How It Feel to Be Colored Me and How to Tame a Wild Tongue Essay Example for Free

How It Feel to Be Colored Me and How to Tame a Wild Tongue Essay Sometimes we know who and what we are, but it’s impossible to wear an identity without becoming what we pretend to be or bullied into silence allowing ourselves to be made a victim to oppression. In this essay I’m comparing the authors of â€Å"How it Feel to Be Colored Me by Zora Hurston, and How to Tame a Wild Tongue by Gloria Anzaldua. Gloria Anzaldua became a victim of oppression by accepting society expectations of the Chicano culture. Meanwhile, Zora Hurston accepted who she is despite who people perceived her as because of her skin color. These two authors defends their personal identities through their cultures in separate ways. In the story How to Tame a Wild Tongue, Gloria Anzaldua feels that the way someone is cannot be controlled it can only be erased; she states â€Å"Wild tongues can’t be tamed, they can only be cut out† (Page 31). Anzaldua was against losing her accent and had an issue with putting her first language as a second. She would rebel as a child when told not to speak Spanish, so she struggled with changing and adapting to the American culture. She believed her culture the â€Å"Chicano† culture needed to differ from others with a secret language they can be able to communicate amongst each other. â€Å"Chicano Spanish need to identify ourselves as a distinct people. We needed a language which we could communicate with ourselves, a secret language† (Page 32). By creating their own slang allows them to connect their identity and communicate reality, values, and things they have in common. Yet, Zora Hurston in the story â€Å"How it feels to be Colored Me† expresses the way she was created doesn’t bother her nor makes her sadden. â€Å"I am not tragically colored. There is no great sorrow dammed up in my soul, nor lurking behind my eyes. I don’t mind at all (Page 145).† Unlike other colored people she doesn’t hate herself for the color of her skin, she’s proud to be created as the person she is without regret. Although, she’s constantly reminded of her culture background it fails to bring her integrity down, because ancestors paid the price of her free start in society, and shouldn’t stop to reflect on choices that wasn’t hers. â€Å"Someone is always at my elbow reminding me that I am the grand-daughter of slaves. It fails to register depression with me. I am off to a flying start and must I not halt to look back and weep. Slavery is the price I paid for civilization, and the choice was not with me† (Pages 145-146). Zora Hurston doesn’t consider herself a part of her culture who uses their skin color for a bad excuse for why they’re in negative life situations. â€Å"I do not belong to the sobbing school of Negrohood who holds that nature somehow has given them a lowdown dirty deal and whose feelings are hurt about it (Page 145).

Automotive Fuel Vehicles :: essays research papers

INCENTIVES AND LAWS The main federal incentives for the purchase or conversion of individual alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) are the federal income tax deductions of $2,000-$50,000 for clean fuel vehicles, and the income tax credit of up to $4,000 for electric vehicles (EVs). An income tax deduction is also available for the installation of refueling or recharging facilities for AFVs. Except for the federal tax credits and deductions, most of the federal incentives are programmatic grants oriented toward large investments such as infrastructure and larger purchases. The lead federal agencies for AFV programs are the U.S. Department of Treasury (i.e., IRS), the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Federal Tax Deduction This is a deduction for clean fuel vehicles and certain refueling properties. A tax deduction for the purchase of a new original equipment manufacturer (OEM) qualified clean fuel vehicle, or for the conversion of a vehicle to use a clean-burning fuel, is provided under the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct), Public Law-102-486, Title XIX-Revenue Provisions, Sec. 179A. Electric Vehicle Tax Credit.A tax credit for the purchase of qualified EVs and hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) is provided under EPAct Public Law-102-486, . The size of the credit is 10% of the cost of the vehicle, up to a maximum credit of $4,000. Beginning in 2001, the size of the credit is reduced by 25% per year until the credit is fully phased out. To qualify for the credit, the vehicle must be powered primarily by an electric motor. Clean Cities Program DOE's Clean Cities Program coordinates voluntary efforts between locally based government and industry to accelerate the use of alternative fuels and expand AFV refueling infrastructure. Federal Incentives EPAct establishes an incentive program for the purchase of AFVs and conversion of conventional gasoline vehicles to alternative fuels. Through federal tax incentives, companies and private individuals can offset a portion of the incremental costs associated with the purchase or conversion of an AFV. Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 The Clean Air Act (CAA) was passed in 1970 to improve air quality nationwide. Congress amended the law in 1990, passing the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA) and thus creating several initiatives to reinforce one of the original goals of the CAA to reduce mobile source pollutants.

