and acting subjects acquire and use knowledge† (Habermas, 1984). Rationality, freedom and justice are not just theoretical issues to be explored and debated. Habermas’ entire work aims to defend and continue the enlightenment project against the challenge of Weber’s instrumental rationality, Horkheimer and Adorno’s earlier critical t heory and Nietzscheanism in the forms of post-structuralism as presented by Foucault and Derrida and the postmodernism of Lyotard. The reconciliation of the competition of claims of the reason of the life and the world are contributions of Habermas to contemporary and social theory. His account and his answers are not complete, but raise questions without losing the hope of continued research (Rasmussen, 1990). People create conditions and deal with them. Their opinions influence the thoughts of others. In his theory, Habermas fails to incorporate or appreciate gender and racial inequality. Habermas’ calls for particular â€Å"reconstructive sciences,† whose aim it is to render theoretically explicit the intuitive, pre-theoretical know-how underlying such basic human competences as speaking and understanding, judging, and acting. It is not certain if Habrmas’ theories are built on a conception of the world in which essentialist characteristics (middle class, white, males, or class) dominate. Historically discourses of rationality and progress have sided with men over women (Stanley and Pateman, 1991). Certain valuable elements are cited of by Selya Benhabib (1986) that can provide basis for a wide-ranging normative critique of contemporary society. An excerpt from Critical Theory and Society: A Reader: â€Å"essay is a stylistic vehicle with its inherently unfinished quality is the logical form for generating anti-systemic claims and fostering the existence of reflexivity† perhaps best describes the logic that inspired Bronner and Kellner to publish this book. Within is a collection of seminal essays, many appearing in English for the first time, which provides an excellent overview of the critical theory developed by the Frankfurt School. An essay is a short work that treats of a topic from an author’s personal point of view, often taking into account subjective experiences and personal reflections upon them (Wikipedia). What better way can a criticism be announced than through an essay? Personal opinions are relished because they may have something within their contents that was not seen by others. In the essay Le Prix Du Progress by Max Horkheimer exemplifies the nature of discussions that were presented to the early theorists. A French physiologist, Pierre Flourens, was disenchanted with the use of chloroform. He states his belief, and cites his reasoning. The essay ends with Horkheimer’s comments. Somewhat in the form of an editorial for a newspaper, but yet an answer is given. A concern was presented – a problematic thought was answered. Another famous essay by Theodor Adorno elaborates on Culture Industry Reconsidered. In it Adorno explains the term culture industry, corrects inconsistencies from a prior publication and remarks on the term â€Å"mass culture† (from â€Å"The Culture Industry: Selected Essays on Mass Cuture† London: Routledge, 1991). In Critical Theory and Society: A Reader are included the works of Horheimer, Erich Fromm, Lowenthal, Pellock, Herbert Marcuse, to mention a few. The time realm of critical theory displays evidence that modern culture needs to redefine the conclusions of its predecessors. The understanding of theories, imply that they have to be updated continually to include new circumstances. Modernization has to be critiqued to include the changing of the times. We should be concerned with something other than uncovering the past. Instead we should reinvigorate the present, salvage the Enlightenment legacy, and contest those who would institutionally freeze its radicalism and strip away its protest character (Israel, 2001). The inclusion of the way people act and why they act can begin with critical theory of family. Family history provides an example of some of the theoretical deficiencies as in social scenes. The family is attacked and defended with equal vehemence. With a dominant empiricist tradition, historians have come to the field of family history without a clear sense of what the significant questions are. They have not self-consc iously theorized the family as a field of investigation. Instead they began by adopting the conventional wisdom of sociology which, goes back for Federic Le Play (L’Organisation de la famille selon le vrai modele signale par l’histoire de toutes les races et de tous les temps –Paris, 1871), and saw a broad change in the family from an extended form of the Middle Ages to a nuclear form of modernity (Shorter, 1975). From the family come the leaders of the world. Understanding distinct family structures enables an outline to the future tasks of its members. The tendency of Marxist social theorists is to view the family as a dependent variable, a secondary structure, unintelligible in its own right, which will change after the revolution. The family is an intelligible as a structure (Morgan, 1975) composed of race, religion, gender, which impose these factors towards their beliefs. From a â€Å"Gramscian† perspective the mass media have to be interpreted as an instrument to spread and reinforce dominant hegemony – or they can be used to spread counter-hegemonic ideas too. â€Å"Pop culture and the mass media are subject to the production, reproduction and transformation of hegemony through the institution of civil society which cover the areas of cultural production and consumption. Hegemony operates culturally and ideologically through the institutions of civil society which characterizes mature liberal-democratic, capitalist societies. These institutions include education, the family, the church, the mass media, popular culture, etc. (Strinati, 1995: 168-169). From Strinati’s point of view the main problem with Gramsci’s ideas is the same as the the Frankfurt School’s theories and Althusser’s work: their Marxist background. The framework does not allow history to contradict the theory, and the interpretation of reality becomes rather elementary. Critical Theory offers an approach to distinctly normative