Transferring Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Transferring - Essay Example I must confess that upon rejection, I remained extremely disturbed for a considerably lengthy period of time; not because I found myself incapable of achieving my aim, but because of being rejected for a reason that was beyond my control. My friends helped me during that phase by sending messages like â€Å"realize that there are things which arent under your control, no matter how hard you try.† But to me, all this appeared to be an oversimplification of the reality as I strongly believe that those who hide behind excuses like â€Å"things are not under control†, may never be able to take control of their lives; let alone bring a positive change in the world. For this reason and also due to the fact that I like this private institution because of the limited strength of classes that enhances student-faculty interaction, I mustered up courage to give a second try to fulfill my dream of studying at the Trinity College. I am confident that if I am given a chance to study at the Trinity College, my stay will not only be beneficial for myself, but also for my fellow students as I love to share knowledge with others and always take active part in ventures that enhance learning in a collective

Mrs. Whipple and Her Son in Katherine Porters He Essay -- Katharine A

Mrs. Whipple and Her Son in Katherine Porter's He In the story "He" by Katherine Porter, the main character Mrs. Whipple is often seen as a cruel, neglectful mother who mistreats her son, and there is ample evidence to support this view. But there is another away to look at Mrs. Whipple: she can also be perceived as a pitiful mother being forced to raise a retarded child that is totally incapable of returning her love. After closer inspection, however, it becomes evident that Mrs. Whipple does the best she can under very harsh circumstances, to raise and nurture her son to the best of her ability. She treats her son the way she does out of necessity and therefore should not be hated or pitied for her treatment of Him. In his book, The Texas Legacy of Katherine Anne Porter, James Tanner states "not many of us could-under the dreadfully circumscribed conditions imposed by the author-measure up so well as Mrs. Whipple under such adversity" (104). The Whipples are poor, lower-class people struggling to feed and clothe their children, and make ends meet. Mrs. Whipple is a very proud woman who does not want to be judged by others. She desires respect, and because of this she often makes decisions that do not seem to be in her family's best interest. It often appears as if Mrs. Whipple cares more about what her neighbors think than she does about her relationship with her son, He. For example, she makes Him come down from the tree just because a neighbor says it may be dangerous, and she constantly justifies and makes excuses to others for the way she treats Him. The truth is, she does these things because of her pride; as a human being it is in her nature to be concerned with what other people think about her. This does not m... ...rter's Artistic Development. Baton Rouge: LSU Press, 1989. Porter, Katherine Anne. "He." The Literature of the American South. Ed. William L. Andrews. New York: Norton. 1998. 596-603. Tanner, James T.F. The Texas Legacy of Katherine Anne Porter. Denton: U North Texas P, 1990. Unrue, Darlene Harbour. Truth and Vision in Katherine Anne Porter's Fiction. Athens: U Georgia P, 1985. Works Consulted Hendrick, Willene and George Hendrick. Katherine Anne Porter. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1988. Jorgensen, Bruce W. "The Other Side of Silence: Katherine Anne Porter's 'He' as Tragedy." Modern Fiction Studies 3 28 (1982). Moddelmog, Debra A. "Narrative Irony and Hidden Motivations in Katherine Anne Porter's 'He'." Modern Fiction Studies 3 28 (1982). Rpt in Modern Critical Views, Katherine Anne Porter. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House 1986. 117-125.

