102 Using Sources and Ethos Professor Ramos Blog

102 Using Sources and Ethos MLA Style Quick Write Why do we use sources? Critical Thinking and Research Identify important problems. Explore relevant issues. Evaluate available evidence. Consider the implications of the decisions. Critical thinking is NOT collecting information to support established conclusion. Survey, considering as many perspectives as possible. Analyze, identifying and then separating out the parts of the problem. Evaluate, judging the merit of various ideas, claims, and evidence. Why Use Sources? To understand an issue See what has come before To find the facts To inform and persuade your audience You need to understand that research is connected with ethos, an appeal that establishes credibility with readers. MLA Style Here is a good explanation of  citations in MLA. Basic MLA format: Author(s). â€Å"Article Title.†Ã‚  Source, vol. #, no. #, season year, pp. xx-xx.  Database,  URL. Example: Kong, Les. â€Å"Business Sources for Education Majors.†Ã‚  Education Graduate Students Journal, vol. 75, no. 4, 2014, pp. 12-19.  JSTOR,  jstor.org/stable/52506788. MLA Style We will be going over the 8th edition MLA citation Style. You can look under our  resources page  for MLA or APA guides. There are three things to consider for each style guide you use: Page Formatting In-Text Citations /References Page Krikorian, Mark. â€Å"Two Immigration Priorities.†Ã‚  National Review, Dec, 2016, pp. 18-20, SIRS Issues Researcher,  www.sks.sirs.com. This article goes into detail on some of the other less talked about factors of the changes in how we deal with illegal immigrants under our new president and his policies. The author is the director of the Center for Immigration Studies so I assume he is a credible expert in immigration. I will use this source to get more specific in my critique of the border wall proposal. Krikorian, Mark. â€Å"Two Immigration Priorities.†Ã‚  National Review, Dec, 2016, pp. 18-20, SIRS Issues Researcher,  www.sks.sirs.com. This article goes into detail on some of the other less talked about factors of the changes in how we deal with illegal immigrants under our new president and his policies. The author is the director of the Center for Immigration Studies so I assume he is a credible expert in immigration. I will use this source to get more specific in my critique of the border wall proposal. Ethos Ethos is about values. In rhetoric we connect ethos to  character, credibility, and trustworthiness.  At their core, these concepts have to do with values. We tend to believe and trust those individuals who exemplify the values we cherish, who live the sort of life that we would want to live.  Ethos Handout from University of Maryland Ethos is inferred, NOT possessed. Five strategies for persuading through character. Personal info Sources Identification with Audience Point of View Balanced Presentation 5 Ways to Persuade with Character (Ethos) | How to Craft an Argument Audience Audience is quite possibly the most important thing to consider when writing an argument. You need to appeal to them, understand their problems, values, and beliefs, in order to convince them of your point of view. Who your audience is should influence  how  you present your argument. Who your audience is should influence  how  you present yourself. Determine what is important to your audience. What do they really care about? What do they value? Finding Material Finding Quality Information Online (251) Finding Articles Using Library Databases (254) Locating Books (255) Interviewing Peers and Local Authorities (256) Evaluating Your Sources Remember the Acronym CRAAP C current R relevant A author A accurate P purpose Ask yourself: Am I choosing sources that represent a range of ideas, not simply ones that support my opinion? Taking Notes Checklist for Evaluating Print Sources (262) Checklist for Evaluating Electronic Sources (263) Plagiarizing, Paraphrasing, and Common Knowledge Checklist for Avoiding Plagiarism (267) Compiling an Annotated Bibliography Summary of Source, 2-4 sentences How you are using it in your report, 1-3 sentences Reliability of source, 1-3 sentences Writing the Paper Organizing Your Notes The First Draft Later Drafts Organization Choosing a Tentative Title The Final Draft Quoting From Sources Incorporating your reading into Your Thinking: The Art and Science of Synthesis The Use and Abuse of Quotation How to Quote Documentation Use MLA or APA style Note on Footnotes (and End notes) MLA Format: Citations within the Text MLA Format: The List of Checklist for Critical Papers Using Sources (306) Rhetorical Analysis Notes Make sure to describe the text you are analyzing to your audience. Explain what you see and how you see it. Don’t just refer to the image, paint a picture with words. Clearly describe the methods of persuasion being used. If they are using a celebrity, make sure to highlight that and the corresponding appeal being used. A  Checklist for Analyzing Images (Especially Advertisements)  on page 145 of our textbook is very thorough and helpful for analyzing visual images. Page 181 has a  checklists for analyzing a text. Use these as guidelines to begin your analysis. Page 191 has a  checklist for writing your analysis  of an argument. Very helpful for the early stages of drafting.

