Mixing Regular and Synthetic Motor Oils

Mixing Regular and Synthetic Motor Oils Heres a practical chemistry question for you: Do you know what happens if you mix regular and synthetic motor oil? Lets say the mechanic put synthetic oil in your car when you got your oil changed. You stop at a gas station and see you are running about a quart low, but all you can get is regular motor oil. Is it alright to use the regular oil or will you risk harming your engine by doing so? Mixing Motor Oil According to Mobil Oil, it should be fine to mix oils. This manufacturer states it would be unlikely anything bad would happen, such as a gel-forming from an interaction of the chemicals (a common fear), because the oils are compatible with each other. Many oils are a blend of natural and synthetic oils. So, if you are low on oil, dont be afraid to add a quart or two of synthetic oil if you are using regular oil or even regular oil if you are using a synthetic. You dont need to rush right out and get an oil change so youll have pure oil. Possible Negative Effects It is not recommended to routinely mix oils because the additives in different products may interact or the oils may become destabilized by the mixture. You may reduce or negate the properties of the additives. You could lose the benefits of the more expensive synthetic oil. So, adding regular oil to your special synthetic oil will mean youll need to get your oil changed sooner than you would have otherwise. If you have a high-performance engine, its possible it will be displeased if the (expensive) additives cant work the way they are supposed to. This may not damage your engine, but it wont help its performance. The Difference Between Regular and Synthetic Oil Both conventional and synthetic motor oils are derived from petroleum, but they can be very different products. Conventional oil is refined from crude oil. It circulates through the engine to keep it cool and prevent wear by acting as a lubricant. It helps prevent corrosion, keeps surfaces clean, and seals the engine. Synthetic oil serves the same purpose, but its tailored for higher temperature and pressure. Synthetic oil is also refined, but then its distilled and purified so that it contains fewer impurities and a smaller, select set of molecules. Synthetic oil also contains additives intended to help keep an engine cleaner and protect it from damage. The main difference between regular and synthetic oil is the temperature at which it undergoes thermal degradation. In a high-performance engine, regular oil is more apt to pick up deposits and form sludge. Cars that run hot do better with synthetic oil. For most automobiles, the only real difference youll see is that synthetic costs more initially but lasts longer between oil changes.

In Freud's view what is the difference between the ego, id and Essay

In Freud's view what is the difference between the ego, id and superego, and how do they interact - Essay Example The Id Freud conceptualizes the id in terms of uncoordinated instincts, and as the unorganized part of the personality structure, the id only contains basic instinctual drives, and is present from the time individuals are born (McLeod). The id is the origin of human needs, wants, desires, and impulses, especially the sexual and aggressiveness-related drives, and it is governed by the pleasure principle, which is the psychic force that arouses the tendency to seek the immediate gratification of impulses as soon as they emerge. The id encompasses the libido, the primary source of the instinctual force, and it seeks to avoid pain or un-pleasure aroused by the rise in instinctual forces; in this respect, the id demands immediate satisfaction. When individuals satisfy their needs or drives, they experience pleasure; however, since the id does not care about reality or the needs of other people but its own satisfaction, it is not a stable personality. The fact that the id is present right from birth implies that it encompasses all the inherited traits, and the minds of babies being purely id-oriented, it implies that the id is important in babies since it contains the life instincts that are very important for pleasurable survival. For instance, when babies are hungry, they cry to be fed, and when they are wet, they also cry for their diapers to be changed; in this respect, the id enables the babies to seek immediate gratification. This explains why babies have no sense of wrong or right as the id knows no judgment of value, of what is wrong or right; in that respect, so long as there is a need it must be satisfied immediately. The Ego The ego, unlike the id, is the organized, realistic component of the psyche, which only acts according to the reality principle, and seeks to grant the id satisfaction in realistic ways that are beneficial in the long term rather than only in the short term. In this regard, Freud perceives the ego to be an individual’s conscienc e that makes them understand that their own desires may vary considerably from those of other people around them. In that sense, the ego will try to meet an individual’s needs but at the same time, it will consider the reality in the surrounding world since it understands that actions have consequences or effects, which may be positive or negative. The ego, therefore, plays a very fundamental function in individuals since it tries to balance thinking before carrying out decisions or before taking actions, to ensure that they bring benefits in the end rather than pain. The reality principle governing the ego is the regulating mechanism, which enables individuals to delay satisfying their immediate needs and drives until the appropriate time. For instance, the ego will enable individuals to wait patiently at a restaurant for their food, rather than grab food off other people’s plates; without the ego, individuals would be grabbing things from people as soon as they have felt a need that needs to be satisfied immediately. The Super Ego Unlike the id and the ego, the super ego plays a very fundamental moralizing role in the psyche since it aims for nothing short of perfection by incorporating ego’s ideals and punishing misbehavior with guilt feelings (Eugenes). According to Freud, the super-ego incorporates the learnt values and morals of society, which are gained from interactions within family and

