5 senses Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

5 senses - Essay Example When you wash your hair using touch, you can feel the shampoo on your hands. You can feel the warm water running down through your hair. You can feel the running of your fingers through your hair as you massage the lathered up shampoo in your hair. When you use the sense of smell while washing your hair, you can smell the aroma of the shampoo. Whether it be fruity or a subtle lavender smell, your nose will pick up on the scent and send signals to the brain telling you what that smell is. It is a nice clean smell and every product that you use on your hair whether it be shampoo, conditioner, detangler or some other kind, will have some sort of scent. When using the sense of hearing, we can hear a lot of different sounds. When washing the hair, you can hear the shampoo as it squirts into your hand as you squeeze the bottle. You can hear the water trickle down through your hair as it hits the floor of the shower or bath tub. As for the sense of sight, you can see the shampoo or conditioner when you are washing your hair. You see the steam rising up in the shower or bath tub. You can see everything around you and only when you get that shampoo in your eye and you try to rub it out, is your sense of sight kind of blurry. There are several ways that the senses can be used when washing your hair. When we take in what exactly we are feeling and being mindful of using our senses, only then do we get the full experience. Sometimes life is just too busy to recognize what it is our senses are doing but we do know that they are at work or otherwise we would not even know we were having our hair

Revolutionary Mothers Essay Example for Free

Revolutionary Mothers Essay Women of varying races and classes experienced the American Revolution in different ways. Loyalist women over-estimated the power of their class position, Native American women would see their power within their societies diminish, and African American slave women saw their hope for power through freedom subsumed by racial inequality. Regardless of the relative positions of power for each of these classes of women, their experiences as victims of war were similar. The chaos of war and a changing political system left few women, if any, truly better off it its wake. Enslaved African American women, those with the least amount of social or political power before the American Revolution, were taunted with promises of freedom from British office holders and eventually British generals. However, these promises only came to fruition for a fraction of the tens of thousands of slaves who left their masters in search of freedom. Dunmore’s Proclamation of 1775 enticed slaves to fight for the British Army in exchange for freedom. Dunmore’s â€Å"Ethiopian Regiment† met with disaster through disease and capture. Half of the regiment and its female followers died of smallpox (124). When the regiment was captured by Americans, thirty people were sold back into slavery in the Caribbean as an example of what would happen to slaves who sided with the British (124). Four thousand slaves, men, women, and children, fled with General Cornwallis. When he was forced to surrender Charleston to the Americans, many of the slaves who were with him were sent to NY and eventually to freedom in Canada (125). Not all those who encountered the British Army were freed. When General Henry Clinton ordered that Patriot personal property be confiscated, that included slaves. Clinton treated these slaves as property of the British Army and forced women to do the soldier’s laundry and help build fortifications (127). African American women who did manage to escape to Canada, were victims of racial hierarchy. The best lands available went to white refugees rather than black refugees. Those who made it to Canada were subject to  violence from whites when they stepped outside of their accustomed economic and social roles (129). There are regional differences for African American women who did not did not flee during British promises of freedom. Gradual abolition in the North meant opportunities for freedom. However, these opportunities were limited by racial hierarchy. In the South, farmers and plantation owners relied on slave labor to rebuild the agrarian economy in the wake of the Revolutionary War (133). As slavery became further entrenched in the Southern economy and culture, freedom became nearly impossible. Of the tens of thousands of slaves who fled, the British formally granted only 1300 men, 914 women, and 740 children freedom (129). Many white loyalist women also escaped to Canada. However, many elite loyalist women overestimated the power granted to them by their class standing. Loyalist women left behind when their husbands went to fight for the British were powerless to prevent patriots from taking their property and removing them from their homes. Elite women’s marriages, property, children, and mere presence were politicized (98). Women who chose to flee or who fled to escape the violence of the patriots were unwanted burdens on their enemies and allies alike (100). Not all loyalist women were hapless victims. Those who chose to act as individual political agents by aiding British soldiers and passing intelligence forced an alteration to the American’s language surrounding traitors. Treason laws which previously read, â€Å"he,† were changed to include both men and women (103). Women who fled invariably faced hardships in the harsh travelling conditions. Wealthier women fared better than those of modest means. Wealthy women were more likely to survive the journey to Canada and find adequate shelter once they arrived. Women of less means lived in tents during harsh winters and faced starvation. By the end of the war, the elite social classes were rebuilding their societal structure in Canada (106). Though many were still bitter about losing their farms and possessions, they made a gentrified society out of the relative wilderness of Canada (106). Native American women lost the most in terms of position and power during the American Revolution. Women were an integral part of the political decision making process in Native American nations. Women leaders of the  Mohawk, Cherokee, and Munsee Delaware sought to coexist with white settlers, none were successful. Molly Brant, mistress to British Indian Agent William Johnson held considerable sway with both Mohawk and British. She relied upon for her diplomatic skills and remained loyal to her husband’s British background even after his death in 1774 (111). Nancy War attempted to keep the peace between Cherokee and white settlers from her position on the Cherokee General Council and as leader of the Women’s Council (115). When negotiating a treaty with white settlers, Queen Esther Montour of the Munsee Delaware suggested the white man with who she was negotiating take the proposed treaty back for him women to read. He was incredulous at the idea that his women would have anything to say in political matters (116). None of these women had â€Å"counterparts in American colonial society† (118). White men who wanted to trade or negotiate with Native Americans were forced to deal with women in positions of power. Molly Brant took political action when she warned her brother of American soldiers intent on providing support at Fort Stanwix. Her efforts made her an enemy to the Americans and an enemy of the Oneida, a tribe once united in Confederacy with her own Mohawk. Molly’s home war raided and she was forced to flee. At the end of the war, like so many other women, she was exiled to the relative safety of Canada. British men came to respect women like Molly Brant. However, it was much more common for European men to view the gender structure of Native American society as abhorrence against God’s natural law. Once America had secured its independence, Native American women’s positions of power within their cultures was subsumed by assimilation efforts of the new American nation. Native Americans refashioned their societies in the face of threats and pressures from Americans who pushed European norms onto Native Americans. The spiritual and political roles for women were lost in these efforts (119). Although these groups of women started out in very different circumstances before the war, and ended with different social circumstances, they shared a common thread of the necessity to flee. They even often shared a common location of safety and freedom: Canada. None of these women had a place of freedom or power within the new American Republic. Many more slaves remained as such than gained freedom during the American Revolution. Elite women  eventually regained status lost during the Revolution, but in a new, harsher land. Native American women’s social and political positions were devastated by the results of the American Revolution. Just as their nations slowly lost their sovereignty and autonomy, so did Native American women lose their power and freedom within their communities.

