Social trends and issues Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Social trends and issues - Essay Example The ONS report (2011) states that London was the greatest growing region in England and Wales followed by three other regions growing at 8%. The population density of London is the highest in England and Wales at 52 persons per hectare. The male population in London is 4.0 Million while the female population is 4.1 million. The median age for the residents of London is 38.1 years. GLA intelligence reports show that there are over 50, people aged above 90 in London. The life expectance at birth in London improved to 82.3 years. The life expectancy at 65 increased by 2 months this indicates an improvement in the health of the population. It is evident that London’s population is the youngest than other regions in the UK. There are over 300 languages spoken in London. The age structure of London is not similar to that of England as a whole. London has a greater proportion of people aged between 20 and 44. Data illustrates that in inner London people aged 20 and 44 represent 48% of the population and in outer London people aged 20and 44 make up 39% of the population. When we compare these figures to the rest of England, it is higher because in England the people aged between 20 and 44 make up 35% of the population. The age structure of London shows children aged five and below make up 8.5% of the population whereas people aged 65+ makes up 11% of the population. The ONS state that London has the highest proportion of young children. When we compare 2001 and 2011 data, it is evident that in London the number of children under 5 increased by 24%. Data shows that the residents of London aged 15-64 increased by 13.5% since 2001. This is the largest increase in England and Wales. The ONS report explains that areas that have a high population of 65+ hav e fewer births and more deaths this explain their slow growth rates. The population growth rate in London is due to the high numbers of birth and low deaths (London.gov.uk, 2011). The ONS states that the

John Broadus Watson Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

John Broadus Watson - Research Paper Example Watson’s childhood John Broadus Watson was born on 9th of January 1878 in the village of Travelers Rest, South Carolina and his parents were Emma Kesiah Roe Watson and Pickens Butler Watson. His birth was in a poor farmer’s family and there are contradictions regarding his sibling particulars among experts. Watson’s mother was immensely religious and an active member of the Reedy River Baptist Church which made him to involve in religious activities during his childhood. His mother expected him to become a minister and so she kept his name after John Albert Broadus, a minister of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and she tried to keep her family always close to the church and she never let her family members to drink, smoke and dance. Watson’s father, on the other hand, was least religious. He used to drink and chase women and eventually separated from his family in 1891. Watson’s childhood was immersed in poverty and isolation. ... He engaged himself in a part time job at a chemical laboratory to pay his college fees and continued to live with his family during his college days. Watson was influenced by Gordon B. Moore who taught him philosophy and psychological works of Wundt and James at his college. Watson was not happy with his brother Edward and there had been constant clashes between these two brothers and Edward considered Watson as a shame to his family. Watson’s graduation took one additional year to complete and he made it in 1899 as he was flunked by his favorite teacher in 1898. But there is an interesting counterpart to the story and it restarts at the point when Watson received a letter form Gordon B. Moore requesting to accept him as a research student under the guidance of Watson. But unfortunately Moore died soon after loosing his eyesight before starting his research under the supervision of his former student. Even though it is true that Watson had to spend one additional year to compl ete his graduation at Furman; the extra year benefited him to achieve a post graduation at the age of 21. The Chicago era Watson worked in a tiny school at Greenville as a teacher for a monthly salary of $25 after completing his graduation form Furman and it was the death of his mother which made him think about going for higher studies in the University of Chicago or in Princeton. He applied in both the universities and decided to choose Chicago by recognizing the fact that it is necessary to have thorough knowledge of Greek and Latin to go on with his studies at Princeton. His favorite faculty at Furman who flunked him was also from the University of Chicago and this was yet another personnel reason behind his decision. He took

