Explore how chapter 56 in Pride and Prejudice fits into the overall scheme of the text Essay Example for Free

Explore how chapter 56 in Pride and Prejudice fits into the overall scheme of the text Essay What social comments do you think Jane Austen is making in this chapter? Pride and Prejudice was written by Jane Austen in 1813. The novel describes and exaggerates the life in which in Austen lived. The title Pride and Prejudice refers to the ways in which Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy first view each other. The story involves the lives of many different classes and how they interact with each other; it is also informing us of the way certain types of people were treated in those days. Near the end of the novel, Lady Catherine de Burgh comes to visit Elizabeth to try and persuade her not to marry Darcy. I will explore this chapter to find out what social comments Austen tries to make throughout the novel about the world she lived in. Chapter 56 is a summary of the whole novel. Lady Catherine has come to see Elizabeth to make her withdraw her acceptance of marriage to her nephew, Mr. Darcy. Lizzy is shocked by these accusations, as she has heard nothing of the sort, so wonders where Lady Catherine heard the rumours. She is the type of person who thinks that everybodys business is her own because she is of the higher class. It has been planned since Darcy and Lady Catherines daughter were born that they were to be wed and now she hears of Darcy proposing to another lady has outraged her. That is why she has come to visit Elizabeth to stop her marrying Darcy. From the moment lady Catherine arrived she was very rude and not welcoming. She says things such as, you have a very small park here, and this must be a most inconvenient sitting room. As soon as she entered the Bennets home she made no effort on being civil or polite to their family. If Elizabeth were to behave in this manner when she was at Rosings it wouldnt have been tolerated in the slightest. The only reason Lady Catherine gets away with it is because she is a lady and very rich and of the higher class. Anyone who was below her would put up with her behaviour because it was not his or her place in those days to accuse her of being impolite. Jane Austen grew up in this world where the rich people were almost the celebrities of the day. In our world famous people have the money, the expensive cars and clothes and a celebrity status, where the public would stop and look at them and always aspire to be like them. In Austens time it was very much the same but the lower classes and even middle were always looking up to the higher classes and admiring them. This is why people with the money could be as rude and stuck up to people as they wanted because in the end they were the ones with the power and the money to do what they wanted. Lady Catherines reason for visiting Elizabeth was not what the family had thought. Elizabeth expected a letter from Charlotte yet no letter was given. Instead Lady Catherine remarked upon a, prettyish kind of a little wilderness on one side of your lawn. Again she is not really being as polite as she could have been about the garden. From this point Elizabeth realised that she wanted to be alone. She had realised that Catherine was again being very rude and stuck up and so made no effort to talk to her. Lady Catherine begins with, your own heart, your own conscience, must tell you why I come. Elizabeth doesnt have any idea what she is talking about. Lady Catherine talks about her conscience, which is showing that Lizzy is to feel guilty about whatever she has been accused of. She tells Lizzy that rumours have reached her that her and Mr. Darcy were to be engaged and says though I know it must be a scandalous falsehood, Lady Catherine cannot comprehend this idea, to think that a middle class person such as Miss Bennet, who has no real connections, would even consider accepting an offer of this sort. Lady Catherine does not hold back on her true feelings about the subject and as Elizabeth has been brought up in the proper manner she has to respect her. Elizabeth soon becomes tired of her picking at everything that is wrong with her and her family and is not rude but stands up for herself. She asks Lady Catherine if the only reason they should not wed is because she wants him to marry her daughter, then what is there to stop her? She replies with honour, decorum, prudence, nay, interest, forbid it. This is the long list that she has against Lizzy. The social points she is trying to make is that in those days if a family were to have such a disgrace as Lydias elopement then no man should be interested in them, rich men such as Bingley and Darcy should marry same class or higher and that there were some very snooty people who would disagree with the association of certain families! They dont have a lot of land so are not as wealthy and high class.families like this always tried to marry higher up. Need to put in that Bennetts dont have a lot of land or money so lady Catherine looks down. Not too sure how to say this fits in with the rest of the book or how the chapter does? Bit stuck but will be done properly when handed in; in neat its a promise

