The Burkean Parlor Essay Example for Free

The Burkean Parlor Essay In an ideal world, a Burkean Parlor writing center, whether the collaborative type or in its own pure or hybrid form should be capable of seamlessly merging with the control kind and even harmlessly synthesized with the Storehouse and Garret models. In contrast with the pure Storehouse and Garret models, or the individual and the exterior genre, a Burkean Parlor is dreamed to be an open-ended knowledge center where there is individuality of the genius as there are collaborative knowledge processes. It can also be the interior type blending perfectly well with its own anti-thesis – the Storehouse exterior concept. This is the new hybrid Burkean Parlor writing center – a composite of the Storehouse and the Garret models metamorphosing both as a collaborative and control knowledge center. The knowledge and writing center as envisioned here recognizes and anticipates the varying needs and psyche of the scholar. The current pragmatic and philosophical needs of the writers everywhere demand the most motivating atmosphere that will encourage a spontaneous, prolific and imaginative flow of creativity. This flow of knowledge, although extremely fluid as it is rigid, demands a new form of writing center. Call it a hybrid Burkean Parlor or a new form of intellectual hub where every genius can be his own individual or in collaboration as well as in caution as a control button; where knowledge can be both sourced internally and externally. This neo-Burkean Parlor can be ideally called the Hub. Andrea Lunsford would be glad to join it as she must admit that in the scheme of linearity, her Burkean model could be slowly being rendered redundant and restrictive the way it did with the Storehouse and Garret models. It is as open as any knowledge center and can be as private as a virtual online writing domain. The Hub recognizes the various forces within the universe that creates or brings knowledge constructs to those who become congruent with the forces that make writers write well and thinkers think well. The Hub in any university is the brain as well as the heart of the intellectual interfacing with the school community or anyone who happens to exude the radio frequency of the Hub. It is the former student lounge as well as the internet cafe without the walls that divide the knowledge of the elite or the masa, the common man. It is equipped with the latest communication gadgets and circuitry that shames the traditional classroom: in fact, the Hub is the reason to come to school (Glasser. 1990). Its emptiness is a reason to move out of the school to find another Hub elsewhere. In the Hub, one can commune with oneself and bring out the most intriguing electronic autobiography for every one to read and develop a sense of belonging. As most schools turn to exclusivity, the Hub recognizes no special talents – it is an inclusive school; only for those with a clean heart to write and the need to discover knowledge without the academic compulsion to do so. Freedom is the pervasive atmosphere, but discipline is sharp and vigilance foremost. Here, order is non-existent but the Hub is not chaotic. The Hub graduates students as many times as the students want, as well as it elevates writers to the next level of knowledge and writing. The Hub would look like heaven on earth. Each one talks the same language despite the highly diverse backgrounds with each move and gesture of the writer giving a message of peace and quiet to allow knowledge and scholarly work to evolve in pure immaculate fashion – plagiarism free. The place is a real hub – teachers freely imparting knowledge and learners interfacing with other learners to collaborate and accumulate knowledge from within and without. It is freedom without the control and there is control without the pressure. New learners develop as they are inspired by the oneness in the Hub. While there are many voices, there is only one song sung in the Hub – creative writing? The Hub would hire only people who believe in the richness of culture, the phenomenon of collaboration, the variedness of the sources of knowledge whether the internal Garret type or the Storehouse kind. Here, the manager is the chief motivator, the philosopher of the writing center and the only person therein who can write the best about the smallest thing on earth and lead the reader to strongly believe that it is the biggest thing on earth. Lunsford would have loved the place to tickle her into creating the new Burkean Parlor once more. Inside the Hub, the students would be taught on stabilizing ethics even in the most trying times; on critical thinking without the excesses of rhetorics; writing skills that can move the heart to tears and chuckles no end; and, an on sustaining an imaginative mind to create a peaceful written or online virtual world where the ideal is just a pen stroke away. The lessons here are endless and borderless. Everyone is welcome to be one among them. It is a university within a university. No encroachment here; only an existence arising out of another’s existence: a university creating another university: a university that has not lost its soul. (Lewis, 2006) The Hub will make sure that students are guided into maturity and wisdom without the painful experiences of everyday life. For them, life is both pain and pleasure and one cannot exist without the other. Acceptance here is academic, hence pain is predictable but bearable, but it becomes truly excruciating as he beings to write. Here, the students are given a tour of life itself, and the crossroads available to each. Everything is there: the experiences, all of them, at the push of a button. The student is given the rare experiences of his lifetime: in physical as well as virtual realities. Inside the Hub, there is no difference between virtual pain and physical pain. Both are felt. The writers and knowledge worker in the Hub learns to be surprised at his own writing skill – able to grapple with the exact word and the best adjective fit for the scenario. Indeed, the Hub is a writers’ paradise where awareness (Clark, 2002) is knowledge itself It would not be difficult to relate to the students because the Hub creates the mood for the writer. Anyone can come at any phase of the activity within without feeling like a stranger and still come out with all the stories that abound. List of References Lewis, H. R. Excellence without a soul: How a great university forgot education. NEW York, Perseus Books, 2006. Glasser, W. , The quality school: Managing students without coercion. New York, Harper and Row Publishers. 1990. Clark, R.. Global awareness: thinking systematically about the world. New York. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc. , 2002. Glasser, W. The quality school: Managing students without coercion, New York: Harper Row Publishers, Inc. 1990. Villa, R. , Thosuand, J.. Creating an inclusive school, Alexandria, Virginia, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1995.