Plato/Socrates & St. Augustine Essay

The realm of the reasoning man, according to Plato in his work Phaedo, is extrapolated by Socrates, that is, a man who is within reason also must admit to the fundamental truths regarding life after death (the viewpoint of Plato in this paper will be seen through Socrates as Phaedo was written to express Plato’s viewpoint through Socrates, so, henceforth, whenever Socrates is mentioned it is Plato’s perspective). That is to say, in Socrates explanation of immortality, there remains the outlook that the body and the soul are not eternally combined; but the soul is grounded in the body through emotions, and feral states of humanity.   When the soul is released from such torpor, it then reclines back into its previous non-corporeal state to either rest, or to transform and reinvent itself in the world.   The soul, according to Socrates, is that which is in us that commands and it is the body that serves.   The following paper will explore the nature of good and evil as it is expressed through Plato/Socrates and Augustine.   There will be comparing and contrasting points on this issue. Augustine believes in the essential goodness of humanity; thus, with the incorporation of the soul as mentioned in Plato’s writing, it seems that both philosophers are in agreement thus far about the nature of humanity.   There are however varying degrees of good and evil.   In either philosopher it is not merely a question of good and evil but of reason in a man.   It is reasong that leads to the choice of good or evil.   Augustine believes for a reasonable person, the pursuit of power would be a safe action. However, one who served their own passions would be apt to sin. By maintaining, Augustine suggests, a well managed ideology and conception of moral value, the pursuit of power would be just as viable an option as piety.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Augustine intended to explain the principle source of sin was, in fact, intention. Through his interpretation of the fall of man, Augustine rationalized that the acts committed by Adam and Eve, the eating of the apple, were not the actual sins – but instead, the decision to eat the apple, and the commitment to the act was the point at which the sin occurred. However, with Plato’s writing, there is redemption for humanity.   With the idea of redemption being in need, both philosophers are admitting the proneness that humanity has for evil.   Plato suggests that the human soul is created out of divine will, and that anything created out of divinity is good. Thus, while St. Augustine’s intention marks humanity as evil, Plato’s soul marks them as capable of being good.   Plato believes that the soul is the image of divinity; in the soul there is found an unceasing existence of transformation.   The reasonable man must then accept the dichotomy of the body and soul, as well as accept their harmony he must distance the idea that the body and the soul are one.   The body is mortal, and can succumb to dissolution, but according to Plato, the soul is indissoluble.   Thus, according to Plato the human body is evil while the soul is good making a dichotomy of good and evil and the capacity for each in each human. The body commands emotions, and its fate lies within those external circumstances, that is nature, but the soul, in Socrates’ view is above nature.   The soul is a higher self.   As the introduction to Phaedo states, â€Å"The human being alone has the consciousness of truth and justice and love, which is the consciousness of God.   And the soul becoming more conscious of these, becomes more conscious of her own immortality† (23).   The soul hinges upon the realization that she is immortal.   In that consciousness, and in that state of being, there exists God, and all that is immortal and the goodness of humanity.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Therefore, Socrates is trying to define the perimeters of immortality, and the fact that a reasonable man cannot indubitably believe that the body and the soul will perish, but must in fact take credence to the soul existing at a higher level of existence, that is, at the level with God.   Socrates is placing a belief system in his dialectic, and in so doing he goes into analyzing the existence of God, or the intangible being that is the divine.   In Phaedo Socrates circulates his ideas around the immortality of the soul and the acceptance of this by the reasoning man on the basis of the dimension that God portrays. By dimension, suffice it to say that God, in divine right, is perfect.   It is in that perfection that man may find allusions to his reasoning, and by so doing, reason that since the soul is of God, then man himself is immortal, as Plato wrights, â€Å"An evil God, or an indifferent God might have had the power but not the will, to preserve us†¦But is he is perfect, he must will that all rational beings should partake of that perfection which he himself is† (23).   Life after death then is a certainty on a celestial level.    On this argument in Phaedo, Cebes states, â€Å"†¦knowledge is simply recollection, if true also necessarily implies a previous time in which we have learned now what we recollect.   But this would be impossible unless our soul had been in some place before existing in the form of man; here then is another proof of the soul’s immortality† (Plato 60).   Knowledge is something that is acquired through a previous experience.   A reasoning man can deduce that because he is of a reasonable mind he gained knowledge through previous experience.   The idea of mutating and changing, and being in a semi-transcendental state while in one’s body is something that is prevalent in Socrates’ philosophy. Augustine created this same room for a shift in the combining good and evil of the human body and the divine soul. By suggesting that intent was the source of sin, rather than actions themselves, one would be able to absolve himself of sin by believing that he was following a righteous path.   Thus Augustine’s philosophy suggests, as Plato suggests that there is redemption for humanity.   Both philosophers then meet an agreement point by expressing the truth of the evil nature of humanity.   Both philosophers agree that human nature is evil and it is only the soul which is found to be pure and by following that pure pathway of the soul/God, the evil nature, the body or intent, can be expiated.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   However, while Augustine admitted to redemption for humanity through following the soul he also stated that, â€Å"apparently virtuous acts, like prayer, sacrifice, or the risk of one’s life could in fact stem from vicious, self-regarding motives† (Augustine).[1] This understanding called into question the root motivations of all people. However, looking at the actions of another, one could not see these motivations, and therefore, could not place judgment on their righteousness or validity.   It seems that as Augustine progressed in his philosophy he became more ambiguous as to whether or not humanity could be saved from their own evil intent because of their incapability of selflessness.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Augustine spoke on this as well. There was no rational process by which one could judge the actions of another – other than one’s personal reason. Reason, therefore would become the most important of the human virtues. Augustine felt that reason, in the mind of any man, could not be corrupted by the passions of evil or by the sinful motivations of others.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Thus, the division point for each philosopher became whether or not humanity wanted to be good, as it were.   Plato states that the soul is good and that every person has a soul and thus a pathway to goodness and God, while Augustine also admitted to their being a soul he suggests that the human race was too selfish to follow that pathway because their evil intentions overruled their desire to be good. WORKS CITED Augustine.   â€Å"Confessions†.   R.S. Pine-Coffin.   Longman.   New Impression Edition.   2005. Hundert, E.J. â€Å"Augustine and the Sources of the Divided Self†. Political Theory. 20 No. 1  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   (1992): 86-123 Plato.   Phaedo.     Ã‚  