F-105 Thunderchief in the Vietnam War

F-105 Thunderchief in the Vietnam War Design of the F-105 Thunderchief began in the early 1950s as an internal project at Republic Aviation. Intended to be a replacement for the F-84F Thunderstreak, the F-105 was created as a supersonic, low-altitude penetrator capable of delivering a nuclear weapon to a target deep within the Soviet Union. Led by Alexander Kartveli, the design team produced an aircraft centered on a large engine and able to achieve high speeds. As the F-105 was meant to be a penetrator, maneuverability was sacrificed for speed and low-altitude performance. F-105D Specifications General Length: 64 ft. 4.75 in.Wingspan: 34 ft. 11.25 in.Height: 19 ft. 8 in.Wing Area: 385 sq. ft.Empty Weight: 27,500 lbs.Loaded Weight: 35,637 lbs.Crew: 1-2 Performance Power Plant: 1 Ãâ€" Pratt Whitney J75-P-19W afterburning turbojet, 26,500 lbf with afterburning water injectionCombat Radius: 780 milesMax Speed: Mach 2.08 (1,372 mph)Ceiling: 48,500 ft. Armament Guns: 1 Ãâ€" 20 mm M61 Vulcan cannon, 1,028 roundsBombs/Rockets: Up to 14,000 lbs. of ordnance including nuclear weapons, AIM-9 Sidewinder, and AGM-12 Bullpup missiles. Weapons carried in the bomb bay and on five external hardpoints. Design and Development Intrigued by Republics design, the US Air Force placed an initial order for 199 F-105s in September 1952, but with the Korean War winding down reduced it to 37 fighter-bombers and nine tactical reconnaissance aircraft six months later. As development progressed, it was found that the design had grown too large to be powered by the Allison J71 turbojet intended for the aircraft. As a result, they elected to utilize the Pratt Whitney J75. While the preferred power plant for the new design, the J75 was not immediately available and as a result on October 22, 1955, the first YF-105A prototype flew powered by a Pratt Whitney J57-P-25 engine. Though equipped with the less powerful J57, the YF-105A achieved a top speed of Mach 1.2 on its first flight. Further test flights with the YF-105A soon revealed that the aircraft was underpowered and suffered from problems with transonic drag. To counter these issues, Republic was finally able to obtain the more powerful Pratt Whitney J75 and altered the arrangement of the air intakes which were located at the wing roots. Additionally, it worked to redesign the aircraft fuselage which initially employed a slab-sided look. Drawing on experiences from other aircraft producers, Republic employed the Whitcomb area rule by smoothing the fuselage and slightly pinching it in the center.     Ã‚   Refining the Aircraft The redesigned aircraft, dubbed the F-105B, proved able to achieve speeds of Mach 2.15. Also included were improvements to its electronics including the MA-8 fire control system, a K19 gun sight, and an AN/APG-31 ranging radar. These enhancements were required to allow the aircraft to conduct its intended nuclear strike mission. With the alterations complete, the YF-105B first took to the sky on May 26, 1956. The following month a trainer variant (F-105C) of the aircraft was created while the reconnaissance version (RF-105) was canceled in July. The largest single-engine fighter built for the US Air Force, the production model of F-105B possessed an internal bomb bay and five external weapons pylons. To continue a company tradition of employing Thunder in its aircraft names, which dated back to World War IIs P-47 Thunderbolt, Republic requested that the new aircraft be designated Thunderchief. Early Alterations On May 27, 1958, the F-105B entered service with the 335th Tactical Fighter Squadron. As with many new aircraft, the Thunderchief was initially plagued by problems with its avionics systems. After these were dealt with as part of Project Optimize, the F-105B became a reliable aircraft. In 1960, the F-105D was introduced and the B model transitioned to the Air National Guard. This was completed by 1964. The last production variant of the Thunderchief, the F-105D included an R-14A radar, an AN/APN-131 navigation system, and an AN/ASG-19 Thunderstick fire-control system which gave the aircraft all-weather capability and the ability to deliver the B43 nuclear bomb. Efforts were also made to restart the RF-105 reconnaissance program based on the F-105D design. The US Air Force planned to purchase 1,500 F-105Ds, however, this order was reduced to 833 by Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara. Issues Deployed to Cold War bases in Western Europe and Japan, F-105D squadrons trained for their intended deep penetration role. As with its predecessor, the F-105D suffered from early technological issues. These issues may have helped earn the aircraft the nickname Thud from the sound the F-105D made when it hit the ground though the true origins of the term are unclear. As a result of these problems, the entire F-105D fleet was grounded in December 1961, and again in June 1962, while the issues were dealt with at the factory. In 1964, the issues in existing F-105Ds were resolved as part of Project Look Alike though some engine and fuel system problems persisted for another three years. Vietnam War Through the early- and mid-1960s, the Thunderchief began to be developed as a conventional strike bomber rather than a nuclear delivery system. This was further emphasized during the Look Alike upgrades which saw the F-105D receive additional ordnance hard points. It was in this role that it was sent to Southeast Asia during the escalation of the Vietnam War. With its high-speed and superior low-altitude performance, the F-105D was ideal for hitting targets in North Vietnam and far superior to the F-100 Super Sabre then in use. First deployed to bases in Thailand, F-105Ds began flying strike missions as early as late 1964. With the commencement of Operation Rolling Thunder in March 1965, F-105D squadrons began bearing the brunt of the air war over North Vietnam. A typical F-105D mission to North Vietnam included mid-air refueling and a high-speed, low altitude entry and exit from the target area. Though an extremely durable aircraft, F-105D pilots usually only had a 75 percent chance of completing a 100-mission tour due to the danger involved in their missions. By 1969, the US Air Force began withdrawing the F-105D from strike missions replacing it with F-4 Phantom IIs. While the Thunderchief ceased to fulfill a strike role in Southeast Asia, it continued to serve as a wild weasel. Developed in 1965, the first F-105F Wild Weasel variant flew in January 1966. Possessing a second seat for an electronic warfare officer, the F-105F was intended for a suppression of enemy air defenses (SEAD) mission. Nicknamed Wild Weasels, these aircraft served to identify and destroy North Vietnamese surface-to-air missile sites. A dangerous mission, the F-105 proved highly capable as its heavy payload and expanded SEAD electronics allowed the aircraft to deliver devastating blows to enemy targets. In late 1967, an enhanced wild weasel variant, the F-105G entered service. Due to the nature of the wild weasel role, F-105Fs and F-105Gs were typically the first to arrive over a target and the last to leave. While the F-105D had been completely removed from strike duties by 1970, the wild weasel aircraft flew until the wars end. In the course of the conflict 382 F-105s were lost to all causes, representing 46 percent of the US Air Forces Thunderchief fleet. Due to these losses, the F-105 was ruled to no longer be combat effective as a frontline aircraft. Sent to the reserves, the Thunderchief remained in service until officially being retired on February 25, 1984.