Sociology Essays Risk Society Theory

Sociology Essays Risk Society Theory Risk Society Theory What are the main features of Ulrich Beck’s ‘Risk Society’ theory? To what extent does it challenge the explanations of inequality based upon class, gender and race? This essay will give brief context to the term coined by Ulrich Beck (1992), ‘risk society’, before it discusses the main characteristics of Beck’s theory; risk, individualisation and reflexive modernity, characteristics that all intertwine with one another. Demonstrates a realist approach to risk, throughout some of his writings however he demonstrates a weak version f social constructionalizm. (lupton) â€Å"Society is increasingly preoccupied with the future (and also with safety), which generates the notion of risk† (Giddens 1999: 3). Ulrich Beck (1992) coined the term ‘risk society’, which is used to describe the type of risks that have primarily been created as a result of the industrialisation and modernisation processes. Beck (1992) examined the hazards of pre-industrial society to see whether they are just as damaging as the risks that we are facing in modernity. He concludes that we are not progressing towards a post-modern society as Baudrillard and Lyotard argue, but instead we are moving into an era that he calls ‘the second modernity’. He continues to say that ‘manufactured risks’ (Giddens, 1999), which are products of human activity, have possibly become more ‘deadlier,’ than the epidemics which plagued our society in the pre-modern epoch. However it is Elliot (2002) who states that Beck is not implying that we now live in a more hazardous society, but that he acknowledges the types of risks in society have altered. Beck et al (2003) states that modernity has not been replaced but that it has become more problematic. Beck (1992) however is not as pessimistic as other theorists such as Weber, Foucault or Adorno; he states that for society to evolve then modernisation must become ‘reflexive’. Therefore introducing ‘Reflexive modernity’ as a central feature of Beck’s ‘risk theory’, which is a process whereby development is attained through reform. At this point questions begin to arise because the concepts of post-modernity and reflexive modernity tend to overlap and thus it is necessary to explain the differences between postmodernism and second-modernity. Although post-modernity and second-modernity share some similarities, they have one clear distinction; second-modernity is focused more on evolutionary advances, thus reforming the society; rather than the radical idea that postmodernist put forward, the idea of revolution. ‘Risk’ itself, Beck argues has become increasingly central to our global society: â€Å"Indeed, in a world that could literally destroy itself, risk managing and risk monitoring increasingly influence both constitutions and calculations of social action† (Elliot, 2002: 8) He, like most of society uses the term ‘risk’ as a synonym for danger, a danger that is caused through the need of ‘controlling’ certain aspects of society, in aid of heightening social security (Elliot, 2002). However Beck (1999) had previously stated that ‘ultimate security’ is unattainable to human beings. This ‘new risk’ according to Beck differs from the ‘risk’ experience by pre-modern society; instead of ‘risk’ being generated by natural disasters, which were seen as a ‘stoke of fate’, it has derived through the evolution of technology, and individual choice. The latter is seen as crucial to Beck’s debate, as it â€Å"is societal intervention, in the form of decision-making that transforms incalculable hazards into calculable risks† (Elliot, 2002: 3) thus Beck’s theory of risk society has become a political debate. For Beck the â€Å"production of risk has become more important than the production of wealth† (Albrow, 1996: 9). Here Beck introduces another key element to his debate, the idea of ‘globalisation’. He argues that the risk of nuclear radiation, many modern technologies, the greater mobility of diseases, global warming, and invasive species affects everyone, globally. Supported by Elliot (2002) who points out; that Beck mention even; the rich and powerful are unable to avoid hazards such as global warming. Thus creating what Beck (1992) describes as the ‘boomerang effect’, which simple means that even those who produced or once profited from certain risks, will sooner or later be effected by them, thus, in effect, eliminating the element of class inequalities. Bringing the essay back to a more political content; class, race and gender have conventionally been seen as the main political conflicts within society; however Beck argues that this has been replaced with ‘new globalising conflicts’ (Elliot, 2002: 11). This universal theory that Beck has created states that no one is safe from the harmful risk that new-modernity predicted, it has emerged on a global scale, making boundaries seem irrelevant, and for Beck this global scale was a by-product of ‘reflexive modernisation’. Thus seen as a positive step forward on dissolving social inequalities, however with globalisation occurring, and the blurring of boundaries it led to social agents becoming more individualised. In pre-modern society it was stated that our lives were pre-destined, based on the chances given at birth. However under the notion of Beck’s ‘risk society’, he argues that society is reshaping its social structure and thus creating more individualised social agents, as he concludes: â€Å"individuals must then, free of these structures, reflexivity construct their own biographies†(Beck, 1992: 3), making individualisation another main feature of Beck’s theory. Individualisation, as Lupton mentions is the ‘private side of globalisation’ (2002: 83). Individualisation was seen as a positive step forward into post-modernity. However it is Elliot (2002) who states that individualisation itself has become problematic because what may be seen as beneficial to individuals today, can become problematic tomorrow. This is supported by advance technology being able to test the genetic health of the unborn, seen as a positive advancement, however it was argued by Beck and Beck-Gernsheim that it became problematic for the parents, as they saw it as a compulsory to use ‘such technologies’ in order to give their offspring the best possible start in life (1995). Individualisation leads to an increasing demand upon individuals, as well as increasing choice, especially as there has been a breakdown of traditional certainties that were originally structured through age, gender and social class, enabling society to be set free from the social forms of industrial society. Generating more risk including â€Å"unemployment or underemployment, marital instability and family breakdown, accompanied by high levels of anxiety and insecurity.† (pg 85). Therefore beginning to answer the second part of this question ‘†¦to what extent does it challenge the explanations of inequalities†¦?’ Inequality within society has always been a widely controversial issue; for Beck it is part of every day society, and thus is a feature for his theory of risk. As questions have been raised such as; are certain types/groups of people more affected by these ‘new risks’? Does that differ from the inequality found in pre-modernity? Beck does state that certain groups of people are affected more than others by the distribution and growth of risk. However ‘risk’ has not surpassed problems of inequality and distribution of goods, it has intensified them. For Marxist theoreticians the situation has became ambivalent; on the one hand income inequalities have remained unaltered, however the importance of the social class system seems to have been significantly reduced. He spoke of a new kind of capitalism; ‘capitalism without class,’ focusing more on the capitalism of the individual, the result is the problems of the system have lessened politically and transformed into a ‘novel of personal experimentation’ (Elliot, 2002: 7) allowing the ‘risk’ personal failure. Gender, Beck (1992) argued has also altered within society, there has been a breakdown of the strict stereotypical ideologies. This is primarily reflected through the increasing acceptance of divorce within society, which Beck argues is the ‘trap door’ through which women fall into ‘new poverty’ as their support and in essence stability is being reduced, and as a result; ‘risk’ has become part of ‘family life’. Equality therefore, is challenged by ‘risk’ because as a result of more decision making within the family, there has become more of a need for the correct balance of their desires of autonomy and self-expression, with their need for dependence and emotional stability that is established through the dependence of a secure relationship. For Beck refers to the ‘omni-dimensional’ (1992: 103) inequality of genders; arguing that the ‘epochal changes’ that we have encountered regarding law and education, are more apparent ‘on paper’ than the behaviour and beliefs of society, and rather than increasing equality, the paradoxical effect has intensified inequalities, with that new ‘personal risks’, like that of the insecurities related to employment and economy within new modernity. Individualization is therefore burdened with risk (ibid.).With the breakdown of many of the traditional certainties structured through age, gender and social class, a plurality of new risks are generated, including unemployment or underemployment, marital instability and family breakdown, accompanied by high levels of anxiety and insecurity. Life becomes less certain even while it is placed more under one’s control. This move towards individualization does not mean that social inequalities or structuring of opportunities through such attributes asclass, gender or ethnicity have disappeared. Rather, in the face of individualization the influence of these structures have become less obvious and acknowledged as affecting life chances. Inequalities have become primarily viewed as individualized, perceived as ‘psychological dispositions: as personal inadequacies, guilt feelings, anxieties, conflicts, and neuroses’ (Beck 1992b:100).

