Free Essays on America Play Interpretation

The â€Å"whole† referred to in â€Å"The America Play† seems to embody definitive moments in American History, such as the assassination of President Lincoln. Park focuses not on the celebrated figures of heroism, but those who contributed to the shaping of the country, but have yet to receive credit. The digging of a â€Å"hole† represents the search for the history of unrecognized African-Americans. In Act I, the Foundling Father speaks of the â€Å"Lesser Known† who is compared to Abraham Lincoln and only receives recognition through this association. In trying to find his own voice, the Lesser Known becomes an imitation of Lincoln’s legend. The Foundling Father states that, â€Å"he [The Lesser Man] wanted to grow and have others think of him and remove their hats and touch their hearts and look up into the heavens and say something about the freeing of the slaves. That is, he wanted to make a great impression as he understood Mr. Lincoln to have made,† (Act I, 214). In search of his own identity and recognition, the Lesser Man only lives out the events, and even death, of an already historically recognized figure. Lincoln’s death is made into a gruesome joke, and literally an amusement. No heroism is associated with the sufferers of slavery themselves, forcing the Lesser Man to gain acknowledgment vicariously though an already established historical figure. . A later generation also digs with the intent of uncovering a part of African American history that has been lost in the past. Lucy tells Brazil, â€Å"Itssalways been important in my line to distinguish. Tuh know the difference. Not like you Fathuh. Your Fathuh became confused. His lonely death and lack of proper burial is our embarrassment. Go on: dig. Now me I need tuh know thuh real thing from thuh echo. Thuh truth from thuh hearsay,† (Act II, 21). Lucy seeks to find more than what is acknowledged American H... Free Essays on America Play Interpretation Free Essays on America Play Interpretation The â€Å"whole† referred to in â€Å"The America Play† seems to embody definitive moments in American History, such as the assassination of President Lincoln. Park focuses not on the celebrated figures of heroism, but those who contributed to the shaping of the country, but have yet to receive credit. The digging of a â€Å"hole† represents the search for the history of unrecognized African-Americans. In Act I, the Foundling Father speaks of the â€Å"Lesser Known† who is compared to Abraham Lincoln and only receives recognition through this association. In trying to find his own voice, the Lesser Known becomes an imitation of Lincoln’s legend. The Foundling Father states that, â€Å"he [The Lesser Man] wanted to grow and have others think of him and remove their hats and touch their hearts and look up into the heavens and say something about the freeing of the slaves. That is, he wanted to make a great impression as he understood Mr. Lincoln to have made,† (Act I, 214). In search of his own identity and recognition, the Lesser Man only lives out the events, and even death, of an already historically recognized figure. Lincoln’s death is made into a gruesome joke, and literally an amusement. No heroism is associated with the sufferers of slavery themselves, forcing the Lesser Man to gain acknowledgment vicariously though an already established historical figure. . A later generation also digs with the intent of uncovering a part of African American history that has been lost in the past. Lucy tells Brazil, â€Å"Itssalways been important in my line to distinguish. Tuh know the difference. Not like you Fathuh. Your Fathuh became confused. His lonely death and lack of proper burial is our embarrassment. Go on: dig. Now me I need tuh know thuh real thing from thuh echo. Thuh truth from thuh hearsay,† (Act II, 21). Lucy seeks to find more than what is acknowledged American H...