Strategies of a Non-Native Translator :: Free Essays Online

Strategies of a Non-Native Translator Non-native speakers of the target language are strongly discouraged from translating literature. I believe this is a very sensible recommendation, for regardless of individual abilities, it is often the case that the texts translated by such translators do not flow well. To be more exact, when I read translated works by non-native speakers, including my own, I often detect a matter-of-fact, straightforward tone, rather too serious, if not downright annoying to read, instead of the subtleties and elegance of the flow exhibited by many native translators. Of course, there are not only disadvantages in being a non-native translator. The non-native translator may grasp the original text better than the native translator, and be more aware of cultural and social implications hidden in the text. However, the main issue is the output. How do you transform the original text into its equivalent in the target language? I have been working as a freelance translator, of both literary and non-lit erary works, for the past 10 years, but this question hangs over me every time I begin to translate. I ventured into this unattainable arena, fully aware of the problems I faced. At first, there was something about challenging the impossible, but I also believed there was still a need for translators like myself in the field of translating Korean literature into English, for no other reason than that not much has been translated and there were not enough translators around to introduce Korean literature and culture to the world. I believe, though, that non-native speakers are at best transitional figures, who will fade into the shadows when more and more native speakers of English with good Korean language skills emerge. My goal is very modest by literary standards, but very ambitious for a non-native speaker. My goal is to render my translations as readable as possible. The best response I have ever received for my literary translation was that it was â€Å"very readable.† I was very pleased with that praise. I know that as a non-native translator I can never attain a highe r plateau. Once I attended a translation seminar in Korea, where most participants were Korean professors of foreign languages. They insisted that the importance of the act of the translation lies in introducing the unfamiliar to an audience, rather than making foreign literature readable. When I raised the question of stilted texts