Bhagavad Gita Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Bhagavad Gita - Essay Example it as having a Western equivalent: â€Å"Hindus find in it much the same kind of inspiration and guidance which Christians find in the New Testament† (Shideler 308). While the Christian bible contains lists of do’s and don’ts, The Bhagavad-Gita takes a different view to morality. The views expressed in the work stem from the Eastern circular notion of time, as opposed to the Western linear view of time. This, among other reasons, is what makes the work difficult to Western audiences. In the Christian bible, killing another person is expressly forbidden. In The Bhagavad-Gita, taking the life of another person isn’t suggested or recommended expressly, but it isn’t viewed as absolutely right or wrong either. Of course, this is not to say that the Hindu religion doesn’t seek peace in general, either. The work begins with Arjuna pondering a moral dilemma: â€Å"Evil they may be,/ Worst of the wicked./ Yet if we kill them/ Our sin is greater./ How could we dare spill/ The blood that unites us?† All of the questions answered and asked from this stem from this original question. To Western audiences, there is an expectation of a religious work to tell you how to act. There is simplicity in something being either right or wrong. If we do not know easily if a particular action is right or wrong, that might cause a certain amount of anxiety. As time is viewed as linear in the West, there is a certain progression that is expected. The longer a person lives, the more that person knows, and the more that person is able to choose the correct path in order to lead to where this person wants to go. However, in the East, since time is circular, there is not this same progression expected: â€Å"In the Hindu view, history is a great turning of the wheel, the flowing forth of the manifestations of Brahman and its return to itself† (Shideler 309). Krishna answers Arjuna by stating that the path itself, whichever choice happens to be made, is not what is

Claims and reflection Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words - 1

Claims and reflection - Essay Example It is just that, it is not as simple compared to the American Constitution where the Bill of Rights are readily contained in the Amendments one to ten for easy reference. I thought that perhaps we are an older country than them with a more complicated legal system with a monarchy to consider which is why our legal system is more complicated than them. I was not however daunted. Deep in my gut, I know that despite the absence of a written regulation of a Bill of Rights, UK does not in any way, put lesser importance to it. In the first place, the first Bill of Rights that was contained in the Magna Carta which was drafted in UK soil in 1787 and that piece of history alone manifests how much importance we place as a people on the Bill of Rights. I knew I just have to look and research further for the paper to take form. This led me to the better understanding of the British legal system of how it works in the absence of a formal Constitution. Compared to United States where their laws are codified in a written Constitution, â€Å"our laws are a combination of statute law and the principles of the common law and equity developed by our courts. Our system is based upon the constitutional principles of Parliamentary sovereignty and the Rule of Law† (Commission on a Bill of Rights). Our framework of Bill of Rights may not be contained in the Amendments one to ten such as the case of the American Constitution, but its statutes can be rooted from documents such as the as Magna Carta in 1215 and the Declaration of Arbroath in 1320, the later Bill of Rights and Scottish Claim of Right in 1689, and the Reform Acts of the 19th and early 20th centuries. Proposing what should a UK Bill of Rights contain requires understanding on how British legal system adopts or creates a law. In the case of Bill of Rights, it requires further understanding of British constitution because I have to understand how the international Human Rights treaties

Modern Microecon, Consumer Theory Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Modern Microecon, Consumer Theory - Essay Example In raw economic terms, utility is a measure of consumer satisfaction, that is, how much satisfaction a consumer derives from the consumption of a good or a service. Budget constraint on the other hand represents the combination of goods or services an individual can consume or purchase in consideration to given prices with his or her limited income. Combining the two concepts forms the foundation of consumer theory. The utility theory provides a methodological framework whereby usually, all individuals, organizations and firms evaluate given options. Utility is a term used to describe the satisfaction that each of the given options provide to the one making the decision. Hence, the basis of the utility theory is that each individual will choose that option which tends to maximize utility, working on what is called the ‘maximization principle’. This principle states that the most desirable choice is the one with the highest level of satisfaction. However, while making the se decisions, the individual must also consider his income earned along with the respective prices of the goods and services in question. ... Total utility continuously rises as consumption increases. This rise becomes smaller as more units of a product are consumed, it can also decline after a certain level of consumption. On the other hand, marginal utility measures the change in consumption benefit as a result of consuming one more or one less unit of a product. In other words, marginal utility tracks the change in total utility as the number of units consumed changes. The behavior of marginal utility is such that it tends to fall continuously as consumption of a product increases. This is because the first few units consumed of a product provide a higher level of satisfaction than the later few. For example, the first drink of water is worth a lot more to a thirsty individual than his seventh one. For a consumer to be in equilibrium certain conditions need to be met. The consumers are assumed to be rational in their decision whereby they aim to maximize the utility derived from the consumption of any product. It is als o assumed that consumers have limited incomes and that the value of utility can be quantified in monetary terms. The equi-marginal principle states that a consumer will be in equilibrium if it is not possible to switch expenditure from good X in favour of good Y to achieve an increase in total utility. In other word this principle is satisfied when the marginal utility of every dollar spent on a good is equal to the price paid for that good. If a basket of goods is in question, an individual will continue to alter the mix of consumption of the products until the marginal utility of a dollar spent on each of the goods is equal. Therefore, the equilibrium principle can be expressed as MUx/Px=MUy/Py, where MU is the marginal utility and P is the price of the good. Consumer