On Religion: Rhetorical Devices :: English Literature Essays

on Religion: Rhetorical Devices In Twilight of the Idols Nietzsche discusses his views on Christianity, other philosophers, and authors of his time. Nietzsche’s main focus, however, is on Christianity and how its actions and views are means to an end. He uses eloquent diction that sometimes loses the reader (he makes up for his articulate word usage with elementary sentences which describe his views very efficiently) along with syntax which is very informal - for the time - to describe his views on subjects quite exquisitely. His logic is the logic which is always right; he never contradicts himself or makes a statement without support. Nietzsche’s use of rhetorical strategies [i.e. diction, syntax, and figures of speech] helps him to make his points and support them in a style which help him attain his underlying goal: to make the reader think. Nietzsche uses an elevated level of diction to help him achieve his purpose, he uses Latin in many passages to make the reader look to the bottom of the page and thus think about what he is proposing. His combination of elevated diction along with deductive reasoning can sometimes lose the reader, but just as fast as the reader is lost Nietzsche offers forth a formula which helps the reader follow his thinking. Nietzsche believes that a person’s "virtue is the consequence of happiness," or that a person’s emotions are the product of their beliefs. Nietzsche’s uses consequence to mean something more like cause than effect. He interchanges monosyllabic and polysyllabic - in the form of metaphors - words in connotation to sometimes differ the reader from the beaten track of thinking. He believes in a set course "that he became ill, that he failed to resist the illness," for humans and that they cannot deter from it (this is very far left in a time of conservative Eu ropeans, late 19th century). Even in his "formulas" Nietzsche’s meaning is not as straight forward as it seems. It seems that he believes that individuals genetically are means to an end, but this is more of a metaphor for humanity, or that humanity is their own means to an end. Nietzsche use interesting syntax to evoke thought from his reader. His dependent clauses (in this excerpt, but not in others) relate back to the main clauses causing the reader to re-read the sentence or begin to formulate their own ideas (based upon what they just read).