Criminal Profiling Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Criminal Profiling - Term Paper Example The origin of criminal profiling can be traced back to the 19th century where researchers such as Alphonse Bertillon and Hans gross realized the potential of criminal profiling (Turvey 3). In the 1880s, the Metropolitan Police made the first examination in the murder of prostitutes. They were successful because they found Jack the Ripper guilty of the offence through the evidence gathered from the crime scene. To come up with a criminal profile the following approaches are followed. The first approach is the geographical approach whereby the patterns in relation to the location and timing of the scene of the crime are analyzed, which then helps in identifying the location of the offender. Second is investigative psychology that uses the theory of psychology in analyzing and identifying the true characteristics of the criminal. This is achieved through looking at the analyzed offending style and behavior of the crime. Third is the typological approach, which focuses on the specific characteristics, portrayed by the scene of the crime and then the offender is categorized according to ‘typical’ characteristics identified. Finally is the clinical approach that is useful in identifying whether the criminal is suffering from psychological abnormalities. In the case of a homicide, the FBI gathers the information about the offender(s) through four phases. The first phase is the antecedent, which involves investigating the fantasy or plan of the murderer before the act. The second phase is method and manner, which tries to determine the type of victim the murderer chose and the manner and method used in the murder such as stabbing, shooting, and strangulation. The third phase is the body disposal, which tries to identify if the murder and disposal of the body took place at multiple or one scene. The fourth and final phase is the post-offence behavior, which investigates whether the murderer is trying to inject himself

The Major Factors That Led Rome and the Hellenistic Kingdom to Clash Essay Example for Free

The Major Factors That Led Rome and the Hellenistic Kingdom to Clash Essay 6. What were the major factors that led to clashes between Rome and the Hellenistic kingdoms, down to 146 B.C.? Can one decide what proportion of the responsibility for these clashes belongs to Rome, to the Hellenistic great powers (the Antigonids, Seleucids and Ptolemies) and to the minor players? This essay will what were the major factors that led to clashes between Rome and the Hellenistic kingdom, down to 146 B.C. A brief history of Rome’s increasing involvement in the Hellenistic area starting with its wars with Hannibal of Carthage and how the Hellenistic Kingdoms of Antigonids, the Seleucids and the Ptolemies and several other minor powers in the area came to be after the death of Alexander. The essay will focus on the factors that the writer believes contributed to the clashes. These being, Philips alliance with Hannibal and the Carthaginian empire, the results of ambassadors from Rhodes and Pergamum being received in Rome and telling of an appending alliance between Philip of Macedon and Antiochus of the Seleucids Kingdom, the third factor is that Rome was simply coming to the aid of its ‘friends’, various smaller powers in the area with which it had formed alliances. The essay will then focus on to whom the responsibility for the clashes between Rome and the Hellenistic Kingdoms lies with and what proportion of responsibility can apportioned to each party. This will focus on the major players of the Hellenistic Kingdoms, the Antigonids, Seleucids and Ptolemies and other smaller players. After the death of Alexander in 323B.C. the empire which he had created began to be broken up into different kingdoms and satraps amid bitter infighting by his generals, including Ptolemy, Cassander, Antigonus, Parmenion and Seleucus. â€Å"the ultimate fragmentation of Alexander’s empire was likelihood from the start, and the history of the following generation was to see the emergence of several separate kingdoms and dynasties out of his once unified empire.† Out of these generals three emerged to take control of large pieces of Alexander’s empire, these were, Ptolemy, Antigonus and Seleucus. Ptolemy Soter had campaigned with Alexander from the beginning and had gained Alexanders trust, and had become one of his personal bodyguards as well as one of Alexander’s generals. After Alexanders death Ptolemy was given the satrapy of Egypt and soon used his new found authority to start claiming some of the surrounding areas, including, the region around Cyrene. His first challenge to the authority of the other satrapies and kingdoms was the claiming of Alexanders remains as his funeral procession toured through his empire. Ptolemy later won the lands of Palestine and Cyprus to further secure Egypt’s borders. The Ptolemy dynasty lasted many centuries until it also came under Roman rule. Antigonus was another one of Alexander’s successors and created the Antigonid dynasty which was to rule Macedonia and parts of Greece. Antigonus had ambitions to recreate Alexanders empire and this was recognized by the other successors who formed an alliance against him, that was fought over many battle but reached no real conclusion, but prevented him from expanding his kingdom any further. Antigonus was constantly under attack from all sides and finally