Cage, John – Criticism and interpretation. I. Nicholls, David, 1955 – II. Series. ML410.C24 C36 2002 780 .92–dc21 [B] 2001052401 ISBN 0 521 78348 8 hardback ISBN 0 521 78968 0 paperback Contents List of illustrations [page vi] Notes on contributors [vii] Preface [ix] Acknowledgements [xi] Chronology [xii] Part I . Aesthetic contexts 1 Cage and America David Nicholls  2 Cage and Europe Christopher Shultis  3 Cage and Asia: history and sources David W. Patterson  4 5 6 7 8 Part II .
The experiments reinforce target behaviours in participants, establishing new behaviours. This breaks the ethical guideline that states all pps should leave the study in the same condition as when they entered. In Bandura's study, the group that exhibited aggressive behaviour would have left the study with that behaviour reinforced in them. A second weakness of the study is that demand characteristics affect the validity of the experiment, as the environment is more artificial compared to the pp's
Civilizations are expected to be structured and even when the structure is taken away the civilization can potentially fall. Another thing one might notice is that none of the stanza’s scenes are the same. Each stanza switches scenes with juxtaposed images within the stanzas that build up a sense of absurdity or corruption. There is a pattern within the scene changes it starts outside the city, then switches 3 times within the city, and then goes back to the outskirts. The last stanza though is somewhere completely different.
As part of his reply, “Timon cares not”. Timon and Coriolanus cannot physically see the middle ground in any decision which turns them into characters that both people in the two plays and us as an audience cannot relate to. The protagonist can no longer be viewed as the hero. This is a large factor to why Timon of Athens and Coriolanus are two of Shakespeare’s least watched plays. The two characters are presented as so absolute that their passion for their beliefs turns to a passion for revenge which ultimately, is self destructive.
Restraining forces hinder change because they push the person in the opposite direction. Restraining forces cause a shift in the equilibrium which opposes change Equilibrium Equilibrium is a state of being where driving forces equal restraining forces and no change occurs Equilibrium can be raised or lowered by changes that occur between the driving and restraining forces. STAGES Consists of three distinct and vital stages: 1. “Unfreezing” Unfreezing is the process which involves finding a method of making it possible for people to let go of an old pattern that was counterproductive in
THE LOGIC OF POLITICAL ENQUIRY (POLS7045) JOHNATHAN PAOLI (312912) Ricoeur’s Critical Hermeneutics and the Habermas-Gadamer Debate The debate originating in the 1960s between Hans-Georg Gadamer and Jürgen Habermas portrays the fundamental importance around considerations of interpretation. Despite the fact that both philosophical hermeneutics and ideological critique on a certain level concern the importance of interpretation, especially in relation to the power structures which facilitates the engagement with tradition and the acquisition of new forms and sources of ‘truth’, the debate surrounding the ontological framework for hermeneutics and the consistency or compatibility of a critical theory within that discourse has proven a breeding ground for new considerations and reconsiderations of the relationships between tradition, prejudice, authority, interest and reflection and their position within the system of knowledge surrounding human inquiry. Hermeneutics is presented as that by means of which the investigation of the basic structures of factual existence is to be pursued—not as that which constitutes a ‘theory’ of textual interpretation nor a method of ‘scientific’ understanding, but rather as that which allows the self-disclosure of the structure of understanding as such. In line with this then the Habermas-Gadamer debate “…hinges most fundamentally on the relation of critical theory to the living traditions which prevail in the societies in which critique arises and which it seeks to transform” [Mendelson 1979:44]. The debate between the humility of hermeneutics versus the hostile defiance of ideological critique represents two opposing perspectives, in some ways addressing each other and in other ways addressing separate problems, concerning the foundational position of understanding.
Running head: A NARRATIVE ON HOWARD GARDNER The Road to Multiple Intelligences: A Narrative on Howard Gardner Sheila Thomas Capella University Address: 4901 Far Hills Avenue, D-1 City, State, Zip: Kettering, OH 45429 Phone: 937-626-7145 E-Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Advisor: Heidi Kopacek Degree: PhD Abstract Although the idea of multiple intelligences is not new, some consider Howard Gardner the father of multiple intelligences (MI) theory. Through a synthesis of literature reviews, this paper narrates the profound events in Gardner’s upbringing, political, social, and educational background that helped shape his ideas, theories, and utility for MI. Outlined and discussed are the seven intelligences and the eight criteria for defining a new intelligence. Also given platform is the lack of empirical evidence for MI theory. This paper culminates with a glimpse at MI implemented in 21st century classrooms and suggestions for establishing a MI learning environment.
In this sense, history is not the record but the thing being recorded. At some point in time or another everything will be considered history. History tells a story, whether it is written on paper, painted on a canvas, carved in stone or even sung in a song; an strand of events in time that historians explain to the audience. In the bigger picture, it is the sense of all that has happened, not just all of human life’s existence, but those of the natural world as well. It underlines everything that goes through change; and as life has shown that there is nothing that stays exactly the same.
The other is to become an authority yourself, a person who applies structure to others. Either way, you escape your separate identity. 2. Destructiveness. Authoritarians respond to a painful existence by, in a sense, eliminating themselves: If there is no me, how can anything hurt me?