Actus Reus Paper Essays

Actus Reus Paper Essays Actus Reus Paper Essay Actus Reus Paper Essay ACTUS REUS: OMISSION CAUSATION The general basis for imposing liability in  criminal law  is that the defendant must be proved to have committed a guilty act whilst having had a guilty state of mind. The physical elements are collectively called the actus reus and the accompanied mental state is called the mens rea. It is the fundamental duty of the prosecution to prove both of these elements of the offence to the satisfaction of the judge or jury beyond reasonable doubt. In the absence of such proof the defendant will be acquitted. ACTUS REUS An actus reus consists of more than just an act. It also consists of whatever circumstances and consequences are recognised for liability for the offence in question in other words all the elements of an offence other than the mental element. The term actus reus has been given a much wider meaning by Glanville Williams in his criminal law. He says : When he use the technical tern actus reus we include all the external circumstances and consequences specified in the rule of law as constituting the forbidden situation. Reus must be taken as indicating the situation specified in the actus reus as on that, given any necessary mental element, is forbidden by law. In other words, acus reus means the whole definition of the crime with the exception of the mental element – and it even includes a mental element in so far as that is contained in the definition of an act. Actus reus includes negative as well as positive elements. For example, as stared earlier, the actus reus of murder is the causing of death of a person. It also includes circumstances, such as the person whose death has been caused was not as a consequence of a sentence or death given to him or that the death was caused within the territorial jurisdiction of the state. OMISSIONS IN CRIMES Omissions are controversial for two main reasons_ first, whether and to what extent it is justifiable omissions rather than acts; and secondly, whether liability for omissions rather than act requirement in criminal law. Pursuing the second point here, much has been made above of the importance f requiring proof that the defendant voluntarily did something to produce prohibited conduct or consequence. In so far as this can be termed an ‘act requirement’, are omissions a true exception to it? If they are, is this another argument against criminalizing them? One much-discussed preliminary question is the distinction between acts and omissions. Sometimes it is argued that certain verbs imply action and therefore exclude liability for omiss ions, and that the criminal law should respect. The distinctions flowing from this. English courts have often used this linguistic or interpretive approach. It has led to a variety of decisions in different statutes, without much discussion of the general principles underlying omissions liability. The law commissions considerably draft criminal code may be said to signal the continuation of this approach, by redefining the homicide offences in terms of ‘causing death’ rather than ‘killing’, and refining the damage offences in terms of ‘causing damage’, rather than ‘damaging’, so as ‘to leave fully open the courts the possibility of so constructing the relevant (statutory) provisions as to impose liability for omissions’. The draft cod would therefore remove any linguistic awkwardness in saying, for example, that a parent killed a child by failing to feed it; but it does so in this specific instance, and without proclaiming a general principle, that the act requirement may be fulfilled by an omission of a duty can be established. Attachment to the vagaries of the language is no proper basis for delineating the boundaries of criminal liability. In some situations the courts, following the linguistic approach, have nevertheless found themselves able to impose omissions liability. In Speck (1977)3 the defendant was charged with committing an act of gross indecency with or towards a child. The evidence was that an 8 yr old girl placed her hand on his trousers over his penis. he allowed that hand to remain there for some minutes, causing him to have an erection. The court of appeal held that the defendants failure to remove the hand amounted to an invitation to the child with the act, or it created a duty in an adult to put an end to the innocent touching of this kind, with omissions liability for not fulfilling the duty. The analysis is similar to that in miller (1983) where D fell asleep whilst smoking, woke up to find the mattress smouldering, but simply left the room and went to sleep elsewhere. He was convicted of causing criminal damage by fire, on the basis that a person who initiates a sequence of events nnocently and then fails to do anything to stop the sequence should be regarded as having caused the whole sequence. On this view the conduct constitutes a single, continuing act; Miller caused the damage because he took no steps to extinguish the fire he had innocently started. It must be doubted whether these efforts to find an act which then coincides in point in point of time with defendants knowledge and intentions are convincin g. surely the courts are imposing liability for an omission on these cases, by recognizing that a duty arises. Speck is a little different from miller since the original act of the speck was of the girl, and the duty must therefore amount the recognition of an obligation on an adult to put an end to the indecent yet innocent touching by a child. In so far as these decisions appear to extend the statutory wording, are they objectionable on grounds of retroactivity and lack of fair warning, or defensible as applications of existing common law doctrine to new situations? In other situations it seems possible to offer plausible reasons for regarding the same event as either an act or an omission, and in some cases the courts have sought to exploit this ambiguity when dealing with problematic medical issues. Yet it is one thing to say that a healthcare professional who decides not to replace an empty bag for a drip-feed has made an omission, whereas switching a ventilator off is an act; is another thing to maintain that the act-omission