issues that cooperates with the social sciences in a nonproductive way. Its domain is inquiry into the normative dimension of social activity, in particular how actors employ their practical knowledge and normative attitudes from complex perspectives in various sorts of contexts. It also must consider social facts as problematic situations from the point of view of variously situated agents. In conclusion, Kellner feels that in order to find a way out of the contemporary crisis of social theory, it must develop new perspectives. Critical Theory should be responded to with theoretical analyses of developments within the capitalist economy and of changes in class stratification, the labor process, new technologies, the media, and politics. The central claims of critical theory should be emphasized by those who wish to revitalize it in an attempt to politicize it with new social movements and existing political struggles to buil d a better society. The development of both its â€Å"analysis of the present situation and a new politics is in order to become once again the cutting edge of radical social theory† (Kellner, 1989). Critical theory enables the development and refinement of the ability to engage in comments as critics, through movements encompassed around incomprehensible situations of society. All productive and concerned citizens should be the empowered critical agents that are able to question, challenge and contribute toward the progress of transformation of the prevailing status quo within the communities, societies, and cultures that are worked in to help maintain and reproduce every day. In relation citizens should not only be inescapably interested, but also vitally important as participants to opinionate on theory (Nowlan). BIBLIOGRAPHY Agger, Ben. 1993. The Discourse of Domination: From the Frankfurt School to Postmodernism. Northwestern University Press. January. Bronner, Stephen Eric. 2002. Critical Theory Its Theorists. Routledge Publishers: 2nd Edition. April. Bronner, Stephen Eric and Douglas Keller. 1989. Critical Theory and Society: A Reader. New York and London: Routledge. Glendening, Marc. 2003. Visions for a democratic Europe. Brussels, December 12. Habermas, J. 1987. The Theory of Communicative Action. Volumes 1 and 2. Boston: Beacon Press. Heinemann, Benhabib, Seyla. 1986. Critique, Norm, and Utopia. New York: Columbia University Press. Horkheimer, M, 1982. Critical Theory. New York: Seabury Press. Israel, Jonathan. 2001. Radical Enlightenment: Philosophy and theMaking of Modernity 1650-1750. Oxford University Press. Kellner, Douglas. 1984. Herbert Marcuse and the Crisis of Marxism. London and Berkeley: Macmillian and University of California Press. 1988. Postmodernism as Social Theory: Some Problems and Challenges,† Theory, Culture Society, Vol. 5: 240-269. 1989. Critical Theory, Marxism, and Modernity. Cambridge and Baltimore: Polity Press and John Hopkins University Press. Leitch, Vincent B. et al. (eds), The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism (New York/London: W.W. Norton, 2001. Morgan, D.H.J. Social Theory and the Family. London, 1975. Nowlan, Bob. Introduction: What Is Critical Theory and Why Study It? University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire. September 21, 2001. Stanley, L and Pateman, C. 1991. Feminist Interpretations and Political Theory. Cambridge: Polity. Rasmussen, D. 1990. Reading Habermas. London: Blackwell. Shorter, Edward. The Making of the Modern Family. New York. 1975. Strinati, Dominic. 1995. An Introduction to Theories of Popular Culture. Rouyledge, London. Wiggershaus, Rolf. 1986. Die Frankfurter Schule. Munich: Hanser. Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essay

The Stranger by Albert Camus - Man or Monster? :: The Stranger The Outsider

Man or Monster in Camus’ The Stranger (The Outsider) In Albert Camus’ absurdist novel, The Stranger, Meursault’s detachment from society and his killing of the Arab reveal moral and ethical implications for him and his society. As is common in many absurdist novels, Camus discusses the estrangement - and later development - of an individual in a benign and indifferent universe, one in which conformity prevails. Camus not only satirizes the conformity of society, but religion and the legal system as well. By writing in the first person (from the standpoint of Meursault), he draws in the reader, making the evils of society more prevalent. The conflict is established at the end of Part I, when Meursault kills an Arab; an action not uncommon in Algiers during this period of social unrest (the 1930’s). He does not do it intentionally, but rather because of the intensity of the moment and the blinding sunlight reflecting off of the Arab’s blade.   The fact that Meursault kills an Arab is of little importance in this novel. The jury and the general population despise him because he is different, not because of the murder. Even Meursault’s lawyer predicts that the punishment will be minimal. Throughout the entire trial, the prosecution stresses Meursault’s lifestyle and his indifference to everything. They bring up his mother’s funeral and say that he showed no signs of emotion. To make things worse, he went to a Fernandel comedy and had sex with Marie on the very next day. The prosecutor once states, â€Å"...all I see is a monster.† It is true that Meursault was different from the rest of society. However, he changes throughout the trial and eventually becomes an existentialist hero. This is because he finds meaning in life. It is ironic, though, that he learns to appreciate life after his is effectively over. His apathetic approach to life is made clear from the first page: â€Å"Maman died today. Or yesterday maybe, I don’t know.† This foreshadows his approach to everything else in the book. His indifference to Maman’s death contrast’s significantly to Salamano’s distress at losing his dog. Many of the characters in this book also function to highlight his qualities through contrast. At the end of the book, after coming to a realization, Meursault does not want to die and for the first time, he shows emotion. He shakes and screams at the chaplain and says, â€Å"It was the first time in my life I wanted to kiss a man,† when Celeste speaks up for him at the trial.