fell in battle and his kingdom now came under the control of his son. Seleucus was another of Alexanders general and after his death was given the satrapy of Babylonia and after first being ou sted by Antigonus, he fled to Egypt to seek refuge with Ptolemy, after a number of years in Egypt, Seleucus returned to take over much of Persia. The lands that he had gained were ethnically diverse and used different parts of each culture to administer his lands. Seleucus managed to gain back much of Alexander’s former empire until he was assassinated and his son took over his leadership. These three successors of Alexander along with the more minor satrap of Lysimachus and Cassander inherited an empire but through almost constant warfare between themselves were not able to resurrect Alexander’s empire either singularly or as an alliance. The three main successors forged dynasties that lasted a couple of centuries until they all were defeated or came under the sway of Rome. Rome fought three wars with Carthage called the Punic wars, these wars were fought between 264B.C. and 146B.C. (First 264-241B.C., Second 218-202B.C., Third 149-146B.C.) The first two Punic wars were essentially defensive wars for Rome especially the second where Hannibal in command of the Carthaginian forces crossed the Alps and attacked mainland Italy, the Romans were able to repel Hannibal and his army, Hannibal was eventually defeated by the famous General Publius Cornelius Scipio and pushed back to North Africa and Carthage. The second war reduced Carthage to nothing but a city state, but Rome still feared that Carthage could rise once again to its former military might and with the third Punic war; Rome razed Carthage to the ground, slaughtering or enslaving its inhabitants. â€Å"At the sight of the city utterly perishing amidst the flames Scipio burst into tears, and stood long reflecting on the inevitable change which awaits cities, nations, and dynasties.† Rome and the Hellenistic kingdoms fought four wars called the Macedonian wars between 215B.C. and 146B.C. and wars signalled the first clashes between Rome and the Hellenistic kingdoms. The first Macedonian war was fought between Rome and Philip V of Macedon of the Antigonid kingdom and was brought about as a cause of revenge. In 216B.C. Philip V thought that with Hannibal’s continuous victories over the Roman forces that the Italian peninsula would fall and that the time was right to form an alliance with Hannibal, with the ambition of expanding his own domains. This was a war that Rome did not want to be involved in as they were already stretched militarily in their fight against Carthage, and sent only a small force to deal with Philip V and the Macedon kingdom. According to Livy, Rome made an alliance with the Aetolians to fight against Philip V and sent a larger force to wage war, but on arriving found the Aetolians had made peace with Philip V and it was easier for Rome to seek peace with Philip V than fight alone, and thus the first Macedonian war ended. The Second Macedonian was fought between 200-196B.C. and was started after an apparent secret deal between Philip V of Macedon and Antiochus III of the Seleucid kingdom to attack and divide up the Egyptian kingdom under Ptolemy rule. Ambassadors from Rhodes and Pergamum had sent diplomatic missions to Rome with these reports with the intent of gaining Roman support against Philip V and the threats he posed to their kingdoms. Philip’s aggression towards the Greek city states, some who had alliances with Rome, caused Rome to issue an ultimatum to Philip, to remove his forces back into Macedon, Philip refused and on the pretext of helping its ‘friends’ Rome started t mov e its forces against Macedon. It is possible that Rome also feared if Philip and Antiochus gained further footholds in the Eastern Mediterranean, they could at some point threaten Italy, also of note is the ambition of Roman commanders to gain personal advancement and public prestige through the triumphs of winning wars. Philip was defeated in the battle of Cynoscephalae in 196B.C. and was forced to give up all territories outside of Macedonia and become an ally of Rome. At this point Rome proclaimed that all Greek was ‘free’ and essentially Greece came under Rome’s political and military sway. ‘The Senate of the Romans and Titus Quibctius the proconsul having defeated king Philip and the Macedonians in war, allow (Greece) to be free, ungarrisoned, not subject to tribute and using their ancestral laws.† In 192B.C. Antiochus III invaded Greece seemingly at the request of some Greek states to liberate Greece from the Roman’s, Antiochus found little support in Greece for his en deavours, for many of the Greek states had regained independence after the Roman occupation and had no desire to be ruled over by another king. Rome retaliated and Antiochus was defeated in battles at Thermopylae, Myonnesos and Magnesia-by-Sipylos, these were crushing defeats and forced Antiochus back to Syria and what was left of the Seleucid kingdom and thrust Rome deeper into the affairs of the region. The third Macedonian war fought between 172-167B.C. and was caused by accusation by King Eumenes of Pergamum of Macedonian violations of its territory and an assassination attempt on Eumenes that were both attributed to king Perseus, who had now taken the throne after the death of his father. Perseus tried diplomatic negotiations with Rome who had an alliance with Pergamum, but these only served to give Rome more time to prepare an invasion force. Perseus managed to win a few minor battles, but was crushed in the battle Pydna in 168B.C. and this signalled the ended of the Antigonid kingdom as it was split up into four republics by Rome. In the period between 168-146B.C. Rome consolidated its power in the region with calling on Antiochus to withdraw his troops from Egypt and further decimated the Seleucid kingdom by