distinction should be crucial to any determination of the criminal liability in the two situations. In Airedale NHS trust v bland (1993)the house of lords held that it would be lawful for a doctor to withdraw treatment from a patient in a persistent vegetative state, even though death would inevitable be hastened by that conduct. The house held that the withdrawal of treatment would constitute and omission, and thus regarded the duties of the doctor as the central issue. The decision was that the doctor a doctor has no duty to continue life supplying treatment when it is no longer in the best interest of the patient, having regard to responsible medical opinion. However the court of appeal declined to adopt this subterfuge in Re A(conjoined twins: Surgical separation), holding that the surgical separation of the twins would undoubtedly an act, and subsequently deciding that carrying out an operation which would result in the death of one twin in order to save the life of other could be justifies on the grounds of necessity. This demonstration of the fragility of the act-omission distinction of the vagaries fthe English language indicates that it may be simplistic to oppose omissions liability in the principle. There are some clear cases of omission in which it is desirable to have criminal liability, such as the parent who neglects to feed her or his child or neglects to protect it from abuse. Omissions can be involuntary or not, in the same way as acts; and provided, that the harm resulted because D failed to intervene, it can be argued that omissions are also causes. Omissions liability ay therefore satisfy the principles that no one should be held liable for bodily movements that he or she did not or could not direct. It may also satisfy the principle that no person should be held liable for the conduct or consequences that he or she did not cause. But one point of the act requirement is to exclude liability for mere thoughts that do not result in some bodily movement, and omissions fall foul to that. They do so for a good reason – that certain positive duties to act are so important that they can rightly be made the subject of criminal liability. Of course, such a duty should also be defined with sufficient certainty and made known to those affected by it. So long as these formal requirements are fulfilled there can be no fairness objection to holding a person liable, provided that he or she is capable of taking some steps to carry out the duty. CAUSATION IN CRIMES An event is very often the result of a number of factors. A factor is said to have caused a particular event if, without that factor or, the event would not have happened. Thus, a man is said to have caused the actus reus of a crime, if, that actus would not have occurred without his participation in what was done. Some casual relationships has to be established between his conduct and the prohibited result. A man is usually held criminally liable only for the consequences of his conduct as he foresaw, (or is crimes of negligence, he ought to have foreseen). The act must be the causa causans, ie, the immediate or proximate cause of the effect. When the facts are direct and simple, then establishing the causal nexus between the act and the effect may not be difficult, as for instance in a case of person shooting another person and thereby killing him. The causation can also be without any direct physical act. if the victim asks his way on a dark night nd the accused with the intention of causing his death, directs him to a path that he knows will bring him to a cliff edge , and the victing suffers a fatal fall, this is clearly murder, though the accused has done nothing more than utter words. This can be true in cases of abetment, incitement and conspiracy. In the instances stated above, it is not difficult to establish the direct result between the cause and the effect. The difficulty ar ises only in cases of multiple causation, where it is difficult to establish the imputability. Example: A, intending to kill B but only wounds him very slightly. A clearly has the requisite mens rea for murder, that is, he foresees and desires B’s death. Not let us assume that on his being ta ken to the hospital in an ambulance, a piece of masonry from a building falls on the ambulance and kills B; or, alternatively, that B has a rare blood disease which prevents his blood from coagulation so that the slight wound leads to his death, which it would not have done if he had not been suffering from this disease; or, alternatively, that B refuses to have the wound treated and dies of blood poisoning, which would not have occurred if B had had the wounded treated. In all these cases, a problem of causation arises, i. e. , did A cause B’s death for the purposes of the criminal law so that he can be convicted of murder? If the result is too remote and accidental in its occurrence, then there is no criminal liability. CAUSATION AND NEGLIGENCE The difficulty of causation arises very often n cases of negligence. It has t be established that first, the conduct of the person was negligent and secondly, that but for the negligent act of accused, the accident would not have occurred. In other words, the actus reus should be causally connected to the act, which should be proved to be a negligent. In order to impose criminal liability under S 304A, IPC, it is essential to establish that death is the direct result of the rash or (and) negligent act of the accused. It must be causa causans – the immediate cause and not enough that it may be quasa sine qua non, ie, proximate cause. There can be no conviction when rashness or negligence of third party intervenes. In Suleman rahiman mulani v state of Maharashtra the Supreme Court has approved his rule. In Suleman rahiman mulani the accused who was driving the jeep struck the deceased, as a result of which he sustained serious injuries. The ccused put the injured person in the jeep for medical treatment, but he died. Thereafter, the accused cremated the body. The accused was charged under s304A and 201 of the IPC. As per s 304A, there must be direct nexus between the death of a person and rash and negligent act of the accused that caused the death of the deceased. It was the case of the prosecution of