Kant Ethics Essay

Introduction Immanuel Kant was a German philosopher born in 1724 and died in 1804. He is considered one of the most influential people on modern philosophy for his intensive research in the subject. This paper will discuss various articles written by Kant and analyze his thoughts on deeds that are right and deeds that are morally wrong. It will finally discuss importance of motives and duty of morality as illustrated by Kant’s work. Discussion Kant believed that there is no good that can emerge from the world apart from a good will (Kant, 1998). He said that without good will, qualities that are good and desirable become useless. This is because the person yielding these qualities may at times lack the fundamental will to implement and portray them. He called this lack of good will as bad character. He continued to say that when good will is not present, then Power, honor, health and the overall welfare, contentment and happiness will usually mess with the mind of the person and they will start pretending and believing lies created in their mind. Good will, according to Kant, can be facilitated by application of various qualities. However, these qualities may have no inherent absolute value, but constantly presume a good will, which succeeds the esteem that we simply have for them, not permitting us to consider them as extremely good. He attempted to identify the primary maxims of motives, which people are required to achieve. Kant did not base his opinions on claims about any subjective perception of the good, preferences, moral beliefs or regularly shared desires that people may have. Kant also recognized good will as the only absolute good; he refused to accept that the notion of good will could be established by referring to a tangible good. He believed that nothing could be a moral principle, if it was not initially a principle for everyone. According to Kant, morality starts with the denial of non-globalized principles. This idea was devised as a demand, which Kant termed as the Moral Law. He grouped the maxims in a manner that mediators could refer as â€Å"acting on the only adage that one can, and likewise will, just like an international law†. To clarify the point, Kant gave an example of an agent who gives false promises. He adds to this by saying that the agent’s action in this case does not fit to be termed as an international law. He explains that if the agent was hypothetical, then he would take part in the final outcome and this would make him stop his behavior of giving false promises (Kant, 2009). It is therefore clear that the principle of giving false promises cannot be categorized under universally shared principles. According to Kant, the principle of repudiating false promises is vital and the maxim of giving false morally forbidden. Kant is different from many utilitarian’s who regard false promises as wrong due to their adverse effects. He considers this principle as wrong since it cannot be used internationally. Kant identified two ethical modes of assessment, one of them being the fact that human beings have a high probability of evaluating the maxims adopted by agents. He asserted that if human beings had the capacity of evaluating such maxims, then principles with moral worth would come into being, since humans could decline immoral principles. He stated, â€Å"Those who accept principles that are not universal, have principles that are morally unworthy†. He considered those holding morally worth policies as working out of duty and said that human beings lack knowledge concerning the maxims of one another. Kant added to this by saying that people usually deduce the underlying principles or maxims of agents from the pattern of their actions, though no pattern identifies a unique principle. He gave the example of a genuinely honest shopkeeper by saying that his actions are not different from those of a shopkeeper who is reluctantly honest. Kant said that both shopkeepers deal justly out of an aspiration for a good reputation in business and would cheat if given the opportunity. Thus for common reasons, human beings usually do more than is of their concern with outer compliance to principles of duty, instead of paying attention to claims that an action was done out of such a principle. Kant discussed the relationship between principles of morality and people’s real inclinations and desires (Mac Intyre, 1981). He built the political insinuations of Categorical Imperative, which consists of constitution of the republic and value for freedom, particularly of speech and religion. He linked this with individual happiness which according to him can indirectly be viewed as an obligation. This is because one’s dissatisfaction with the wants of another might turn out to be a great lure to the wrongdoing of duty (O’Neill, 1991). He viewed this from another perspective and claimed that most men possess the strongest tendency to happiness. At this point, Kant gave the example of a gouty patient, who can make a choice of what he likes, and endure whatever suffering that comes with it. If he does this, he does not forego enjoying the present time to a probably wrong expectation of happiness believed to be experienced in good health (Kant, 1994). Kant states that, â€Å"an action from duty has its moral worth not in the aim that is supposed to be attained by it, but rather in the maxim in accordance with which it is resolved upon; thus that worth depends not on the actuality of the object of the action but merely on the principle of the volition† (O’Neill, 1991). The moral worth of a deed does not lie in the result anticipated from it, nor in the action or maxim which needs to make use of its intention from the expected result. In relation to the discussed effects, the endorsement of other people’s happiness could be caused by other reasons (Beck, 1960). Conclusion Significance of motives and the role of duty in morality Motives can either be of good or bad intentions. They often influence one’s roles of duty. The morality of duty is relative to the law and is therefore compared to the morality of religion. It, therefore, does not criticize man for not making full use of his life or by not doing good. He states that, â€Å"There is nothing possible to think of anywhere in the world, or indeed anything at all outside it, that can be held to be good without limitation, excepting only a good will† (O’Neill, 1991). Instead, it criticizes man for not respecting the fundamental principles and necessities required in life. A good example is the moral rule that man should not kill, since this does not have much to do with aspiration but the recognition that if one kills, he has not realized his duty of morality. I do not agree with Kant on the importance of motives and the role of duty in morality. This is because Kant only points out principles of ethics, but the same principles are so abstract that they can’t guide motives. Thus, his theory of the role of duty in morality is not motivating. He does not also give a full set of instructions to be followed. Kant lays emphasis on the appliance of maxims to cases that involve deliberation and judgment. He does insist that maxims must be abstract which can only guide individual decisions. The moral life is all about finding ways of good motives that meet all the obligations and breach no moral prohibitions. There is no procedure for identifying any motives. However, the role of duty in morality begins by ensuring that the precise acts that people bear in mind are not in line with deeds on principles of duty. References Beck, L. W. (1960). A Commentary on Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Kant, I. (1998). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kant, I. (2009). Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals. London: Thomas Kings mill Abbot. Kant, I. (1994). On a Supposed Right to Lie from Altruistic Motives. Oxford: Oxford University Press. O’Neill, O. (1991). Kantian Ethics. In A Companion to Ethics. Blackwell: Oxford. MacIntyre, A. (1981). After Virtue. London: Duckworth.