Chariots of Fire Analysis

Chariots of Fire Analysis Chariots of Fire is a 1981 British film directed by Hugh Hudson. The original screenplay is written by Colin Welland, based on the true story of Eric Liddell and Harold Abrahams, two athletes that have competed in the 1924 Olympic Games. The film was nominated for seven and won four Academy Awards, including Best Picture. 1.1. Synopsis The film is the inspiring story of two highly talented British runners, as they prepare for and compete in the 1924 Summer Olympics in Paris. Harold Abrahams (Ben Cross) is an English Jew with Lithuanian roots, who faces both prejudice for his origins and criticism for his use of a professional trainer in his preparations for the Olympics. He is an ambitious sprinter from the Cambridge University, eager to win and to prove his place in the English society. However, in order to succeed, he needs to overcome his inner demons. His rival and teammate, Eric Liddell (Ian Charleson), is a devout Christian, a Scottish Presbyterian protestant whose life ambition is to become a missionary, but who is a talented and passionate sportsman. He runs for his faith and to glorify God. Due to his religious principles, Liddell refused to run in the 100 meter Olympic heats, which were held on a Sunday.  «Ãƒâ€šÃ‚  Chariots of Fire is a film that digs deep into the human spirit. It not only presents us the story of two men and the motivations they have for running, it reaches to the very essence of the questions of why we exist and what significance our lives have. The film begins with Abrahams funerals and then tells, in flashback, the story of the two main characters. It starts with Harolds first day at Cambridge, Caius College, in 1919. Later, he takes part in the college dash, a competition where the challenger will attempt to run around the court perimeter to and from a point beneath the clock within the time taken by the clock to strike midday. A distance traditionally recognized as one of 188 paces. His sole competitor is Liddell, representing Edinburgh University. Abrahams defeats him, to the slight discontent of his masters, who first discuss his social and ethnic origins, and then his capabilities. The focus shifts to Eric Liddell who is invited in Scotland, 1920, to preside a childrens race. At the end, he holds a speech about sports and faith. It is the first moment that presents his preaching spirit. Further along he is shown dining with his family, who has made from missionary a purpose in life. Another memorable scene is the one when Liddell runs in the France-Scotland competition and when he is pushed and falls. However, he finds the power within to raise and not only finish, but win the race. Afterwards, under the rain, people are mesmerized by his speech where he preaches that the true power comes from within. Harold Abrahams, who assists as this race, is amazed before his gift and envious at the same time. He takes the opportunity to introduce himself to Sam Mussabini, a professional coach, and to ask if he could train him for the Olympics gold. The latter does not accept, but agrees to watch him and see if he has the right talent, because, as he says, you cant put in what Gods left out. While Liddell is more of a loner, Abrahams is often shown with his friends or in public. He even has a love interest, Sybil Gordon, singer. The scene of the two of them dining for the first time is a very important one, as Harold speaks about himself, his heritage and why he feels he has to run in order to fit in the English society: Do you love running? Im more of an addict. Its a compulsion. A weapon. Against what? Being Jewish, I suppose. Youre not serious?! Youre not Jewish, or you wouldnt ask. People dont care. Anyway, being Jewish hasnt done you any harm. Im what I call semi-deprived . It means they lead me to water, but they wont let me drink. The climax of Abrahams pre-Olympic struggle is reached when his loses a challenge against Liddell. Demoralized by the fact that he feels he has done anything he could, he feels worthless: I run to win. If I cant win, I dont run. Despite his apparent failure, at the end of the race Mr. Mussabini offers to coach him: I can find you another two yards. This is the decisive moment, and from this point on all of Harolds energy is channeled to one purpose and one purpose only: winning the gold medal. They start training in a sustained and technical way, analyzing mistakes and finding ways to improve. In the meantime, Eric trains in a more relaxed manner, but always empowered by his faith. When his sister, Jenny, is worried that athletics is not something noble enough, and suggests that he should better pursue the family tradition and go to China to spread his faith, Eric replies: I believe that God made me for a purpose, but He also made me fast, and when I run, I feel His pleasure. The preparations for the Olympics start generating rumors. A highly expressive moment is that when Harold Abrahams is called at Cambridge to the masters office. He is confronted by two professors who accuse him of denaturizing the amateur spirit of sports to his own personal interest; of turning into a tradesman: for the past year, you have concentrated on developing your own technique in the headlong pursuit, may I suggest, of individual glory. The athlete replies by a true declaration of independence, a manifest saying: I am a Cambridge man first and last. I am an Englishman first and last. What I have achieved, what I intend to achieve, is for my family, my university and my country [à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦].You know, gentlemen you yearn for victory, just as I do. But achieved with the apparent effortlessness of gods [à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦]. I believe in the pursuit of excellence and Ill carry the future with me. After this bitter discussion Abrahams learns that he has been selected to represent his country at the Olympic Games of 1924, held in Paris. Eris Liddell was also qualified. On the boat to Paris, Liddell is informed that the 100 meter race will be held on a Sunday. This stirs enormous conscience turmoil for him. To run on a Sunday would be against Gods Law. The Prince of Wales himself tries to convince him to compete, but the problem is not solved until Lindsay, another member of the team, offers his place in the 400 meter race. However, this remains a highly representative scene of Erics dilemma and a testimony of his faith. He is torn between his desire to run and his commitment to praise God on the one hand and between his future King and God on the other hand. Liddell is depicted as a true man of principle and a true athlete. His speed is a mere extension of his life, its force. In the Olympic Games each of the two athletes wins a gold medal. However, the meaning of his success is significantly different. As Harold Abrahams discovers before his most decisive race; his life has become all about those few seconds in which he feels he has to justify everything he has done and who he will become I am forever in pursuit and I dont even know what is I am chasing. And even though he wins, he can not rejoice. He has not defeated his inner demons and he has not understood the meaning of his life. Eric Liddell, on the other hand, does not share his colleagues bizarre reaction. He is ecstatic after his success, he feels he has reached his purpose as a sportsman and is ready to embrace his future life, of a missionary. 