the accused had possesse d only a learner’s license and hence was guilty of causing the death of the deceased. The court held that there was no presumption in law that a person who possesses only a learner’s license or possesses no license at all, does not know driving. A person could for various reasons, including sheer indifference, might not have been taken a regular license . there was evidence to show that the accused had driven the jeep to various places on the previous day of occurrence. So before the accused convicted under s304A, there must a proof that the accused drove in a rash and negligent manner and death was a direct consequence of such rash and negligent manner. In the absence of such evidence no offence under s 304A was made out. The accused was acquitted of the charges. MINIMAL CAUSATION When death of a person is caused after medical treatment, it cannot be said that the treatment was not proper or inadequate, or had better treatment been given, the death would not have taken place. This is because, the intervention of the doctor is in the nature of minimum causation and hence its intervention would have played only a minor part, if any, in causing death. As far as the IPC is concerned, explanation 2 of s 299 specifically states that if an act causes death, even death could have been avoided by proper remedies and skilful treatment, the act shall be deemed to have caused death and the person will be criminally liable. If death results from an injury voluntarily caused, the person who causes the injury, therefore, is deemed to have caused the death, although the life of victim might have been saved if proper medical treatment, provided that it was administered in good faith by a competent physician or surgeon. In Moti singh v state of uttar Pradesh the deceased gayacharan had received two gunshot wounds in the abdomen which were dangerous to life. The injury was received on February 1960. There was no evidence when he was discharged from the hospital and whether he had fully recovered or not. He, however, died on march 1 1960. His body was cremated without post mortem being done. The supreme court held that the two gunshot injuries were dangerous to life were not sufficient for holding that gyancharans death, which took place about three weeks after the incident, was on account of the injuries received by him. The court observed that in order to prove the charges on gyancharans murder, it was necessary to establish that he had died on account of injuries received on him. Since, the was no evidence to establish the cause of death, the accused could not be said to have caused the death of gyancharan. A crucial aspect highlighted by the court in the case was that the connection between the primary cause and the death should not be too remote. CONCLUSION Causation is a complex topic, with which we have been able to deal only brief here. Proof of causation is often said to be an essential precondition of criminal liability, but there is reason to doubt the generality of that requirement, notably in respect of accomplice liability and vicarious criminal liability. Rather than insisting on a universal requirement of causation, it may be preferable to argue that liability should be negatived, in general, by the voluntary intervening act of another. Several criticisms of the judicial approach to three exceptional categories of case hace been advanced above. Often the explanations given by the courts are unconvincing. Whilst the traditional or standard causal theory emphasizes the significance of the last voluntary act, there is no reluctance to took wider or to massage the term ‘voluntary’ in certain situations, especially where D clearly stated that the sequence of events by doing a wrongful act. The challenge is to re-examine the intuitions that lead judges and others to their conclusions (the wrongful act theory, the approach to medical mistakes etc. ) with a view to constructing a law that ensures that the courts respect the various principles . BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. P. S. A. Pillai – Criminal law 2. Glanville Williams book on criminal law 3. www. lawteacher. com [ 1 ]. Page 427, principles of criminal law, Glanville williams [ 2 ]. Duff, criminal attempts, 317-20 Glanville Williams [ 3 ]. 65 CR App R 161. [ 4 ]. (1983) 2 AC 161 [ 5 ]. Criticisms by jc smith (1982) Crim LR 527 and 724, and D. Husak, philosophy of criminal law(1987), 176-8 [ 6 ]. See I. M Kennedy, Treat me right (1988) 169-74 [ 7 ]. (1993) AC 789 [ 8 ]. 4 ALL ER 961 [ 9 ]. Emery (1993) 14 Cr App R (s) 394, aand the new duty by the domestic violence, crime and victims act 2004. [ 10 ]. Glanville Williams, ‘criminal law- causation’) [ 11 ]. Rustom sherior Irani v state of Maharashtra(1969) ACC Cj 79 (SC) [ 12 ]. Md rangawalla v state of mahaarashtra AIR 1965 [ 13 ]. However a driver is expected to anticipate reasonably foreseeable negligent act to road users as contributory negligence has no application in criminal law. [ 14 ]. Re san pai (1936) 14 rang 643

Fire Behavior Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Fire Behavior - Essay Example Importantly, these are for use against Class A (that is, combustible) fires, and inappropriate for other classes. Class B fires involve alcohol, gasoline, diesel oil and flammable gases. Carbon Dioxide and Dry-Chemical agents, Foam and Halons Extinguishers form suitable extinguishing agents, lowering the temperature below flash point, by removing the fire's oxygen supply. Two of these agents are suitable too, for use on Class C fires involving energized electrical equipment, with the important exception of foam and water as these methods conduct electricity. Class D fires involve combustible metals such as sodium, potassium and zirconium. Hazardous in powdered form, burning at high temperature, water is ill-advised, due to its possibly acting as an explosive rather than extinguishing agent. No single extinguishing agent exists for all metals, though dry-powder compounds are recommended, commonly, Lith-X and Meth-X. Class K fires involve vegetable and animal oils, and fats in appliances in kitchen restaurants and cafeterias. Extinguishers use saponification (soap converting agents), on hot grease and dry chemicals.