The Hobbit by JRR Tolkein :: essays research papers

The Hobbit Title: The Hobbit Author: J.R.R. Tolkien Setting: The setting of the story takes place in the lands of Wilderland. It is through Wilderland that the hobbit and the dwarves travel to retrieve their lost treasure. As they move on through Wilderland, they encounter different people and different problems, making it more of an adventure. Characters: protagonists: Bilbo Baggins- he is the main character of story. The tiny hobbit is convinced by the great wizard Gandalf to undertake a long journey with thirteen dwarves to help them retrieve their lost treasure. Bilbo, at first, seems to be of no use to the dwarfs, almost getting them killed by the giant trolls. Eventually he shows his value to dwarves by saving them numerous times from death and imprisonment. Thorin- He is the most important dwarf. His father was the king under the mountain of Lonely Mountain. After the fall of his kingdom, the treasure that belonged to his father was lost to the evil dragon Smaug. He leads the other twelve dwarfs in hopes of regaining the treasure and his kingdom. Gandalf- He is the great wizard who helped organize the adventure. At first he travels with the dwarves and the hobbit but leaves them because he has other business to attend to. Beorn- is a large man who can change shapes into other animals. He lives by himself in large house with animals who he can speak to. He helps the dwarves and the hobbit after they have escaped from the goblins. He later joins them in the Battle of the Five Armies to help defeat the goblins and and the wargs. Bard- He is the man who slays Smaug and becomes the new master of the town where the men dwell on Long Lake. antagonists: the trolls (Bert, Tom, Bill)- they capture the dwarves and Bilbo with the intention of eating them. They are saved when Gandalf creates confusion between them (the trolls) allowing the adventurers to escape. Goblins- they also capture the adventurers but not before Thorin could kill the Great Goblin and then escape. This caused them to pursue the group and their anger towards them led to the cause the Battle of the Five Armies. Smaug- He is the evil dragon who takes over Lonely Mountain and all its gold within it. He is stirred from his sleep by Bilbo and while trying to destroy the town on the river, he is killed by Bard. Exposition: The general situation is revealed by the narrator who tells the story in the third person. The narrator makes direct comments usually explaining parts of the story that won't be made clear until later in the novel.

Nagel, Chisholm, and Locke †Metaphysics of the Mind Essay

It is very difficult to attribute characteristics to a mind when we know it does not actually exist in the physical realm. Though, personal identity has been connected to the mind. However, it is tricky to determine what exactly comprises one’s personal identity. Although it is a difficult concept to grasp, philosophers such as Nagel and Chisholm attempt to construct their own position on the characteristics of the mind. By comparing Nagel and Chisholm’s positions on personal identity, it is evident that identity is a development of both body and mind. Nagel shows that we cannot properly identify a mind, and if this is the case then it is impossible to attribute personal identity to a mind. In turn, he attacks the idea that personal identity can be defined in terms of physical attributes. Chisholm shows that although things are constantly changing, they still remain the same. He argues that it is the mind that holds our identity, regardless of physical alteration. In my view, the physicalist perspective of identity is the most logical when contrasted to the mentalist argument simply due to the fact that we do have a self-identity, and Nagel does not attempt to define what it is. Locke’s argument finds a middle ground between Nagel and Chisholm as he argues for a conscious and bodily continuity of the mind. In order to identify the mind-body problem and argue that identity is a development of the mind, Nagel’s position must be analyzed. Firstly, when addressing the mind-body problem, Nagel states that one cannot explain the mind body relationship through logic, functions, or intentions. He argues that these states can be ascribed to robots that may indeed behave like people, however robots do not experience anything, and it is experience that influences the mind (436). Nagel’s bat analogy helps solidify his position on experience which is that no one can experience the same thing as another. He claims that; â€Å"even to form a conception of what it is Kristen Biduk 6949215 like to be a bat†¦one must take up the bat’s point of view† (442). Meaning, one must have the same thinking patterns as the other which Nagel argues is impossible. He argues that it is our consciousness which provides the mind-body problem. Although one can relate to what it is like to be a bat, it is impossible to fully comprehend it because in order to become a bat, conscious-ness must be forgotten. For that reason, one cannot know that others have a mind, but one can perceive that they do. Chisholm opens his argument with providing an analysis of the Ship of Theseus and explains that identity is transitive, meaning that it is always changing. Similarly, he uses the example of the river and how although it is the same exact river, it is given different identities based on geographical location. The identity of the river is changing. Based on his view of alteration, Chisholm suggests three possibilities for alteration and identity. Firstly, we can deny the transitivity of identity, but he proves this to be a problem. His second suggestion is that nothing alters, but this too proves to be problematic. For example, if one was to cross the border of the United States of America and the border patrol officer asked if he was the same as the person in the photo, he would say no. Because, when that photo was taken he had certain characteristics, and now, x amount of years later he has different characteristics, and is therefore a different person. Clearly this is an issue. Thirdly, he analyzes Butler’s position on the misuse of the word ‘is’ in that, for example; there exists something at a certain place (P) at a certain time (t) that is identical with same thing at a different place (Q) at a different time (t1). By saying identical, he means they exist in together, however it is mathematically impossible. He concludes that such things are entia per alio (made of). Entia per alio is something that exists because a Kristen Biduk 6949215 mind makes it up. For example, a pencil is entia per alio because without a mind, it is simply an object. The mind makes the pencil an object for writing. Without a mind giving meaning to something, that something has no identity. In regards to self-identity, I find it difficult to agree with the mentalist perspective. Nagel’s writing, â€Å"What is it like to be a Bat? † does not provide sufficient insight to the development of self and self-identity. He bases his writing solely based on defining the mind. It is true to say that we cannot properly identify a mind. How can we as a whole, understand something we do not actually know exists? We can assume it exists but it provides no understanding. Based on this belief, Nagel concludes that because we cannot properly identify a mind, we cannot connect personal identity to a mind. But where can we find our personal identity? He claims that our identity does not lie within our physical attributes which leaves identity suspending in the air. The mentalist perspective is limiting in the sense that it does not take in to account outside variables that can impact one’s identity. We are not born with an identity and I feel as though Nagel’s position is implying that we are. Additionally, our identity is developed from our consciousness, and we do not become conscious of ourselves at infancy. We develop our self-identity through time and it is consistently changing. Chisholm is much more realistic when it comes to defining personal identity. We cannot assume that our identity is purely based on our minds, for our minds are influenced by our physicality. In turn, our physicality is influenced by society. We identify with ourselves based on what others think of us. For example, if someone weighs three hundred pounds, they may identify themselves as unhealthy because that is what society has told them. Similarly, if that three hundred pound person lost weight and now weighed one hundred and thirty pounds, that Kristen Biduk 6949215 person may identify themselves as healthy. If they used diet and exercise as a method to lose the weight, they may identify as athletic. This proves that personal identity is indeed transitive. It will always be in a constant state of change depending on the influences around them. We have identity because others around us have provided us with our identity. One could argue then that if one was to lose only ten pounds then identity will not change because the change is only slight. If we analyze the Ship of Theseus once more, Chisholm argues that slight changes still have an impact on our identity because our identity is always changing. By using the problem of Theseus’s ship however, it gives us ideas of identity for inanimate objects. One could argue that it is not relatable to beings with consciousness however I would have to disagree. Our consciousness, or our memories are what hold our self-identity. If we lose an arm or leg, we are still the same person because our minds still hold our memory. While the mentalist perspective does not take into account physical impressions, and the physicalist perspective lacks some insight on our own consciousness, Locke provides an explanation that touches on both sides. Locke argues for a conscious continuity and not a bodily one. He begins with clarifying that all minds have a common structure wherein there are two qualities within our identity: primary and secondary. The primary quality consists of consciousness. I can identify with myself because I am conscious of my own existence. The secondary qualities consist of qualities that are changing, such as hair length or weight. He insists that our primary qualities are what provide us with identity however he agrees that secondary qualities must be analyzed. Our secondary qualities are always changing while our primary qualities are static. Without the secondary qualities, our identity would not change, Kristen Biduk 6949215 which Chisholm proved. In comparison to both Nagel and Chisholm, Locke’s argument holds the truest because he takes into account both perspectives and develops the most logical understanding of identity. Additionally, Locke states that there is a first and third person perspective on identity. The first person identity is what one makes of himself. The third person helps confirm one’s identity. Both of these together help form one’s true personal identity. For one without outside influences has nothing to base their identity on. For example, if one was to look at cases of people raised in isolation, it will be seen that they have no sense of reality or identity. They were left to their own thoughts with no outside stimulation. When they leave their isolated prisons, they rediscover their identity by identifying with their outside influences. In conclusion, it is almost impossible to justify the mind/body problem. Both Nagel and Chisholm’s perspectives on identity are fairly vague and both lack a deeper understanding of the mind. I truly believe that it is the mind that holds our identity. However an identity is highly structured by its outside influences. Without a body or without society, one would have no identity. Some can argue that there can be a mind without a body, but it just doesn’t make rational sense. If hypothetically, one was to have their mind switched into a different body, he would still identify as himself. For it is our mind that holds our identity, however our mind is within a body.