1.2. The title The title is inspired by And did those feet in ancient time, a short poem by William Blake from the preface to his epic Milton a Poem. Today it is best known as the hymn Jerusalem, whose music is written by Sir Hubert Parry in 1916. It seems that the films working title was Running. The inspiration came one Sunday evening when Colin Welland (screenplay writer) turned on the television to the BBCs religious music series Songs of Praise featuring the stirring hymn Jerusalem, its chorus including the words Bring me my chariot of fire. the writer allegedly leapt up to his feet and shouted to his wife Patricia, Ive got it, Pat! Chariots of Fire!  [1]  . A church congregation sings Jerusalem at the end of the film and a performance appears on the Chariots of Fire soundtrack performed by the Ambrosian Singers overlaid partly by a composition by Vangelis. 2. Chariots of Fire film analysis Our analysis will focus on the two heroes, their leadership style and their interactions with the other characters. In order to fully understand Harold, we also need to take into account Sam Mussabini, because their activity and achievements are complementary. We will begin with a short description of their personality based on the way the film depicts them and then we will observe their leadership styles. 2.1. The character of Eric Liddell Eric Liddell is a fully talented person, led by efforts for excellence in studies and sport. Being an academic, he belongs to one of the best schools of Scotland Eton College, Edinburgh University. he is also extremely talented in sports. He is initially very good at rugby, but gives up with it in order to completely dedicate himself to running for the Olympic Games. He is called the flying Scotsman. He is extremely gifted and works very hard to achieve his goals.   Ive never seen such drive, such commitment in a runner. He runs like a wild animal, says Harold Abrahams. He is more of a runner on long distances; opposite to Abrahams, who is a sprinter. Hes fast. But he wont go any faster, not in the dash, anyway. Hes a gut runner. Hes all heart. Digs deep, says Sam Mussabini. During a competition, he falls  while  running and still manages to win the race. Therefore, he achieves the almost impossible veterans, were unanimous in the opinion that Liddells win in the quarter mile was the greatest track performance that they had ever seen  [2]  . We also can notice that, despite the fact he has no coach, he wins the Olympic 400 meter race. He has been able to provide the right efforts on his own and with the help of God. He is a man who lives for his faith. His parents are missionaries in China and are very  strict  about religion. God is a loving dictator. His rules are such as attending the Sunday service, or not playing football on Sunday. Eric fully embraces this conception of religion. He feels that running and winning races will prove the world the presence of God. To win is an honor for Him. When I run, I feel his pleasure. Winning an Olympic Gold Medal becomes a priority, second only to his religion. The ambition to win this event is part of his religion; is spiritual. Eric believed that everything he did in the name of his belief should give God pleasure. I would like to give you something more permanent but I can only point the way. I believe God made me for a purpose, he says after a race. After winning the Olympic medal, he follows his family and becomes himself a missionary in China, as he had planned from the beginning. He is an example of a person who lived out the Olympic ideals while upholding the Olympic motto, Citius, Altius, Fortius (used for the first time in 1924), which means, Swifter, Higher, Stronger, throughout his life.  [3]  Today, a foundation and an internet site are dedicated to his memory. His conscience issue, his testimony of faith   When he learns that the heats are to be run on a Sunday, he switches to the 400 meter competition. Running on Sunday is against Gods law. His decision is taken; he will show inflexibility on this point. The Prince of Wales himself tries to influence him to change decision, but Eric says that although he loves his country, he is not ready for such a sacrifice. Lindsay is the one who suggests the solution. Having already won a silver medal, he yields his place on the 400 meter race, which takes place the next Tuesday.   In this situation, Eric has proven to be extremely focused; he wins and stands by his principles. It is a way to promote his religion, since his convictions make the headlines in all the newspapers Eric Liddell, God before the king.   His relationship with others For Abrahams, with whom he shares personal conversations, he holds a strong friendship. It is remarkable to notice that, although competition should be the master word in his field, he does not appear to be affected by this state of mind.   He does his best to encourage friendship and loyalty. His sister Jennie is very worried about him being stolen by sports: your mind is not with us anymore, it is full of running and starting and medals and pace. He is diplomatic and very soft with her, tells him that he will go to China, but only after the Olympic Games. He tries to convince Jenny that he is an excellent runner and that it is Gods wish for him to do his best to win the games, because it is God who made him fast. Sandy, his close friend confesses: Erics special to me. Precious. When Erics father goes back to China, he is asked to look after the family Im relying on you now to keep them all out of mischief. This is why he remains close to him; he even follows him at the Olympic Games. An illustration of charismatic leadership Leadership is described as  «Ãƒâ€šÃ‚  the art of influencing others in the manner desired by the leader  Ãƒâ€šÃ‚ ».  [4]  In this case, we believe that Eric has the natural talent to attract people around him without exercising authority. He gets his power from inside and does not need any kind of support or coach. It is a personality trait that he had from his birth, which makes him endowed with special qualities. His father being a missionary, we presume that it is a family gene. He takes risks by involving himself in religious purposes. He is extremely confident in his faith; he can therefore communicate strongly about it. This increases his leadership towards others as well as his charisma. He feels he is driven by a divine mission to uphold God throw his behavior in sports. He therefore takes every opportunity to preach the god news. He is skilled for public speaking and uses this talent very often; he is an authority for those around him. He is passionate and shows a lot of determination in convincing others.    At the end of a race, he does not hesitate to gather the crowd around him and speak about God. Under the rain, he is able to federate a large group of people. He speaks their language, talks about their problems. People are highly receptive, some of them captivated.   Open to others, he is able to mix with very different social classes. He is as well at ease with people from his high level College and people from the street who watch him racing. His modesty is entirely genuine and unaffected. Eric Liddell possesses a outstanding emotional intelligence  [5]  . He is self aware; he is good at understanding what motivates him and how his actions or words affect others. For example, when he speaks to his sister Jenny who is worried about his attitude towards sport, he finds the right argument and gains her support: he will pursue the mission to China when the games are finished. He is motivated by something beyond money or status. He wants to win in the name of his religion and that is his drive. He is empathetic, since he preoccupies himself with what is on peoples mind. He is a role model for children. For example, at the end of a Sunday service, a young little girl asks him to sign on her Bible. Eric also has good social skills, as we can see many friends are around him. On the Sunday when he should have run, he is called to participate to Sunday mass at the Paris Church of Scotland. He is asked to read a psalm and it is a moment of deep emotion for the people listening to him. Being a leader, he also shows abilities of self management: he entirely enjoys what he does and appears as someone very well balanced.   He is setting high objectives for himself, winning the games, and he visualizes his success.   He is mature because he knows that the Olympic Games will only be a step in his life and that after, his mission will lead him to higher purposes. His vision of the future is realistic. He balances  hard work, studies and personal life very well since he achieves all his goals, by a good management of time and resources. Moreover, he is well integrated in his social community and appreciated by many people around him. All these elements prove that he has the skills to self manage his life and his reach objectives very efficiently. We can observe that Erics followers are captivated, the message is healthy and people oriented. By his behavior and his personality, he shows the necessary qualities for a Spiritual Leader. His life after the film shows him even more determined on this point. Today, an internet site and a community exist and services are regularly offered in his name, a proof that his leadership was strong enough to still be present today. 2.2. The character of Harold Abrahams Harold Abrahams is depicted as a strong and somewhat tormented personality. He descends from a family of Lithuanian Jews and his familys origins follow him everywhere, not only in his perception, but also in the attitude of others. His determination and his desire to be appreciated for what he really is as a person, and not to be judged upon his ascendants, is evident from the very first scenes of the film. For example, as he arrives his first day at Cambridge, where he studies law, he feels obliged to correct the porters, who address him using the word laddie. In response, Abrahams mentions: I ceased to be a laddie when I took up the Kings commission. Harold is an excellent athlete, a great runner, and the first challenge he takes is to run the collage dash. He is the first student in all the 700 years of the college to attempt to run the whole perimeter of the court between the first and the last strike of 12. He is competitive, determined and extremely self confident when he runs. We learn however that his need to be valued and respected comes from his sense of inferiority. He feels rejected in the English society because he is Jewish. The confession he makes to Aubrey is particularly relevant: Its an ache, a helplessness and an anger. One feels humiliated. Sometimes I say to myself, Steady on, youre imagining all this. Then I catch that look again. Catch it on the edge of a remark. Feel a cold reluctance in a handshake. Thats my father. A Lithuanian Jew. He is alien [à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦]. I love and admire him. He worships this country. From nothing, he built what he believed was enough to make true Englishmen of his sons. My brothers a doctor. A leader in his field [à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦]. And here am I. Setting up shop in the finest university in the land. But the old man forgot one thing. This England of his is Christian and Anglo-Saxon. And so are her corridors of power. And those who stalk them guard them with jealousy and venom. Youre right to study law. Youre quite an advocate. A rare ethnic advantage. Its called the gift of the gab. So what now? Grin and bear it? No, Aubrey. Im going to take them on. All of them. One by one. And run them off their feet. In order to be the best, Harold Abrahams does something unusual and revolutionary for his time; he hires a professional coach, Sam Mussabini. The latter is reluctant to this demand, because it was usually him who made the proposition. Nevertheless, Harolds argument convinces him to observe and then acknowledge his talent: I can run fast. With your help, I think I can run even faster. Perhaps faster than any man ever ran. I want that Olympic medal. Now, I can see it there. Its waiting for me. But I cant get it on my own. During the few moments when Harold is shown with his friends, he seems outgoing and gregarious, a good company. There is a clear contrast in comparison to his moments of solitude, when his more fragile side of his personality appears. This is why we speak of inner demons, of the duality he faces: he is eager for others to like and appreciate him, but seems incapable to do that for himself. He denies his true essence, his origins, he doubts