Philosophy of Ernest Nagel from a First Person Essay

One burning and enduring problem in philosophy to which we have given considerable examination is the question of the existence of God–the superlative being that philosophers have defined and dealt with for centuries. After reading the classic arguments of St. Anselm and St. Thomas Aquinas, the contentious assertions of Ernest Nagel, and the compelling eyewitness accounts of Julian of Norwich, I have been introduced to some of the most revered and referenced arguments for and against God’s existence that have been put into text. All of them are well-thought and well-articulated arguments, but they have their holes. The question of God’s true existence, therefore, is still not definitively answered and put to rest; the intensity of this debate probably never will mitigate. Many theologians and academics honestly admit that no matter what any philosopher may assert regarding this topic, whether or not a certain person believes in God’s existence is a questio n of faith and nothing more. I am naturally inclined, then, even after reading the heavyweight philosophers of religion, to ponder this pressing issue. After all, what one person may gather out of serious consideration of this problem could totally alter his or her life. Even though I have been raised in the Episcopal Christian faith and have attended church regularly, I have never really taken the time to scrutinize the very existence of a being I have been worshipping for my whole childhood. Reading the famed selections in this course has alerted my attention to the topic, and this major philosophical problem continues to eschew my understanding. One would think that, because I have been raised a Christian and have been exposed to the doctrine and theory of Christianity, I would quickly lean toward the arguments for God and be more easily persuaded by them, hoping to find a defense for spending nearly every Sunday morning in the chancel at church. Actually, I am not automatically persuaded toward the theist position thanks to an atheist argument; the philosopher whom we have examined this semester who complicates this issue for me is Ernest Nagel, an atheist professor who wrote an outstanding defense of atheism. I found that his defense made atheism appear a much more attractive way to think than any theistic religion. I was not impressed, though, with his contentions against  the Ontological Argument of St. Anselm, and thus I refrain for now from venturing to the atheist way. Because of Nagel, I now have ambivalence towards believing in God, even though reading his work did not change my broader belief. One object of heated debate between convinced believers in God and convinced atheists is the Problem of Pain or Theodicy Problem, which asks how evil and suffering can exist in the world if an all-powerful and all-good God is overseeing what happens in his world. There are a few arguments that theists have constructed defending God’s existence in spite of this obvious conflict between doctrine and reality. Some of them, even though they have become classic arguments, are ridiculous; for example, Nagel confronts the argument stating that â€Å"the things called evil are evil only because they are viewed in isolation; they are not evil when viewed in proper perspective and in relation to the rest of creation† (605). This argument can be easily destroyed by a man of reason, and Nagel does so mainly by holding that â€Å"it is irrelevant to argue that were we something other than what we are, our evaluations of what is good and bad would be different† (606). Calling the argument â€Å"unsupported speculation,† (606) Nagel easily downturns this faulty response to the Theodicy Problem. What I found most admirable about this section of Nagel’s â€Å"Philosophical Concepts of Atheism† was his own solution to the problem–simply that it cannot be resolved: â€Å"I do not believe it is possible to reconcile the alleged omnipotence and omnibenevolence of God with the unvarnished facts of human existence† (606). Since Nagel has demonstrated that the Theodicy Problem cannot be taken down, it remains a solid argument for atheists and a very good disproof of the existence of an all-good, all-powerful God. I have not seen a response to this problem so effectively stated, honest, and convincing. Nagel’s arguments concerning the Theodicy Problem show that atheists think in a much more straightforward and practical fashion than do theists. The way Nagel uses the words â€Å"unvarnished facts of human existence† (606) leads to another attractive element to atheism and to his work–Nagel appeals to the earthly life, and only the earthly life, in describing how atheists think. Instead of reaching out to another world or