New Predictive Model For Vaginal Birth After Cesarean

A clear objective of this study has been demonstrated in the paper: To construct a new predictive model for vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC), which incorporates the factors that can only be obtained as the pregnancy progresses and compare the new model with a previous model that only have variables available at the first prenatal visit. In this study, authors stated that in a previous model is limited to the variables which are available at the first prenatal visit, and they want to know whether incorporating pregnant woman’s most recent circumstances can refine the predicted probability of VBAC. Model and Variables: Logistic model has been use in this study. In previous model, only variables at first prenatal visit have been used. In this study, Grobman et. al developed the model by adding the variables that can only be obtained as the pregnancy progresses. Cross-validation method was used to evaluate the predictive power of models. Dataset was equally divided into two parts. Models were fitted on training set and tested on testing set. Results The significant factors in the model were presented in table 1. In Fig 1 and 2, calibration curves (empirical probabilities vs predicted probabilities) were presented. The predicted probabilities are the mid-points of five equal intervals (0%-20%, 21%-40%, ..., etc). The empirical probabilities were calculated by average all women in the same interval. The closer to the 45-degree line, the better the model is. Figure 1Show MoreRelatedNursing Essay41677 Words   |  167 PagesEducation and Development Oregon Health and Science University School of Nursing, Portland Troyen A. Brennan, Executive Vice President, Chief Medical Officer, CVS Caremark, Woonsocket, RI Robert E. Campbell, Vice Chairman (Retired), Johnson Johnson, New Brunswick, NJ Leah Devlin, Professor of the Practice, University of North Carolina School of Public Health, Raleigh Catherine Dower, Associate Director of Research, Center for the Health Professions, University of California, San Francisco Rosa Gonzalez-Guarda