Layla and Majnun relation to Sufism Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Layla and Majnun relation to Sufism - Essay Example The relation between the legend of Layla and Majnun and Sufism The relation between the legend of Layla and Majnun and Sufism includes the elements like love, madness, life in exile and self-realization. A. Love The theme of the legend of Layla and Majnun is the love between the hero and the heroine and it’s after effects. To be specific, the legend of Layla and Majnun portrays the deep love between Layla and Majnun. Majnun considers that his ultimate aim is to unite with Layla, his beloved. So, he was ready to give up the worldly pleasures for the sake of his love towards Layla. In the legend of Layla and Majnun, the lover considers that his beloved is an inseparable part of his self and him ultimate aim is to be with his lover. He does not consider the obstacles in his life as important because his aim is most noble. His love towards his beloved helps him to suffer a lot in his life. On the other side, a Sufi saint undergoes the same process in his life because he is totally intoxicated with the thought of the search for eternal truth. He does not consider the worldly pleasures as important because his aim is most noble. His life is totally dedicated to the God, who created this universe. He is aware of the fact that worldly pleasures may not lead a person to find out the secret of life or the eternal truth. Instead, one who is ready to discard worldly pleasures can embrace the real love or eternal truth. Besides, Sufism considers that love towards the god is the real love, not the human desire towards worldly pleasures. B. Madness In the legend of Layla and Majnun, the lover becomes totally absorbed by his affection towards his beloved. This can be termed as madness because Majnun gradually began to ignore the real world. But he was not ready to give up his love and began to wander aimlessly. He considered that the imaginary world was the real world and vice versa. This helped him to compare the things in nature with the beauty of Layla. When a dog ap proached him he treats it with due care because it came from his beloved’s place. But when he happens to meet Layla, he totally ignores her. Now, he realizes that his aim was to reach the real love, the love of god. Sinha opined that â€Å"A further view is that the story of Layla- Majnun has merely been adopted by the Sufis as a fitting vehicle for expressing the mystical experience, and has thus subsequently been given a spiritual interpretation by them† (26). Sufism is the straight forward way to the god, without the helpful external forces. Sufism considers that those who are in search of the god do not like to have a mediator. One can see that Majnun’s relationship with the imaginary world acted the role of a veil (say, Layla) between him and the god. When he was able to discard his relationship with the imaginary world (mad love towards Layla), he was able to realize his ultimate aim. So, Majnun’s temporary madness is similar to the feeling of the S ufis. Besides, Majnun was not aware of his ultimate aim and this hindered him for a moment from reaching the same. On the other side, Sufis are aware of their aim and their single minded dedication helps them to attain their aim with ease. C. Life in exile Most love stories portray life in exile is an important factor which builds up the strong bond between the lovers. In the legend of

USGS Bird Population Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

USGS Bird Population - Essay Example Indeed, it found as far north as Alaska on the west coast as well as New England on the east coast and as far south as Mexico and the Bahamas. It is also found in eastern Canada, in Great Britain, and Ireland. Its ability to survive on a variety of diets, which include fish, amphibians and crustaceans, also indicate that the Double Crested Cormorant is a generalist. The Great Blue Heron is also a generalist/opportunistic species. This species is found not only in freshwater and saltwater habitats but also in mangrove swamps, flooded meadows, lake edges as well as along the shoreline. Indeed, it thrives in almost every part of North America, from Alaska and southern Canada in the North to Florida, Mexico and the Caribbean in the south. It is also found in South America, Greenland and England (Elliott, del Hoyo, Sargatal, & Imboden, 1992). Though the primary food of the Great Blue Heron is fish, it opportunistically feed on a variety of aquatic organisms such as shrimp, crabs, insects, rodents, amphibians, reptiles and other smaller birds. The Wood Stork is an example of a specialist given that it is found in limited habitat mainly tropical and subtropical climates of South America, Central America and the Caribbean. It is also found in subtropical climates of the United States such as in the States of Florida, Georgia and South Carolina where they live on cypress trees in marshes and swamps (Ehrlich, Dobkin, & Wheye, 1992). The Wood Stork, which is an endangered species (Ehrlich, Dobkin, & Wheye, 1992), preys on a limited variety of aquatic organisms that include fish, frogs and large insects. The America Robin is indeed a generalist that is found in almost all parts of North America, from Alaska and Canada in the North to Florida and Mexico in the south (The Cornell Lab of Ornithology, 2011). Thus is can survive in different types of environments though its habitat is mainly woodland. It is also found in the Caribbean, Greenland, and in