Structural Sociologists vs Interpretive Sociologists Essay examples --

Is it true that structural sociologists use only quantitative methods while interpretive sociologists use only qualitative methods? The methods that sociologists use to conduct their research vary and can depend on practical considerations such as suitability of the method, and theoretical considerations such as the sociologist’s theoretical position. Interpretive sociologists focus on the meanings and definitions which guide and direct behaviour, they claim that understanding human behaviour involves seeing the world through the eyes of those being studied. Structural sociologists can be called positivists. Positivist sociology models itself on the natural sciences such as physics, it is concerned with behaviour that can be directly observed and quantified e.g. the number of visits to the doctors in one year. It attempts to explain human behaviour by discovering cause and effect relationships e.g. Durkheim claimed he had found a causal relationship between social isolation and suicide. Interpretivists use a range of research methods. They often use unstructu...

A Comparison of Hubris in Catcher in the Rye, Scarlet Letter, and Great Gatsby :: compare and contrast essay examples

Hubris in the Protagonists of Catcher in the Rye, Scarlet Letter, and Great Gatsby       Aristotle praised Sophocles' King Oedipus as the definitive Greek tragedy; however, he could not have surmised the influence of Oedipus' tragic pride on modern day literature and philosophy. Hubris, the only true crime, has had a threefold influence: it is a reason for downfall as well as a characteristic of criminal motivation; it is manifested in the diverse protagonists of Salinger, Fitzgerald, and Hawthorne; and it is forgiven only by repentance for wrongdoing and the complete surrender of pride.    The erroneous idea that pride is only a predominant characteristic of crime, rather than a crime itself, would put tragic hero Oedipus on the same level as serial killer Charles Manson: while both are guilty of committing heinous acts, Oedipus relinquishes his pride and, ironically suffering under his own proclamation of exile, does penance for his crimes, whereas Manson shows no remorse for his vile and disturbing bloodletting. Oedipus' ultimate repentance is proof that he realizes his hubris and understands his mistakes, as irreparable as they may be.    All human filthiness in one crime compounded! Unspeakable acts-I speak no more of them. Hide me at once, for God's love, hide me away... Touch me, and have no fear. On no man else But on me alone is the scourge of my punishment. (64)    Had Oedipus sought to blame another for his crimes, or denied his own responsibility for his actions, he would have been no nobler than a common criminal; Oedipus is redeemed by his strength of character.    The hamartia of hubris lives on 2500 years after Aristotle lauded King Oedipus as the quintessential Greek tragedy; pride has evolved into an integral characteristic of the majority of literary characters from J.D. Salinger's angry, disillusioned Holden Caulfield to F. Scott Fitzgerald's idealistic Jay Gatsby to Nathaniel Hawthorne's tortured Reverend Dimmesdale.    Holden's pride in his sarcastic perception of the world around him perpetuates his cynicism and frustration with life, making him unrealistic and incapable of finding happiness. He believes himself omniscient, and that other "people never notice anything" (Salinger 9). Oedipus' belief in his own infallibility makes him equally unrealistic; soon after Oedipus' sins are revealed, the chorus of Elders conveys a Holden-esque message of discontent:    All generations of mortal man add up to nothing! Show me the man whose happiness was anything more than illusion