burning its ships and hamstringing its elephants which effectively brought an end to any resistance. The so-called forth Macedonian war consisted of local anti-Roman uprisings and invasion from Thrace in 149B.C. by Andriscus who managed to defeats the Macedonian resistance crowned himself Philip VI, but his reign was short-lived and after being handed over to the Romans in 146B.C., Macedon was made a Roman province, thus signalling the end of the Antigonid kingdom. To attribute a proportion of responsibility for the clashes between Rome and the Hellenistic kingdoms cannot be clearly defined as both parties during this era had ideas of expansion and each conflict could potentially be blamed on the other party. An example of this is the second Macedonian war where the responsibility could be split because Philip had been moving forward in taking land off the Greek city states, while Rhodes and Pergamum had been trying to entice the Romans to attack Philip through sending ambassadors to Rome with their grievances and it could be argued that the senators and commanders in Rome wanted to attack Philip for reasons of personal advancement and prestige. Whilst in many of the other wars Rome could be seen as the aggressor as their seemed to very little provocation or reasoning in some of their attacks, shown by the third Macedonian war. In conclusion this essay has given a history of Roman military movements up until their entry into the Hellenistic realms, along with histories of the major Hellenistic kingdoms and how they ended up clashing with Rome. The major factors which led to these clashes have been identified along with what proportion of responsibility should be given to each party for the clashes. It is possible that the downfall of the Hellenistic kingdoms was inevitable and it was only a matter of time before Rome conquered them all. â€Å"the Romans in less than fifty-three years have succeeded in subjecting nearly the whole inhabit ted world to their sole government—a unique thing in history?† Bibliography: Austin M.M. The Hellenistic World: From Alexander to the Roman Conquest. 2nd Ed Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 2006 Balsdon, J. P. V. D. Rome and Macedon, 205-200 B.C. Journal of Roman Studies , 44: , 1954 Billows. R.A.. Antigonos the One-Eyed and the Creation of the Hellenistic State. University of California Press, Berkley. 1990 Dorey T.A. Rome Against Carthage. Seeker and Warburg, London, 1971. Great Lives from History: The Ancient World, Salem Press, 2004 Gruen. E.S. Rome and the Seleucids in the aftermath of Pydna Chiron, 6, 1976 Livy The History of Rome trans. Rev. C. Roberts, EP Dutton and Co. New York. 1912 McDonald A.H. Rome and Greece 196-146 B.C. Auckland University Press. 1970 Polybius The Histories of Polybius, trans. Evelyn S. Shuckburgh, Macmillan, London, 1889 Shipley. G The Greek World: After Alexander 323-30B.C. Routledge, London 2000 Walbank F.W. The causes of the Third Macedonian War: recent views The in Ancient Macedonia II: Papers Read at the Second Inte rnational Symposium Held in Thessaloniki, 1973 , Metsakes, K. , 1977 [ 1 ]. M.M. Austin The Hellenistic World: From Alexander to the Roman Conquest 2nd Ed Cambridge University Press Cambridge. 2006 pp. 63 [ 2 ]. Great Lives from History: The Ancient World, Salem Press, 2004 pp 25-28 [ 3 ]. Billows. R.A. Antigonos the One-Eyed and the Creation of the Hellenistic State. University of California Press, Berkley. 1990 [ 4 ]. G. Shipley The Greek World: After Alexander 323-30B.C. Routledge, London 2000 pp. 286-287 [ 5 ]. T.A. Dorey Rome Against Carthage Seeker and Warburg, London, 1971. Pp.37-51 [ 6 ]. Polybius 39.51The Histories of Polybius, trans. Evelyn S. Shuckburgh, London Macmillan, 1889 [ 7 ]. J.P.V.D. Balsdon Rome and Macedon, 205-200 B.C. Journal of Roman Studies , 44: , 1954 pp:31-33 [ 8 ]. Livy 31.1-31.4 The History of Rome trans. Rev. C. Roberts, EP Dutton and Co. New York. 1912 [ 9 ]. Livy 31.2 The History of Rome [ 10 ]. G. Shipley The Greek World: After Alexander 323-30B.C. pp:374-375 [ 11 ]. A.H. McDonald. Rome and Greece 196-146 B.C. Auckland University Press. 1970, 113-114 [ 12 ]. Polybius 18.46 The Histories of Polybius [ 13 ]. Livy 37.41-37.45 The History of Rome [ 14 ]. F.W. Walbank The causes of the Third Macedonian War: recent views The in Ancient Macedonia II: Papers Read at the Second International Symposium Held in Thessaloniki, 1973 , Metsakes, K. , 1977 pp. 84-86 [ 15 ]. E.S. Gruen. Rome and the Seleucids in the aftermath of Pydna Chiron, 6, 1976 pp. 74 [ 16 ]. Polybius 1.1 The Histories of Polybius

The Signalman, An Arrest and Napoleon and The Spectre. In this essay

The Signalman, An Arrest and Napoleon and The Spectre. In this essay I am going to compare and contrast them. All three of these stories use gothic techniques; however they have a variety Compare and Contrast Three 19th Century Short Stories The first gothic novel was written in 1764 by Horace Walpole. The novel was called ‘The Castle of Ortranto’. He created the criteria that all gothic writers use today. Gothic literature uses an atmosphere of mystery, shock and suspense to intrigue the reader or audience. The gothic vocabulary consists of words that create an atmosphere of; mystery, hate, tension, fear, sorrow and terror. Gothic novels usually are set in a house or place with a large amount of gothic architecture. Gothic literature has a common involvement with the supernatural. In most gothic stories there is a spectre, ghost or vision that is out of the ordinary. Gothic stories also often contain a mysterious ending. During the gothic phase many authors took to writing in this style. Authors such as Charlotte Bronte, Charles Dickens, Arthur Conan Doyle and Edgar Allen Poe all adopted the gothic style and wrote their own stories. Gothic architecture is also included many times to provoke an atmosphere of terror. The gothic style buildings had large arches and gargoyles that looked down from the ceiling, these things gave the image of darkness. The three stories that I have read are; The Signalman, An Arrest and Napoleon and The Spectre. In this essay I am going to compare and contrast them. All three of these stories use gothic techniques; however they have a variety of differences as well as similarities. ‘Napoleon and The Spectre,’ written by Bronte and ‘The Signalman’ written by Dic... ... his wife which acts as a deterrent to them developing their matrimonial relationship. The background information about the ‘ancestral halls’ at which they are staying gives the reader the sense that there is something strange about the house. The woman feels inexplicable draughts and John dismisses it and shuts, ‘the window.’ This implies a ghostliness and again call upon the theme of the supernatural. This contrasts with ‘the signalman’ and ‘napoleon and the spectre’ because the ghosts in those two stories are physically described, whereas here it is only suggested. As days go on the woman becomes obsessed with ‘the yellow wallpaper’ in the corner of her room. The wallpaper was; ‘repellent, almost revolting: a smouldering†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦sulphur tint in others.’ The wallpaper seems to have a power of its own drawing the woman into an unhealthy hobby of following it.

Social Changes Outside Philippines During 19th Century in the Light of Rizal’s Life

The World in Rizal’s Time Political Changes Alferez, Alain Jared Aquino, Angelica Atienza, Aldrin Baluyot, Rencie Bernabe, Venzerie Rose Lomibao, Justine 2CA1 1801 The Act of Union, a legislative agreement which united Ireland and Great Britain (England and Scotland) was enacted on January 1, 1801. On 1798, the Irish Rebellion brought the Irish question to the attention of the British Cabinet, and British Prime Minister, William Pitt, was convinced that the best solution was a union. The 1799 proposal met strong opposition from a number of members and was rejected by majority of the Irish parliament. However, the government pursued in changing the opposition’s view. During the 1800 session of the parliament, the Act of Union was finally passed. In relation to Rizal Rizal crafted a large number of writings that changed many lives of people not only in the Philippines but also in many parts of the world. And one of Rizal’s greatest works, published on the early time of Spanish colonization of the Philippines, is his annotation of Antonio Morga’s â€Å"Successo de las Islas Filipinas†. Dr. Jose Rizal reprinted in Paris Morga’s â€Å"Successo de las Islas Filipinas† with his annotation. It described the history of the Philippines before the Spanish period. Rizal had shown through this work of his that the Filipinos had a civilization worthy to be proud of even long before the Spaniards came the country. 1816 The American Colonization Society was created in an effort to resettle blacks and newly freed slaves. What is ACS? What does it do? Why is it created? What was the issue with the blacks and slaves? Where? When? Who? How? The  American Colonization Society  (in full, The Society for the Colonization of Free People of Color of America), founded in 1816, was the primary vehicle to support the â€Å"return† of free  African Americans  to what was considered greater freedom in  Africa. It helped to found the  colony  of  Liberia  in 1821–22 as a place for freedmen. Its founders were  Henry Clay,  John Randolph, and  Richard Bland Lee. The colonization effort resulted from a mixture of motives. Free blacks,  freedmen  and their descendants, encountered widespread discrimination in the United States of the early 19th century. In relation to Rizal Rizal evidently disliked the discrimination of rights between black and white. What event? When? Where? How did he show his opposition to discrimination? Any writings? What did he do for the blacks and the slaves? 1837 Queen Victoria becomes Queen at the age of 18. Britain managed to build a huge empire during the Victorian period. It was also a time of tremendous change in the lives of British people. In 1837, most people lived in villages and worked on the land, by 1901, most lived in towns and worked in officers, shops, and factories. In relation to Rizal Rizal arrived in London and in Liverpool on May 24, 1888. For a short time, he stayed as a guest of Dr. Antonio Regidor, an exile and a practising lawyer. By the end of May, he transferred to a new boarding house ran by the Breckett Family. It was here that Rizal met Gertrude Breckett, a true-blooded English woman. Her case with Rizal was quite different from others because it was one-way. She showed sign of being very much in love with our hero. 1861 Criminal Law Coordination Act reduced the number of capital crimes to four: Murder, High Treason, Arson and Piracy. After 1861 capital punishment was only retained for 4 crimes, murder, piracy, arson in the Royal Dockyards and high treason In which country? England, Britain Why was CLCA reduced into four capital crimes? Why were they chosen? More details. In relation to Rizal Rizal was accused of Treason. (Accused as leader of Katipunan/ rebellion) Meaning of Treason betrayal of one's own country by waging war against it or by consciously or purposely acting to aid its enemies. Why was Rizal guilty with treason? What did he do? When? Where? His writings had helped inspire the Philippine Revolution  against colonial rule. For 4 years Rizal remained in exile in Dapitan, where he practiced ophthalmology, built a school and waterworks, planned town improvements, wrote, and carried out scientific experiments. Then he successfully petitioned the Spanish government to join the Spanish army in Cuba as a surgeon; but on his way to Spain to enlist, the Philippine revolution broke out, and Rizal was returned from Spain, imprisoned, and tried for false charges of treason and complicity with the revolution. Connect to Rizal’s martyrdom. His enemies in the government and Church were operating behind the scenes, and he was convicted. The day before he was executed he wrote to a friend: â€Å"I am innocent of the crime of rebellion. So I am going to die with a tranquil conscience. † 1868 Queen Isabella was dethroned and replaced by Miguel Carlos dela Torre In relation to Rizal This happened in Spain (Conservatives wanted a queen as monarch) Why would the queen be dethroned by the general? In relation to Rizal Miguel Carlos dela Torre gave way to Liberalism and freedom of speech. Element in Spanish society— liberals, reformists (dela Torre) created a Republic Separated state from church. Elected, not appointed. 