Conflict and Functionalist Theory Differences Essay Example for Free

Conflict and Functionalist Theory Differences Essay Introduction The conflict theory originated from Karl max, the famous sociologist, during his original development of the theory and his fine-tuning work, he included the qualifications of other sociologists like Georg Samuel and Max Weber which he considered were necessary (Cliffs 1971: 12-16).   According to the theory, positivism does not necessarily answer everything contrary to believes of functionalists. In general, the conflict theory states that everything happens for reasons other than a general believe that it was just supposed to happen; there are causes and influences which cause such things to happen and the responsibility lies solely on the people and there main purpose is not to gain knowledge only as a functionalist but the transformation of the gained knowledge into action (Durkheim 1915: 23-27).    According to the theory even scientists should be activist with regard to their theories, not only explain why such things happen, instead, they are supposed to instigate the necessary changes in their theories in order to help resolve these issues (Cliffs 1971: 17-20). Read more: Functionalist and Conflict Perspectives The theory differences The believers of conflict theory and functionalist theory have clear differences in their beliefs, because when functionalist say that they do everything they do because ‘we love to do it’, the conflict theory belief that our societies are not guided necessarily by stability or anything of the sort, but it is possible to transformed the whole society into something totally new (John Simpson 1951: 16-20). Karlmax, Simmed and Weber, and the believers of conflict theory belief that anything that can cause a difference has the capacity to cause a conflict also, be either in areas of competition, opinions, interests and even power, but to a functionalist these issues do not have any serious problems even though conflict theorists do believe that they exhibit other unseen reasons other than the issue of just because â€Å"we like it† (Merton 1968: 10-15). The way functionalists see the world All functionalists believers emphasize on the importance of value consensus in society and they do not expect any conflict to occur and if it occurs it is seen as being temporal which will be simply counteracted as the society continues to become better and their main concern of these conflicts is to accept them as small issues when compared to the need for consensus and stability in the society (Cliffs 1971: 20-26). An example of a functional analysis; Shils and Young notes how ceremonies and rituals are meant to serve the purpose of promoting social integration in their society; the rituals concerning monarchy, church, government leaders, are mainly involved in public promise while the family is seen as the role it plays for members of society, like personal stability and socialization (Parsons 1951: 19-23). Comparing it with conflict theory by Marx According to Marxists and his believers of the conflict theory, there exists a fundamental conflict between different groups in our society, because, the conflict continues to increase and persist and therefore it is not temporal as functionalists clam it to be:   For example, according to Marx analyzing the conflict theory, all societies are constructed in order to survive, and we enter into relationships with the sole purpose of production (Parsons 1951: 21-25). Therefore the combined forces of production and social relationship form basis for economic or infrastructure of any society, while other aspects, like superstructures are shaped by infrastructure, for instance education system is shaped by economic factors and therefore any changes in infrastructure will lead to eventual changes in the superstructure (Simpson 1964: 21-23). The Marxist theory states that all societies have contradictions; this means there is exploitation by one social group, which leads to the creation of conflict of interests because of the main reason that this one social group owns all the factors of production which only benefits them at the expense of others who are mainly the workers (Parsons 1951: 25-28).   