himself at the smallest failure. His life becomes even more complex when he meets Sybil Gordon, a singer who becomes his girlfriend, his confident and his supporter. She stands by him during his hardest moment of fear and uncertainty: when Eric Liddell defeats him. It is the moment when Harold expresses his compulsion for winning. He cannot conceive to run if he does not win. His thrill does not come from sports, from racing; it comes from winning, being the best. This is why a defeat is unconceivable, unbearable. His salvation, his drive to move on and aim for the Olympic gold does not come from love, nevertheless, but from the one who had refused him. Sam Mussabini is the one who comes at the end of the race and promises to find him another two yards. Mussabini is truly the person Abrahams needed to perk up his performance. His entire perception of life changes when the coach agrees to train him. Everything else falls into second place, including his girlfriend. He no longer has an amateur view over sports, but a more professional one. He understands that result can only come out of hard work and sweat. Together, they analyze other top athletes, their technique and their mistakes. Then they practice, improve Harolds performance and aim for the ultimate goal: the Olympic medal. Due to his use of a professional coach, Harold is accused of is professors at Cambridge of mercantilism, of desiring to win at all costs. In fact, in the 1920s, athletics were regarded as an emanation of talent, not of herd training. The masters plead for an amateur approach and consider that Abrahams attitude prejudices the name of their school: Here in Cambridge, weve always been proud of our athletic prowess. We believe, weve always believed, that our games are indispensable in helping to complete the education of an Englishman. They create character. They foster courage, honesty and leadership; but, most of all, an unassailable spirit of loyalty, comradeship and mutual responsibility [à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦]. Im afraid there is a growing suspicion in the bosom of this university [à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦] that in your enthusiasm for success you have perhaps lost sight of some of these ideals. Harolds reaction to these accusations reveals his innovative way of thinking. He is a visionary who has set his goals and will stop at nothing to achieve them. He is committed and ready to do everything humanly possible to succeed. He believes in himself and uses every resource available. A personal coach is one of them. I believe in the pursuit of excellence and Ill carry the future with me, he says leaving the masters office, only to find out shortly after that he has been selected to be part of the team for the 8th Olympic Games, held in Paris. Abrahams channels all his energy to attain his life dream. He strives for the medal and for recognition. From this point of view, he and Mussabini are very similar. The former is e Jew who feels inferior and therefore uses sports to prove that he belongs in the upper English society. The latter is half Italian, half Arab and is ostracized because he brings a professional approach to sports in an era when it was predominantly amateur. He becomes not only Harolds coach, but his mentor. They complete each other in their desire for glory and they need one another, because none of them can succeed on their own. A discussion between Sybil and Andy, a mutual friend, is extremely eloquent when it comes to Harolds commitment: He says he needs to clear his mind of me. He cant love me and say that. Syb, the worlds against him, or so he believes. Now hes got a chance to prove himself. He cant see or hear anything beyond that, not even you. The fastest man ever before [à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦]. Thats immortality. Just think what it means to a man like Harold. Well, to me the whole things fun. I dont need that. Cast care aside and all that. But for Harold, its a matter of life and death. In Paris, his competitors are two living legends, members of the American team: Paddock and Scholz. Harold suffers several defeats in the beginning of the Olympics and therefore questions his ability to ever reach his objective. He questions himself and everything he stands for. Before his most important race, he confesses to his frind: Contentment. Im 24 and Ive never known it. Im forever in pursuit and I dont even know what it is Im chasing. Aubrey, old chap, Im scared. Sam and I, weve labored, rowed and bullied for this. Day in, day out. Youve seen us, chuckled over us, Ill be bound. Out in all weathers. Madmen. And for what? I was beaten out of sight in the 200. Then I let Paddock trick me in the semi. Now, in one hours time, Ill be out there again. Ill raise my eyes and look down that corridor, four-feet wide, with ten lonely seconds to justify my whole existence. But will I? Aubrey, Ive known the fear of losing. But now Im almost too frightened to win. Before the 100-meter dash Harold has almost overcome his fear of losing, but faces the fear of winning. He feels that his whole existence depends on that one race, which he might either win and offer him a long-desired status; or lose and render him into obscurity. In addition to his own dilemma, he receives a letter from Mussabini, telling him that he would not assist at the race, but that he wishes him all the best. He also offers him his fathers charm. He runs the 100 meters in 10.6 seconds and wins the gold medal. However, he can not celebrate his success. He seeks refuge in a bistro where he drinks with Mussabini. He does not want to party with his team. Yes, youve always thought of yourself as a ruthless man. Hard. Bit of a loner, like me. But actually, youre as soft as a limp pocket. Oh, you care. Care about things that really matter. If you didnt, I wouldnt have come within a mile of you. Do you know who you won for out there today? Hmm? Us! You and old Sam Mussabini. Ive waited 30 bloody years for this [à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦]. Harold! It means the world to me, this, you know. Because weve had, today you and me, and weve got it for keeps. Harold has an illogical, irrational reaction. One possible explanation is that he does not want to share this moment with those who might not have believed in him and in his method; that he wanted to savor his achievement all by himself. Another possible explanation is that he realizes that despite his medal, he is the same person. He is still Jewish and he would still have to face the same problems. Is Harold Abrahams a leader? What kind of leader might he be? Harold Abrahams is an outsider at these Olympics. He is passionate about what he does and he takes it to perfection. He has the vision of success and he