1869 Suez Canal was opened to the world after 10 years of construction. With collaboration with the French How much time does Suez Canal save? (saved time and effort, goods are transported) (Pwede ata ito sa relation) Everything was transported including IDEAS wherever people go. Ideas from Europe will enter Philippines because of Suez Canal In relation to Rizal Rizal passed through the Suez Canal when he was on his way to the City of Naples. 1874 Former Spanish General Manuel Pavia y Rodriguez dies at Madrid, January 4 at age 67, having ended Spain’s first republic by his coup d’etat of January 1874. More details In relation to Rizal From Barcelona, Rizal moved to Madrid, the capital city of Spain. On November 3, 1882, he enrolled in Medicine and Philosophy and Letters in the Universidad Central de Madrid. He also studies painting and sculpture in the Academy of Arts and took lessons in French, German and English. http://www. capitalpunishmentuk. org/hanging1. html http://legal-dictionary. thefreedictionary. com/treason http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/American_Colonization_Society

Race Essay Essay

In our society, racial inequality has always been a concerning issue for past decades, but certain parents’ state their opinions on the open discussions of our history and present with racism. The question of whether or not they should speak to their children about the racism that certain individuals receive has caused controversy in our society. There are parents who claim that they have unbiased judgments on the topic while others strongly commit to reminding the children that racism should be an important topic that should be talked over. Parents differ when it comes to the message they project towards children about race, but the message changes with children’s capacity to understand it. So the actual importance is if children should be introduced to the racial madness at such a young age like we have been doing in schools and in society or should the parents stand up and eliminate the racial topic for good. Although with the parents that are not overly racist, there is multiple concerns of whether or not to speak to their children about how their own race discriminates certain people in our society. Furthermore, there are numerous people in our society, especially parents, who believe we should consider not bringing up racism to future generations and instead take the step into a post racial era since we have improved tremendously in race relations. On the contrary, some parents believe the discussion of racism is important for children to be aware of the outcome it has produced and the background of why racism occurs, and in this case, I do strongly agree with the parents. There are a few parents whom have decided not to speak about racism. They believe the media nor did neighbors and friends play a crucial part in their decision making. They consider Reyna 2 themselves unbiased to all the controversy that occurs in their community over the racism topic, especially when it comes from a white individual. Without the society’s ideas swirled up in their mind, the parents are able to describe every perspective that can be observed of the racism. The importance of being able to see every angle of the racism that the minority group receives will help eliminate the bias judgment that we witness in the media or what we are told by others. With this in mind, the decision to consider the topic of racism in family conversations becomes easier to either bring up or shut down. It becomes easier because parents are able to discuss and inform their children that there is more than just one perspective that society defines as racism against the minority ethnicity. White parents can defend themselves from the ignorant comments and stories that people tell about their racial comments towards the African Americans. It is easier to speak about racism than to keep quiet in today’s society, but that seems to be the problem. On the contrary, white parents can also choose not to speak about the racial topic by ignoring it completely. Shutting down the media and any outside influence can assist furtherly with the unbiased decision to choose not to speak to their children about it. In today’s society, it is difficult to say that parents are not influenced in some way in their choices in life. Although parents can shut down the influence from the media, it is impossible to do the same to their children without turning them away from society as well. In all truth, once the child steps out of their home and their parent’s view on society and racism, the child is left vulnerable to society biased judgments on racism and everything else. There are parents who allow the media and any other influential speaker effect their decision on whether they, as not so overly racist yet biased parents, should intensify and enhance to their children about racism in their community and in the society. A majority of the parents are influenced by the media’s portrayal of discrimination on African Americans. Parents who choose to speak about racism to Reyna 3 their children after hearing and witnessing stories and racist