Twain’s problematic ending of Huck Finn

The adventures of Huckleberry Finn is known as one novel that has brought controversy from the time it was published in the year 1884 (Pearl par 1). It was banned in major public libraries many referring to it as â€Å"trash. † Currently, many regard it as a classical American novel though others still critic it in one area or the other. It is a novel from where â€Å"all modern literature† was derived and modern scholars and critics now treats it as great work of art in America (Pearl par. 1). Perhaps the greatest irony is that though it received great criticism, of all the MT’s novels, it is the one that sold most immediately when it was published. Hunk Finn, as it is commonly referred to, is set in the Mississippi river town of St. Petersburg, Missouri and the various locations along that river through Arkansas (SparkNotes, screen 21). The major conflict in the novel is portrayed as the main character (protagonist), Huck struggles with a society (antagonist) that is trying to civilize him. The conflict is also intensified as Hunk deals with Jim who is a black slave; since Hunk must decide whether to reject Jim and please the society or protect him and follow his conscience. This essay shows that Twain’s ending of the novel betrays the true subject of the work. The novel ends with the three boys Huck, Tom and Jim escaping from a shed where they had been surrounded by about fifteen farmers guarding Jim, the black slave (Twain 361). They make a hole in the wall to escape but as they does, Tom makes some noise and what follows is the shooting that leaves a bullet in Tom’s leg who portrays himself a hero. However, Huck and Jim are concerned about the condition of the leg and upon Jim’s suggestion; they go to look for a doctor. This only worsens things for Jim who is captured by the locals and is chained as they bring Tom home on a mattress accompanied by the doctor. By this time Huck has already run home having left the two boys alone. The locals have decided to hang Jim though no one does it as they are afraid of compensating the slave owner. They are therefore left with no other option than to treat Jim roughly until the time when the doctor comes and saves him by explaining that it is him who in fact saved Tom’s leg from deteriorating by nursing him (Twain 377). When Tom however learns that Jim was still in chains, he reveals to them that in fact Jim had already been set free thus was no longer a slave. This allows the reader to glimpse the character trait of Tom. Though he had known all along that Miss Wanton who had died two months earlier had set Jim free in her will, he did not say it because he felt that they needed to device a good plan to rescue Jim. If he had said it earlier, Jim could not have gone through the sufferings that he had experienced. Huck arrived and on enquiring from Tom what he would do if Jim was freed; he replied that he planned to repay Jim for all his troubles and sending him off as a hero. And he said, what he had planned in his head from the start, if we got Jim out all safe, was for us to run him down the river on the raft, and have adventures plumb to the mouth of the river, and then tell him about his being free, and take him back up home on a steamboat, in style, and pay him for his lost time, and write word ahead and get out all the niggers around, and have them waltz him into town with a torchlight procession and a brass-band, and then he would be a hero, and so would we (Twain 387). The Phelpses and Aunt Polly release Jim and feed him on hearing that he helped the doctor to nurse Tom. He is also given forty dollars as a payment for all his troubles (Twain 387). Tom and Huck are not through with their adventure and plan to go for another one to the Indian territories. Huck thinks that Pap had taken all the money but it is Jim who informs him that in fact the dead man he had seen in a floating house was Pap (a cruel and drunk father). It is clear that though the writer of the novel was initially heading to the right direction in his writing, he â€Å"looses focus† (it may have been intentionally) as he comes to end of the novel in the way he presents the relationship between Huck and Jim. All along, the two boys had been together passing through hardships and challenges during their adventure. They are seen doing different things together; for example have to hide the inheritance of the Silk sisters in a coffin away from the greedy â€Å"King† and â€Å"Duke. Huck even comes to a time when he had to decide whether to give the remaining Gherkin (food) from his provisions to Jim or take it himself (Paine Par. 20). Therefore every reader expects Huck’s emotional attachment with Jim to grow. However when Tom appears, a different picture is portrayed with Huck remaining quiet when, they endanger Jim’s life by not telling Phelpses that Jim had already been released by the former Slave master and instead decides to device a plan as part of their adventure. When Jim goes to get the doctor, Huck leaves and runs to his uncle’s place leaving his friend. So then I crept into a lumber-pile to get some sleep; and next time I waked up the sun was away up over my head! I shot out and went for the doctor's house, but they told me he'd gone away in the night some time or other, and warn't back yet. Well, thinks I, that looks powerful bad for Tom, and I'll dig out for the island right off. So away I shoved, and turned the corner, and nearly rammed my head into Uncle Silas's stomach! (Twain 367). The other problem arises because though the novel’s subject is directed to the theme of freedom, at the end Jim who is supposed to be free is not still free. This can be attributed to the mistake that Tom made though intentionally. Jim, who has been technically free for all that time they were in the adventure, is still bound in chains, first in the home of Phelpses before the escape and then by the locals who captured him when he went to bring the doctor who would treat Tom. It is ridiculous that Miss Wanton can not set Jim free when she is alive and has to wait till she dies and does it in her will. Old Miss Watson died two months ago, and she was ashamed she ever was going to sell him down the river, and said so; and she set him free in her will. â€Å"(Twain 383) In conclusion, it is clear that the work of Mark Twain was based on the theme of racism, slavery and freedom thus different readers can critic it using different views. The plot flows smoothly from the beginning but the problem arises in the ending as the reader is left wondering why there is no development in Huck’s character -who is the protagonist and who is supposed to develop in all areas as the plot develops.