sets his own goals; extremely high goals. He believes in himself and seeks to overcome his flaws. He is also looking at the future, knowing exactly what he wants to achieve. The only thing that he has not figured out is what he will do once he achieves everything. And this is exactly why he can not rejoice when he wins the gold medal. This is why he is not a leader in the true sense of the word. He does, however, manifest some kind of auto-leadership. He manages himself, he determines his objectives and he identifies his resources. He is extremely self-aware, realistic and down to earth. The fact that he acknowledges the fact that he needs a coach is essential. In a way, we would say that he seeks a leader, a mentor and a motivator. And he convinces Mussabini, the best in his field, to be that leader for him. If we had to integrate their relationship in a leadership model, it would be the cognitive resources theory and the transactional leadership. Mussabinis intelligence and experience are the resources that lead to performance. His directivity is exactly what Harold needs; he requires guidance. From a transactional point of view, we could say that there is a contract between the two and that the ultimate task is to win. Harold has every interest to follow his leader, because he is the best and he cannot succeed without him. This is why the contingent reward behaviour is well adapted in this situation, with the mention that the motivation is intrinsic. And this is exactly what permits them to excel. Harold is a mature follower, both in terms of job and psychological maturity (according to Hersey and Blanchards Situational Leadership Model). Therefore, Mussabinis directive pattern of behaviour (similar to Fielders task-oriented behaviour) works efficiently in their relationship; he is a teller. Transformational leadership is a process that changes and transforms individuals. It often involves long term goals  [6]  . We believe that focusing on the process, the interaction between the two does not exclude the transactional point of view. We therefore consider that Mussabini helps Abrahams reach his full potential. They each have a vision, they are both inspired by their own motivation and they have to work together to achieve their goals. From a certain point of view, they render each other a service. 2.3. The character of Sam Mussabini Sam Mussabini is Harolds coach. He first appears in the film at a race opposing France and Scotland. He has a short conversation with Colonel John Keddie, President of the Scottish Amateur Athletes Association, and we understand that from his point of view he is a persona non grata; they do not share the same vision on sports. This is why when the Colonel says we do have a strict amateur code he replies that he is a mere spectator. Harold Abrahams is in the public as well and takes the opportunity to talk to him about his need to be coached by him. He wants to improve in order to be able to win the gold medal. Mr Mussabini first refuses, telling him that he should be the one to choose whether to coach him or not: its the coach that should do the asking. Still, he promises that he would observe him and see if he is talented and capable or not to deserve his attention. They meet again at another race, which opposes Eric Liddell and Harold Abrahams. The latter loses and this defeat in unbearable for him. He questions his ability to be a great runner, he is desperate and depressed. This is the moment when Mussabini appears, telling him I can find you another two yards. A line that is decisive for the rest of the film. They start training together; giving Harold the technique he needed to progresses. He has innovative pedagogical methods, consisting of showing him photos of other runners and analyzing why they win or fail, what they do right and what they do wrong. Abrahams strides are shortened, putting more poise into his running. He acquires a more powerful start and learns to concentrate on his dip at the finish. Mussabini understands the psychology of his student, what drives him: a short sprint is run on nerves. Its tailor-made for neurotics. He realizes that Harold is a good sprinter and that he is pushed by his nerves. He says

George Withers poem, By Knowledge, Life wee gaine, All other things to Death pertaine :: Philosophy Poet Poem Essays

George Wither's poem, By Knowledge, Life wee gaine, All other things to Death pertaine "Vivitur Ingenio Caetera Mortis Erut," roughly translated means, "Live intellectually. In all other matters, death is master." This phrase borders the emblem of George Wither's poem, By Knowledge, Life wee gaine, All other things to Death pertaine. This poem admonishes the reader to beware of a life too concerned with worldly pleasures, titles and treasures, which he says, belong to death and will return to him upon our death. He entreats us, rather, to concentrate on knowledge, honest actions, holy study and charity, which will provide a virtuous nature which cannot be removed by kings, time or death. In Thomas More's Utopia, we see an example of a people living by these examples, but in a self-motivated way. The fact that this society has adopted these sentiments as a purely logical survival mechanism can be seen in the differing attitudes between Utopian individual and Utopian nation toward education and learning, wealth and virtue. The poem's emblem shows a man, sitting under the Tree of Knowledge, with his hand on a stack of books contemplating lofty thoughts. He has his back turned from personified Death. George Wither says, "That Knowledge, and that Treasure seeks to find, Which may enrich thy Heart with perfect Joy." We are to understand that learning and knowledge are the most important things to occupy our time in the short life. The Utopian held the wise and learned man in the highest esteem, elevating him to positions of leadership and excusing him from the normal work duties of society. These leaders are tasked with upholding the laws and maintaining a balanced society. Utopians are skilled in "music, dialectic, arithmetic, geometry...logistics," and devour up the Greek classic which Hythlodaeus brings to the island. The nation of Utopia, on the other hand, is quite different. It is a very closed society. It deals in the baser occupations of commerce and even buys slaves from neighboring nations. The n ation holds itself in such high regard that there are no lessons to be learned from it's neighbors. Contrasting the wise man in the emblem is the skeleton hoarding treasures. Among these items are gold, a crown and a coat of arms representing, respectively, wealth, power and honor. These items are in the possession of death, apparently reverting to him after the foolish ones have died. As a socialist society, everything is provided for and by Utopians.