Coatepec Sacred Mountain of the Aztecs

Coatepec, also known as Cerro Coatepec or Serpent Mountain and pronounced roughly coe-WAH-teh-peck, was one of the most sacred places of Aztec mythology and religion. The name is derived from the  Nahuatl  (Aztec language) words coatl, serpent, and tepetl, mountain. Coatepec was the site of the main origin myth of the Aztec, that of the violent birth of the Aztec/Mexica patron deity  Huitzilopochtli. Key Takeaways: Coatepec Coatepec (Cerro Coatepec, or Serpent Mountain) was a mountain sacred to Aztec mythology and religion.  The central myth of Coatepec involves the murder of the god Huitzilopochtlis mother by her 400 siblings: She was dismembered and thrown off the mountain.The Templo Mayor (Great Temple) at the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan is believed to have been a ceremonial replica of Cerro Coatepec. According to the version of the story told in the Florentine Codex, Huitzilopochtlis mother Coatlicue (She of the Serpent Skirt) conceived the god miraculously when she was doing penance by sweeping out a temple. Her daughter Coyolxauhqui (goddess of the moon) and her 400 other siblings disapproved of the pregnancy and together conspired to kill Coatlicue at Coatepec. The number 400 means legion in the sense of too many to count in the Aztec language and Coyolxauhquis 400 siblings are sometimes referred to as an army of stars. Huitzilopochtli  (god of the sun) leapt from his mothers womb fully armed for battle, his face painted and his left leg adorned with feathers. He defeated the siblings and decapitated Coyolxauhqui: Her body fell into pieces at the foot of the mountain. Migrating from Aztlan According to the myth, it was  Huitzilopochtli who  sent an omen to the original Mexica/Aztecs, demanding that they leave their homeland at Aztlan, and settle in the basin of Mexico. While on that journey they stopped at Cerro Coatepec. According to different codices and to Spanish colonial-era historian Bernardino de Sahagun, the Aztecs stayed at Coatepec for almost 30 years, building a temple on top of the hill in honor of Huitzilopochtli. In his Primeros Memoriales, Sahagun wrote that a group of the migrating Mexica wanted to split from the rest of the tribes and settle at Coatepec. That angered Huitzilopochtli who descended from his temple and forced the Mexica to resume their journey. A Replica of Cerro Coatepec Once they reached the Valley of Mexico and founded their capital Tenochtitlan, the Mexica wanted to create a replica of the sacred mountain at the heart of their city. As many Aztec scholars have demonstrated, the Templo Mayor (Great Temple) of Tenochtitlan, in fact, represents a replica of Coatepec. Archaeological evidence of this mythical correspondence was found in 1978, when a large stone sculpture of the decapitated and dismembered Coyolxauhqui was discovered at the base of the Huitzilopochtli side of the temple during some underground utility work in the heart of Mexico City. This sculpture shows Coyolxauhqui with her arms and legs separated from her torso and decorated with snakes, skulls, and earth monster imagery. The location of the sculpture at the base of the temple is also meaningful, representing Coyolxauhquis fall to earth. Excavation of the sculpture by archaeologist Eduardo Matos Moctezuma revealed that the monumental sculpture (a disk measuring 3.25 meters or 10.5 feet wide) was in situ, an intentional part of the temple platform which led up to the shrine of Huitzilopochtli. Coatepec and Mesoamerican Mythology Recent studies have demonstrated how the idea of a sacred Snake Mountain was already in place in pan-Mesoamerican mythology well before the arrival of the Aztecs in Central Mexico. Possible precursors to the snake mountain myth have been identified at the main temples such as the one at the Olmec site of La Venta and at early Maya sites such as Cerros and Uaxactun. The Temple of the Feathered Serpent at Teotihuacan, dedicated to the god Quetzalcoatl, has also been proposed as an antecedent to the Aztec mountain of Coatepec. The true location of the original Coatepec mountain is unknown, although there is a town called that in the basin of Mexico and another in Veracruz. Since the site is part of Aztec mythology/history, that isnt really too surprising. We dont know where the archaeological ruins of the Aztec homeland of Aztlan are either. However, archaeologist Eduardo Yamil Gelo has made a strong argument for Hualtepec Hill, a site located northwest of Tula in Hidalgo state. Updated by K. Kris Hirst Sources Miller, Mary Ellen, and Karl Taube. An Illustrated Dictionary of the Gods and Symbols of Ancient Mexico and the Maya. London: Thames and Hudson, 1993. Print.Moctezuma, Eduardo Matos. Archaeology Symbolism in Aztec Mexico: The Templo Mayor of Tenochtitlan. Journal of the American Academy of Religion 53.4 (1985): 797-813. Print.Sandell, David P. Mexican Pilgrimage, Migration, and Discovery of the Sacred. Journal of American Folklore 126.502 (2013): 361-84. Print.Schele, Linda, and Julia Guernsey Kappelman. What the Hecks Coatepec. Landscape and Power in Ancient Mesoamerica. Eds. Koontz, Rex, Kathryn Reese-Taylor and Annabeth Headrick. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 2001. 29-51. Print.Yamil Gelo, Eduardo. El Cerro Coatepec En La Mitologà ­a Azteca Y Templo Mayor, Una Propuesta De Ubicacià ³n. Arqueologia 47 (2014): 246-70. Print.