The History of Chemical Explosives

The History of Chemical Explosives An explosion can be defined as the rapid expansion of a material or device that exerts a sudden pressure on its surroundings. It can be caused by one of three things: a chemical reaction that occurs during conversion of elemental compounds, a mechanical or physical impact, or a nuclear reaction on the atomic/subatomic level. Gasoline exploding when ignited is a chemical explosion brought about by the sudden conversion of a hydrocarbon to carbon dioxide and water. The explosion that occurs when meteor strikes the earth is a mechanical explosion. And a nuclear warhead explosion is the result of the nucleus of a radioactive substance, like plutonium, suddenly splitting apart in an uncontrolled fashion. But it is chemical explosives that are the most common form of explosives in human history, used both for creative/commercial and destructive effect. The strength of a given explosive is measured that the rate of expansion it exhibits during detonation. Lets look briefly at some common chemical explosives. Black Powder It is unknown who invented the first explosive black powder. Black powder, also known as gunpowder, is a mixture of saltpeter (potassium nitrate), sulfur, and charcoal (carbon). It originated in China around in the ninth century and was in wide use throughout Asia and Europe by the end of the 13th century. It was commonly used in fireworks and signals, as well as in mining and building operations. Black powder is the oldest form of ballistic propellant and it was used with early muzzle-type firearms and other artillery uses. In 1831, William Bickford an English leather merchant invented the first safety fuse. Using a safety fuse made black powder explosives more practical and safer. But because black powder is messy explosive, by the end of the 18th century it was replaced by high explosives and by cleaner smokeless powder explosives, such as what is currently used in firearm ammunition. Black powder is categorized as a low explosive because it expands and subsonic speeds when it detonates. High explosives, by contract, expand as supersonic speeds, thereby creating much more force. Nitroglycerin Nitroglycerin is a chemical explosive that was discovered by Italian chemist Ascanio Sobrero in 1846. It was the first explosive developed that was more powerful than black powder, Nitroglycerin is a mix of nitric acid, sulphuric acid, and glycerol, and it is highly volatile. Its inventor, Sobrero, warned against its potential dangers, but Alfred Nobel adopted it as a commercial explosive in 1864. Several serious accidents, however, caused pure liquid nitroglycerin to be widely banned, leading to Nobels eventual invention of dynamite. Nitrocellulose In 1846, Chemist Christian Schonbein discovered nitrocellulose, also called guncotton, when he accidentally spilled a mixture of potent nitric acid on a cotton apron and the apron exploded as it dried. Experiments by Schonbein and others quickly established a means of manufacturing guncotton safely, and because it had a clean, explosive power almost six times greater than black powder, it quickly was adopted for use as means for propelling projectiles in weapons.   TNT In 1863, TNT or Trinitrotoluene was invented by German chemist Joseph Wilbrand. Originally formulated as a yellow dye, its explosive properties were not immediately evident. Its stablity was such that it could be safely poured into shell casings, and in the early 20th century it came into standard usage for German and British military munitions. Considered a high explosive, TNT is still in common use by the U.S. military and by construction companies around the world.   Blasting Cap In 1865, Alfred Nobel invented the blasting cap. The blasting cap provided a safer and dependable means of detonating nitroglycerin. Dynamite In 1867, Alfred Nobel patented dynamite, a high explosive that consisted of a mixture of three parts nitroglycerine, one part diatomaceous earth (ground silica rock) as an absorbent, and a small amount of sodium carbonate antacid as a stabilizer. The resultant mixture was considerably safer than pure nitroglycerine, as well as being much more powerful than black powder. Other materials are now used as the absorbent and stabilizing agents, but dynamite remains the premier explosive for use in commercial mining and construction demolition. Smokeless Powders In 1888, Alfred Nobel invented a dense smokeless powder explosive called ballistite. In 1889, Sir James Dewar and Sir Frederick Abel invented another smokeless gunpowder called cordite. Cordite was made of  nitroglycerin, guncotton, and a petroleum substance gelatinized by addition of acetone. Later variations of these smokeless powders form the propellant for most modern firearms and artillery. Modern Explosives Since 1955, a variety of additional high explosives has been developed. Created mostly for military use, they also have commercial applications, such as in deep drilling operations.  Explosives such as nitrate-fuel oil mixtures or ANFO and ammonium nitrate-base water gels now account for seventy percent of the explosives market. These explosives come in various types including: HMXRDXHNIWONC