acts throughout the country, will either help stop discrimination or unintentionally influence further acts of racism. In reference to the book of â€Å"The Color of the Water†, racial equality was shown to be unbalanced through the society and the effect it had on people since they witnessed it in their own family. In the book, James, one of the Ruth’s 12 kids, had taken it upon himself to write down every single detail that flooded back from his mother’s past. Throughout this James discovered how strong his mother was due to all the things she had to go through and the protection she enhanced for her kids. She protected them because she knew racism would be their biggest trouble and the consequences it would lead to. Society has a lot to do with the influence of racism. Future parents should remind their children of the horror of racism that occurred decades past, or should they just ignore it and try to move past it? In my opinion, speaking about racism seems to be the best way to go. Usually the second most influential people in parents’ decision making are neighbors and friends. They communicate with each other and speak of all their experiences which leads to further leverage on racism itself. Lastly, parents’ own assumption on racial inequality will influence their manner of discussing it to their children. Once parents decide to speak to their children about racism, question rise that become too difficult to answer and the biggest issue is parents’ own prejudice. If the answers aren’t well understood by the children it might lead to trouble and further racism. Sometimes children witness their parent’s unintentional discriminations towards other adults even when it is taught to be moral and caring for others which can also lead to further racism. This is why parents should try to educate their children of racism in order to avoid any misjudgments of their parent’s or anybody else’s actions, and this will help avoid their children’s own unintentional racism towards African Americans. Nelson Mandela inspired people with a few words that would better understand this topic, â€Å"No one is Reyna 4 born hating another person because of the color of their skin. People learn to hate, and if they can learn to hate, then they can learn to love†¦ † In reference to all the parent decision on whether they, as white parents, should talk to their children about racism. In my opinion as well as most people, believe that the more parents talk about the racism the easier it will become to educate future generations of what they should not do in society. Our goal as a society, and the reason behind the social experiment that the United States is experiencing, is to create a post racial era. There is a fear that if people don’t remind their children about racial history then it is likely to cause racial discrimination to occur once again and have history repeat itself. As true as that might be, it is also more likely to be wrong. In many cases, the children might begin to get ideas of past discriminations to inflict on current black children. The stereotype about the minority group will keep at stand which will eventually lead to the continuation of the racism. Therefore, the parents and society as well are pressured to continue speaking to their children about racism in order to help them understand the meaning and the harm it does on the victims. [African Americans] Although the future may not be predicted, parents whom decide not to speak about racism, all because it doesn’t seem important to address it anymore, are probably causing our society more harm than good. Some parents do not intend to speak about the racial discrimination because it draws negative attention to the society, and even if all their reasons seem logical, education has always proved to be far more successful than any other option. The parents who refuse to bring up the topic of racism in their family have very strong views about it that should be considered by others. There was once a research program done in 2011 where a few psychologist wanted to ask questions to white parents about their communication with their children about racism. At first the parents didn’t know what the topic Reyna 5 of the questions would be during the research, but as soon as they were told the topic, many parent withdrew from the experiment due to it discussing racism with their children. The parents strongly believed that there shouldn’t be an open discussion with their offspring about race and the discrimination among the minority group. It came as a shock to the psychologists and scientist over the outcome that was displayed before the research was even done. Without even knowing, the research team developed new results on the topic of race without successfully completing their research on their primary experiment and questionnaire. The simple answer was that the white parents that were supposed to participate didn’t want their children to be aware of the inhumane discrimination over skin complexity. They, also, didn’t want to expose them to the violence that arises from racial discrimination such as the hate crimes, the segregation, and the bullying of children their same age. Although many won’t comprehend the reason behind the racism, discussing it will only seem to promote racism in the eyes of the children even when many parents disagree. The parents should not speak about racism because there is a fear, naivete and denial from the white parent’s own thoughts that if they do speak about it to their children the whole truth can become misinterpreted or in many cases, biased. There is an article by Dr. Harris-Britt that goes over the reasons why white parents should not speak about race. Dr. Harris-Britt speaks about the fear, denial, and naivete that parents encounter as being a negative decision. By them discussing to their children the increasing issue of racial discrimination, the