I Was Born Ugly

Not the kind of Ugliness that makes my mother turn away in revulsion. But the Ugliness that makes her stare intently, taking in every rough edge and every smooth curve. Only so that she can sit awake at night and ask God what he was up to. The type of ugliness that you wear like a jacket even when it smells of dried sweat and stunted growth. Ugliness is what made effulgent barbarians out of grown men. Because civilization and sanity are only opium for civilized and sane people and civilized and sane people are beautiful people. Ugliness is what makes the painter paint, the sculptor sculpt and the writer write. Their very existence is an act of rebellion, of contumaciousness. Art is Ugliness that helps us realize nature’s deficiencies and it cannot appeal to beautiful people, it offends their being, it is objectionable and unpleasant to their senses. Ugliness is what prompted negroes to march and sing for a liberty that was supposed to be intrinsic and not take up arms. Ugliness was the fire in his bones when he stood on that podium, forsaking office and gentry and tell the truth for what it was. Yes, Ugliness was the culprit. Ugliness was the strength in her eyes when she gave that child a hug, when she held that man’s hands and told that woman it was going to be alright. Ugliness was what made her die for a cause she knew was never going to lift her out of a squalor that her family had struggled with for generations. Ugliness was what made him look at faces that opposed him and still decide that he was not going to pick that stone or utter that curse. Ugliness was what made him think that his justice and freedom were for naught if the man in the next room did not have his justice and freedom granted to him and in equal measure. Ugliness breathed in his breaths when he said an eye for an eye, and the world will go blind. Ugliness was the reason she said that if you love until it hurts there can be no more hurt only love. Ugliness was what made that promising scholar turn his back on years of academic excellence to join an army he was so clearly unfit for. For Queen and Country was what he said. Ugliness was what swam in their veins when they suspended the death sentence because they believed that Human Rights were fundamental, that they were rights for not some, not a majority but every human being. If you seek someone to blame, blame ugliness. Ugliness was what made that mother contend the sentence against her son with every thing she had and did not have. Courage? No, that was Ugliness. Ugliness is what makes that mandarin stay true to his oaths and that wife true to her vows. Ugliness is what makes the little girl kneel beside her bed every night and pray for the hands that beat her. For the tongues that curse her and for a government that does not acknowledge her. Ugliness is not a beautiful thing, a beautiful thing is that which has tried to imitate Ugliness and failed.. Ugliness is ugly.