Exclusion Restrictions in Instrumental Variables

Exclusion Restrictions in Instrumental Variables In many fields of study, including statistics and economics, researchers rely on valid exclusion restrictions when they are estimating outcomes using either instrumental variables (IV) or exogenous variables. Such calculations are often used to analyze the causal effect of a binary treatment. Variables and Exclusion Restrictions Loosely defined, an exclusion restriction is considered valid so long as the independent variables do not directly affect the dependent variables in an equation. For example, researchers rely on randomization of the sample population in order to ensure comparability across the treatment and control groups. At times, however, randomization is not possible. This may for any number of reasons, such as lack of access to suitable populations or budgetary restrictions. In such cases, the best practice or strategy is to rely on an instrumental variable. Simply put, the method of using instrumental variables is utilized to estimate causal relationships when a controlled experiment or study is simply not feasible. Thats where valid exclusion restrictions come into play.   When researchers employ instrumental variables, they rely on two primary assumptions. The first is that the excluded instruments are distributed independently of the error process. The other is that the excluded instruments are sufficiently correlated with the included endogenous regressors. As such, the specification of an IV model states that the excluded instruments affect the independent variable only indirectly.   As a result, exclusion restrictions are considered observed variables that impact treatment assignment, but not the outcome of interest conditional on treatment assignment. If, on the other hand, an excluded instrument is shown to exert both direct and indirect influences on the dependent variable, the exclusion restriction should be rejected. The Importance of Exclusion Restrictions In simultaneous equation systems or a system of equations, exclusion restrictions are critical. The simultaneous equation system is a finite set of equations in which certain assumptions are made. Despite its importance to the solution of the system of equations, the validity of an exclusion restriction cannot be tested as the condition involves an unobservable residual. Exclusion restrictions are often imposed intuitively by the researcher who must then convince of the plausibility of those assumptions, meaning that the audience must believe the researcher’s theoretical arguments that support the exclusion restriction. The concept of exclusion restrictions denotes that some of the exogenous variables are not in some of the equations. Often this idea is expressed by saying the coefficient next to that exogenous variable is zero. This explanation may make this restriction (​hypothesis) testable and may make a simultaneous equation system identified. Sources Schmidheiny, Kurt. Short Guides to Microeconometrics: Instrumental Variables.  Ã¢â‚¬â€¹Schmidheiny.name. Fall 2016.University of Manitoba Rady Faculty of Health Sciences staff. Introduction to Instrumental Variables. UManitoba.ca.