deity that does  not even certainly exist, atheists â€Å"often take as their ideal the intellectual methods employed in the contemporaneous empirical sciences† (607). Because atheists use empirical evidence obtained through science, i.e. use evidence that certainly exists and can be sensed, all of the thinking they do is based solely on what clearly and distinctly exists in reality. To atheists, says Nagel, â€Å"controlled sensory observation is the court of final appeal in issues concerning matters of fact† (608). Not all of theist thinking is based on something that is proved to exist, since God has not been absolutely proved to be, so the essential base of the theist thoug ht is composed of supposition and theory. Atheists simply ground their logic in what is certainly known, and no assumptions found their reasoning. Even in matters of human morals, atheists think practically: â€Å"The conceptions of the human good [atheists] have advocated are conceptions which are commensurate with the actual capacities of mortal men, so that it is the satisfaction of the complex needs of the human creature which is the final standard for evaluating the validity of a moral ideal or moral prescription† (608). Nagel also excellently applies practicality to atheism in the way he describes â€Å"the stress upon a good life that must be consummated in this world† (608). Nagel dismisses the need of â€Å"some unrealizable other-worldly ideal† (608) so well that atheism appears supremely attractive among all the other religious modes of thought. Since Nagel implements practicality so well and perpetuates the question of the Theodicy Problem in â€Å"Philosophical Concepts of Atheism,† I found not only Nagel’s text, but also the atheist way very reasonable (literally) and intellectually striking. While Nagel superbly makes atheism appear much more attractive as a way of thinking than a theist religion because of its practicality and direct method of reason, I do not think he deals with St. Anselm’s argument for God’s existence well enough. Nagel refutes Anselm’s Ontological Argument by saying, â€Å"the word ‘existence’ does not signify any attribute† (601). I starkly disagree with this position. I think, as does Renà © Descartes, that existence in reality is a descriptor. When we, for example, reflect upon the life of one who has died, we experience that person as he or she exists in our understanding and in our imagination by remembering him or her; although  this individual is no longer existing in reality, he or she still exists, but on another plane of being. I am aware that this is, indeed, a highly debatable topic, but I am quite convinced that existence is an attribute, and thus I find that Anselm’s assertions withsta nd Nagel’s assaults. Even though the fact that atheists are practical, down-to-earth thinkers attracts me, I am still not convinced that God does not exist. For the time being, then, I will retain my theistic beliefs and remain a churchgoer, even though I now have ambivalence toward theism. I am not convinced that God does not exist because of some other reflections, shared especially by many within the scientific community. My current beliefs regarding God’s existence, those that I find more convincing than even the Ontological Argument, follow an deductive chain of reasoning; the argument I support most is the near impossibility that everything in creation came about by accident. The chances for molecules and cells, the very building blocks of the incredibly intricate natural creation, to come together entirely by themselves are so extremely slim that it is hard to believe that the world and all that lives in it are products of chance. The fact that the planet Earth is in exactly the right spot in space to support life, the fact that there are just the right amounts of chemicals and substances to sustain biological life on Earth, and the fact that there is only one species with the intellectual firepower to overcome physical inferiorities and become the ruling class of organisms on the planet all contribute to the suspicion that there may be a certain genius that planned out this harmonious structure of life. This is a tough argument for atheists to refute, but then again, it still could have been chance–it still could have been that one in a billion trillion times that happened. With that in mind, a great secondary argument is Anselm’s Ontological Argument, a piece of reasoning I think both Nagel and Gaunilo fail to overcome. If it ever is overcome, I may begin to take steps across the bridge to the atheist way. Work Cited: Cahn, Steven M., Patricia Kutcher, George Sher, and Peter J. Markie, eds. Reason at Work: Introductory Readings in Philosophy. 3rd Ed. Florence, KY: Thomson Learning, Inc., 1996.