British expansion into Africa between 1868 and 1902 Essay

To what extent were humanitarian and missionary motives the most important reason for British expansion into Africa between 1868 and 1902? Although there had been British presence in Africa from the start of the 19th Century, with British areas of control including Cape Colony, Orange Free State and areas along the West coast, prior to 1880 Britain had in reality very few possessions in Africa. Only when the ‘Scramble for Africa’ was triggered did Britain, along with many other European great powers, begin its campaign for territorial acquisition. The fundamental motives for British expansion into Africa were essentially the economic interest Africa held for Britain and its entrepreneurs, the rivalry Africa created between the Great European Powers, its strategic value and what was commonly presented to the British public as being the most important motive, humanitarian purposes. For many, including Colonial Secretary Joseph Chamberlain, it was believed that Britain had a moral obligation to bring civilization and Christianity to the native population who were considered to be ‘uncivilized’ and racially inferior. Moreover, the Church strongly promoted the idea of missionary work in Africa; the Church encouraged the notion that a fundamental element of imperial occupation was the extension of Christianity which therefore was a motive behind imperialism in Africa. Many missionary societies were created such as the United Society for the Propagation of the Gospel which conducted fund-raising activities and lectures. An example of a well known missionary was Mary Slessor who went to carry out her mission in Africa. Particularly concerned with tribal customs viewed as ‘un-Christian’, she set out to end human sacrifice, slavery and other forms of brutality. However, in reality humanitarian motives were of very limited significance in motivating British expansion into Africa; Britain was not simply guided by altruism and a quest to help the native populations, but instead was largely led by the economic and strategic interests the continent represented for it. Ultimately, it is likely that missionary incentives were simply conveyed as significant in order to win over public opinion and support, particularly through the media and popular entertainment. Of considerably greater significance to Britain was the strategic value that Africa held. Africa had always been strategically vital for Britain’s trade route to the Jewel of its Empire, India. Although Britain had few possessions in Africa before 1880, the few it did have included Gambia, Sierra Leone, Gold Coast and Cape Colony, all of which were deliberately very strategically situated along the coast. This provided Britain with stopping points and allowed it to ensure the security of its position along the long trade route to India. After the construction of the Suez Canal in 1969 Africa, and in particular Egypt, became of even greater strategic importance as the canal provided a quick route to India. As a result the canal attracted considerable British investment in Egypt and in the canal itself. This was illustrated when Britain invaded Egypt in 1882 in response to nationalist riots. British intervention demonstrated how Britain recognized the need to protect the financial investments in Egypt, and most importantly secure the route to India, despite Gladstone’s own personal policy of non-intervention. Moreover, it demonstrates how strategic considerations were ultimately only significant in order to protect Britain’s trade routes and its economic interests in Africa. However, the British occupation of Egypt in 1882 resulted in a turning point in European attitudes towards Africa. It was after this occupation that the ‘Scramble for Africa’ by European powers began, thus creating the issue of extreme rivalry between the Great powers, something which was very important in motivating formal British control in Africa. Until the 1880’s Britain felt no real need to establish formal territorial control, instead it relied on an ‘informal empire’ in which they had established a purely economic influence. Britain had not wished for territorial control in Africa which they recognized absorbed time, people and money but rather economic exploitation at minimum cost. Yet British seizure of Egypt meant that other European nations began to show expansionist interest in the region which in turn threatened Britain’s informal arrangement, particularly in West and Southern Africa. For example, Britain had an interest in Nigeria but a danger was that important trade along the River Niger would be under threat from French expansion in the area. Similar pressure came when Germany seized Togoland and the Cameroons in 1884 and the Belgians set up the Congo Free State in 1885. As a result the government granted a Royal Charter to the Niger Company, out of which eventually emerged the colony of Nigeria. It is unlikely that the government would have regarded the interests of the Niger traders very sympathetically had it not been for its determination not to allow France, Belgium and Germany from grabbing land which would threaten British trade, something which was of foremost importance to Britain and it would not allow to be compromised. The scramble in West Africa had also resulted in Berlin West Africa Conference which laid down rules for future annexation of territory. The treaty stated that in order to gain land a nation had to prove that they were in ‘effective occupation’. This meant that before taking formal control, an economic influence had to be established in the region by private investors and entrepreneurs. For example, a noted ‘man on the spot’ was Cecil Rhodes. At the age of seventeen Rhodes went to Arica and became a multimillionaire through diamond and gold mining enterprises. In 1889 he founded the British South Africa Company and used this organization to push British control northwards from Cape Colony to establish Rhodesia, a colony named after himself. The role of the individual itself was of limited importance in driving or furthering British expansion into Africa as few entrepreneurs managed o push forward territory as Rhodes had. However, it was ultimately motivated by economic interests and it allowed the British government to most significantly protect British influence in an area by proving ‘effective occupation’ which therefore allowed Britain to compete in the scramble with other nations and thereby protect its trade and economic interests in Africa. Finally, of foremost importance in motivating British expansion into Africa was the economic interest the continent held for Britain. Firstly Britain’s colonies along the west coast had always been strategically important for the vital trade route to India and later North Africa became equally as vital in Britain’s route to India via the Suez Canal. However, beyond this Britain was extremely keen to exploit the continents abundance of natural materials and extremely valuable minerals. This is evident as Britain was clearly only interested in seizing colonies that, if not strategically important, were rich in materials to exploit. For example, Egypt was seized by Britain due to its vast economic importance as it provided the quick route to India and additionally produced high quality cotton which was much sought after by British textile manufacturers. Furthermore the attraction to the British of Nigeria lay in the palm oil trade as palm oil was used in the manufacture of soap and candles and as an industrial lubricant. Britain also saw great potential for trade in East Africa; Zanzibar imported significant quantities of manufactured goods from Britain and India. It was a major trading point from which came ivory and leather goods and into which went textiles, brass and steel from Britain. Britain’s primary interest was trade and economic gain. Without any economic potential in an area Britain was not interested in colonization, in contrast if a region held great economic investments, for example Egypt, Britain was quick to occupy the area despite its reluctance to extend formal control which it viewed as consuming time, people and money. In summary, Africa’s economic potential was clearly the primary reason for British expansion into Africa 1868-1902. Britain was not a solely altruistic nation which became involved in the continent purely to help the people, instead it was driven by its own gains. It is true that rivalry from other great European powers was vital in turning British control in Africa from informal into solid occupation, however essentially Britain’s determination not to allow other nations to grab land was to avoid threat to its trade and economic interests in a region. Moreover, Africa’s strategic importance was also highly valued by Britain, yet once again its ultimate value lay in its path along the crucial route to India and therefore the protection of Britain’s economic interest.