Hindenburg - A Giant and Luxurious Zeppelin

In 1936, the Zeppelin Company, with the financial aid of Nazi Germany, built the Hindenburg (the LZ 129), the largest airship ever made. Named after the late German president, Paul von Hindenburg, the Hindenburg stretched 804-feet-long and was 135-feet-tall at its widest point. That made the Hindenburg just 78-feet shorter than the Titanic and four times larger than the Good Year blimps. The Design of the Hindenburg The Hindenburg was a rigid airship definitely in the Zeppelin design. It had a gas capacity of 7,062,100 cubic feet and was powered by four 1,100-horsepower diesel engines. Although it had been built for helium (a less flammable gas than hydrogen), the United States had refused to export helium to Germany (for fear of other countries building military airships). Thus, the Hindenburg was filled with hydrogen in its 16 gas cells. External Design on the Hindenburg On the outside of the Hindenburg, two large, black swastikas on a white circle surrounded by a red rectangle (the Nazi emblem) were emblazoned on two tail fins. Also on the outside of the Hindenburg was D-LZ129 painted in black and the airships name, Hindenburg painted in scarlet, Gothic script. For its appearance at the 1936 Olympic Games in Berlin in August, the Olympic rings were painted on the side of the Hindenburg. Luxury Accommodations Inside the Hindenburg The inside of the Hindenburg surpassed all other airships in luxury. Though most of the airships interior consisted of gas cells, there were two decks (just aft of the control gondola) for the passengers and crew. These decks spanned the width (but not the length) of the Hindenburg. Deck A (the top deck) offered a promenade and a lounge on each side of the airship which was nearly walled with windows (which opened), allowing passengers to watch the scenery throughout their trip. In each of these rooms, passengers could sit on chairs made of aluminum. The lounge even featured a baby grand piano that was made of aluminum and covered in yellow pigskin, weighing only 377 pounds.Between the promenade and the lounge were the passenger cabins. Each cabin had two berths and a washbasin, similar in design to a sleeping room on a train. But in order to keep weight to a minimum, the passenger cabins were separated by only a single layer of foam covered by fabric. Toilets, urinals, and one shower could be found downstairs, on Deck B. Deck B (the lower deck) also contained the kitchen and the crews mess. Plus, Deck B offered the amazing amenity of a smoking room. Considering that hydrogen gas was extremely flammable, the smoking room was a novelty in air travel. Connected to the rest of the ship through an airlock door, the room was specially insulated to keep hydrogen gasses from leaking into the room. Passengers were able to lounge in the smoking room day or night and freely smoke (lighting from the only lighter allowed on the craft, which was built into the room). The Hindenburgs First Flight The Hindenburg, a giant in size and grandeur, first emerged from its shed in Friedrichshafen, Germany on March 4, 1936. After only a few test flights, the Hindenburg was ordered by the Nazi propaganda minister, Dr. Joseph Goebbels, to accompany the Graf Zeppelin over every German city with a population over 100,000 to drop Nazi campaign pamphlets and to blare patriotic music from loudspeakers. The Hindenburgs first real trip was as a symbol of the Nazi regime. On May 6, 1936, the Hindenburg initiated its first scheduled transatlantic flight from Europe to the United States. Although passengers had flown on airships for 27 years by the time the Hindenburg was completed, the Hindenburg was destined to have a pronounced affect on passenger flight in lighter-than-air crafts when the Hindenburg exploded on May 6, 1937.