Socrates s The Apology And Crito - 2035 Words

1. In the Apology and Crito, Socrates explains his reasoning, stating that it is better to be wronged, than to do wrong. Socrates was explaining to Crito than even though in their opinion that Socrates being put to death is wrong that they cannot do something wrong also. In the Crito one of Socrates main points is that â€Å"Even if your enemies have wronged you, you still have to do the right thing†. Socrates isn’t rejecting self-defense he rejects the notion of doing something wrong back to the person or the city. One of the many people putting Socrates to death, Meleteus is simply damaging his soul by doing such an injustice. In the Apology Socrates explains Socrates goes on to explain that he is damaging his soul, and if Socrates escapes,†¦show more content†¦In our own nation, the Boston Tea Party represented a massive act of civil disobedience.† Dr. King is tying the practice of civil disobedience that he was currently doing to past examples and showed that it was necessary at the time. By civil disobedience Dr.King doesn’t mean anything with physical violence, he simply means disobeying the rules that are set in place. 3. In the sense that King and his organization promotes nonviolent action. He and his team believe that the strongest way to promote their message is to not retaliate to the backlash that they receive. Dr. King states in his letter that â€Å"Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue†. Dr. King had followed in the footsteps of Socrates and also Mohandas Gandhi which had both portrayed that non-violence is the way to get your point across and fighting fire with fire is never the answer. Part 2 1. In the Crito, Socrates explains that one’s moral duty to obey the law has many reasoning. An interesting explanation he had given that one has the responsibility to their city even if they think that the city is treating them unfairly. Socrates explains to Crito, that him being born in the city (Athens) and living there until he is seventy he has taken on an agreement to be a citizen and follow their rules and regulations even if he disagrees with it. Socrates asks CritoShow MoreRelatedSocrates s The Apology And Crito2040 Words   |  9 PagesIn 1. the Apology and Crito, Socrates explains his reasoning stating that it is better to be wronged, than to do wrong. Socrates was explaining to Crito than even though in their opinion that Socrates being put to death is wrong that they cannot do something wrong also. In the Crito one of Socrates main points is that â€Å"Even if your enemies have wronged you, you still have to do the right thing†. Socrates isn’ t rejecting self-defense he rejects the notion of doing something wrong back to the personRead MoreTry to Persuade Socrates Friends to Save Him Against His Will1191 Words   |  5 PagesTry to persuade the Socrates`s friends to save him, against his will. Socrates Is one of the most colorful figures of the ancient Greek world, who the strangeness of privacy life have always been of special philosophical and political science. He was convict to death because he does not believe in God and corrupted the youth people to do the same. In Plato`s dialogue Crito, Socrates spent his last time in the prison. Crito is coming to save Socrates and have plans how toRead MoreSocrates Sides with Creon or a1379 Words   |  6 PagesSocrates#8217; Sides With? Through my reading of Plato#8217;s Apology of Socrates and Crito, I have been able to see how Socrates makes important decisions and what he primarily bases his decisions on. As a individual person we have individual morals which lead us to our own moral or immoral decisions. Sometimes are own morals or beliefs might oppose the views of the state or the enforced law that clams to find justice. In this case we rely on our own beliefs that may be through passedRead MorePlato s Apology And Crito983 Words   |  4 Pagesmarked the history of humanity on earth. In the following written works, Plato’s Apology and Crito, The Gospel According to Mark, and Dante’s Inferno, religion and politics are shown to be intertwined, which emphasizes the impact of each individual character in each written work. Also, these written works explain how politics are affected by religion and vice versa. Plato’s Apology and Crito are plays that explain how Socrates, who was considered an honored and the wisest man in all of Athens by the OracleRead MoreEssay on Socrates Fight for Justice1101 Words   |  5 Pagesworks Apology and Crito there is an attempt by Socrates to defend himself in court and defend his choice to receive the death penalty when found guilty. Although he makes very valid and strong arguments throughout one can only wonder why such a wise person would choose death over life. The following essay will analyze three quotes from Apology and Crito, find the correlation between them, and reveal any flaws that may exsist inside these arguments made by Socrates. In Plato’s Apology Socrates explainsRead MorePlato s The Trial And Death Of Socrates Essay1671 Words   |  7 PagesPlato’s The Trial and Death of Socrates presents the reader with complex competing conceptions of what should be considered â€Å"the good life†. According to Socrates, â€Å"the most important thing is not life, but the good life† (Crito, 48b). The majority, who live a non-philosophical life, believes the goods of life include wealth, reputation, and honor: all things that can easily be taken away or destroyed. On the other hand, Socrates lives a philosophical life filled with self-sufficiency. He views wisdomRead MoreSocrates World Views1549 Words   |  7 PagesSocrates Paper The goal of this paper is to discern and construct the world views of Socrates through the various readings, lectures and videos that we have seen in class. Some of these sources include: Socrates by G. Rudebusch; excerpts from The Last Days of Socrates by Plato; and The Allegory of a Cave. Of the nine world views covered in class, I will delve into my interpretation of four of them as seen through the various sources that we have been exposed to in class. These four world views willRead MoreComparison Between Crito and Apology1661 Words   |  7 PagesComparison between Crito and Apology For these two articles that we read in Crito and Apology by Plato, we could know Socrates is an enduring person with imagination, because he presents us with a mass of contradictions: Most eloquent men, yet he never wrote a word; ugliest yet most profoundly attractive; ignorant yet wise; wrongfully convicted, yet unwilling to avoid his unjust execution. Behind these conundrums is a contradiction less often explored: Socrates is at once the most Athenian, mostRead MorePlato: Normative Ethical Theory1077 Words   |  5 Pagesterms that focus on the moral agent. These thinkers are interested in what constitutes, e.g., a just person. They are concerned about the state of mind and character, the set of values, the attitudes to oneself and to others, and the conception of one s own place in the common life of a community that belong to just persons simply insofar as they are just. A modern might object that this way of proceeding is backwards. Just actions are logically prior to just per sons and must be specifiable in advanceRead MorePlato s Life And Accomplishments874 Words   |  4 Pageswas in his late teens or early twenties he heard Socrates teaching, he was so impressed with his teachings that changed his plans to pursue a literary career as a playwright; he destroyed his early work and devoted himself to philosophy. Plato studied philosophy, which means â€Å"love of wisdom† under the guidance of Socrates for the next nine years. Socrates taught by a conversational method, analyzing everything, which was known as dialectic. Socrates had his students find logic in most of their topics