attention that racism is receiving becomes unbearable. The point of view that the article feeds to the reader goes hand in hand with the section of this essay where the racism discussion in families and the white population should avoid each other. Parents may fear their own thoughts and the truth of their judgments towards African Americans. Parents can deny the color discrimination that happens in Reyna 6 their own home, or community. Many will believe that we are already in the post racial era, and will use this belief in order to not openly discuss the subject with their children. Although we do not yet live in a post racial era, we can soon get there if racial discussions can be eliminated. If people would stop dividing them self by race, and focused on their own unintentional discrimination that they might give off, the white race parents won’t find it necessary to warn or inform their children of the racial discrimination that will probably occur to their African American friends, acquaintances, or classmates. In my opinion, these should be used as examples to enhance and persuade other parents that it is far much better to inform all children of racism before they receive or misinterpret other information given to them by someone else, like the media. Some parents will argue that racial ignorance erases the history and experiences that led up to the freedom from racism, hence why those as parents should speak of other race’s experiences and hardships in order to prevent them from happening again. In reference to an article titled 5 Reasons We Need To Talk to Kids about Race in America by Bree Ervin, it states that parents of the white race should consider speaking to their children about race, especially by beginning at the youngest age where they can understand what they’re being told. With all the reasons given, Bree Ervin has sided with the parents who strongly suggest it is the right choice to speak out to our children about racial history and the changes that must be done to prevent history repeating itself. The strong argument is that when we are â€Å"color-blind,† we also tend to discount or dismiss other people’s experiences of race, racism, and bigotry. Parents should not only speak about racism, but should educate their children as well because educating their children about race helps them fight racism and create change. A good example of childhood education about racism would be a TED video of a woman named Chimamanda. Chimamanda Reyna 7 was a Nigerian woman that was well thought and informed at such a young age. In the TED video about Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, she spoke of a childhood story where her parents educated her about the African Americans racial history and that how their own black race was a part of our country’s history, not just the perspective of the whites that most books mention. They wanted her to have more than one view on what the people of our country have gone through. Although Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s parents were not of the white race, it was still necessary for them to teach and have discuss the topic with an open mind. By informing of the past to the next generation, parents will be able to prevent racism of African Americans. It is always a difficult decision on what is right or wrong for a child to know. No matter what decision the parents end up making at the end of the day, every parent thinks they are doing what is best for their child. Some parents are worried that by not informing their children about the active racism that is and has been going on for so long in the United States, the children will only end up falling into the black hole of the negative racism attention that is occurring. Although they may have a point, the rest of the parents aren’t prejudiced nor biased nor are they influenced by any other media source or individual and have concluded that is safer not to mention or allow children to discuss racism among the family or anywhere else because it only feeds on the negative attention that it promotes. It is hard to say which is the right choice that the white parents should make about racism, but they both do indeed have good reasons behind their view on it. We have to be armed with the fact to give our kids what they are owed which is honest conversations about the reality of the world that they are inheriting, but that can only be accomplished by allowing ourselves to acknowledge that racism and issues of race and bias are still present. Just as parents were informed of racism, in my opinion, children should be educated about what is going on in our Reyna 8 country about the racism against the African American race. The best way to solve a problem like this has always been through education. Although many parents believe that the racism will never end because we continue to bring it up, the future generations [the children] will end up never understanding the past racism if it fades away with time. Parents of the white race should consider communicating with their children about racism towards African Americans, but should keep in mind about any social media influence, such as the news, that the children will encounter. The children will hear about racism, but its best that it first comes from the parents in order to prevent any further incidents of it or negative promotion. Reyna 9 Work Cited Bree Ervin. â€Å"5 Reasons We All Need to Talk to Kids about Race in America. † August 2014. Web. Journal. Magazine Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie: â€Å"The Danger of a Single Story. † TED Global. July 2009. Dr. April Harris-Britt. â€Å"Why White Parents Don’t Talk About Race. † October 7, 2013. Web. McBride, James. The Color of Water. New York. The Berkley Publishing Group. 2006 Rodolfo Mendoza-Denton Ph. D. Psychology Today: â€Å"Should we talk to young children about race? † April 2011. Article.