They therefore, propose that this trend should be stopped.   For example; the society is comprised of classes, and in its simplest form, there are two main classes of classification. The main determination of an individual to these classes is their relationship to the means of production, which are land, labor and factories (Merton 1968: 16-18). This means that this class that owns the factors of production and therefore, the most powerful. The least powerful class is therefore the one which sells its labors in order to make a living out of it. To be more specific, let us consider wages versus profit achieved by the Bourgeoisie; according to the theory, all societies operate through class of conflict as mentioned; and in a capitalist society there are oppositions between bourgeoisie and the proletariat. The real wealth is only created by the labor power of workers, but low wages are paid to the workers below the profits made the owners and this creates the major contradiction (Durkheim 1915: 29-31). Conclusion In the recent past, workers have become more differentiated and this has eliminated homogeneity in terms of class-consciousness and thus they have increased their awareness of differences between themselves and this has made the above class groups to be split and not united (John Simpson 1951: 21-23).   It is not important therefore for the society to be characterized by the competing interest groups who are in conflict; therefore we should have ties of the following; economic power and social and secondly political ties to the ownership of means of production (Simpson 1964: 24). Work cited Cliffs, E. (1971). The System of Modern Societies. NJ: Prentice-Hall: pp12-26 Durkheim, E. (1915). The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life: A Study in Religious  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Sociology. Translated by Joseph Ward Swain. New York: Macmillan press:   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   pp.23-31 John, A. S. and Tr. Simpson, G. (1951). Suicide: A Study in Sociology: New York IL:    Free Press: pp.16-23 Merton, R. K. (1968). Social Theory and Social Structure; New York: Free Press: pp.10-18 Parsons, T (1951). The Social System; Glencoe, IL: Free Press: pp.21-28 Simpson, G. (1964). The Division of Labor in Society; New York: Free Press: pp.21-24

Upton Sinclairs The Jungle and the Meat-Packing Industry Today Essay

Meatpacking pertains to the raising, slaughtering, packaging and processing of livestock such as pigs, cows, and chickens. Prior to slaughter, animals are grown and fed. Food borne illness and pathogens still plague the meatpacking industry since the creation of meatpacking. The government plays a huge role in providing legislation and ensuring the safety of meat products and business. Although the government is meant to inspect and guarantee safety, many unlawful practices appear overlooked pertaining to the safety of meat for consumers. Meatpacking commenced thousands of years ago, and the safety of the meatpacking industry has been evaluated greatly since the industrial revolution in America. The history of the meatpacking industry in America, the impact of literature such as the novel of the jungle written by Upton Sinclair, the rendering and irradiation of meat, and current worker issues contribute to the horrible safety precautions as well as the awful environment inv olving the meatpacking industry. Meatpacking served as solely a family business up until the 17th century. As population in America grew immensely, industry as well as urbanization created a demand for meat product. Consequently, heavy industry quickly replaced traditional practices. Local meat stores grew into enormous companies and businesses that processed thousands of animals each day into fresh meat ("Meat Industry"). At the emergence of the 20th century, 4 major meat packing corporations took over small meatpacking companies and family owned businesses. The 4 major companies at the time consisted of the Armour, Swift, Morns, and national packing. The â€Å"Big Four† meat packing companies centralized their operations in a few cities ("BRIA 24 1 B ... ...s not a top priority. As the meat industry demonstrates a few pros, the cons outweigh drastically. Works Cited "BRIA 24 1 B Upton Sinclairs The Jungle: Muckraking the Meat-Packing Industry." Constitutional Rights Foundation. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Mar. 2014. Greenhouse, Steven. "US: Meat Packing Industry Criticized on Human Rights Grounds." New York Times. N.p., 25 Jan. 2005. Web. 19 Apr. 2014. H.C. White. Chicago - Meat Packing Industry: Dropping Hides and Splitting Chucks, Beef Dept., Swift & Co.'s Packing House. Digital image. Library of Congress. Library of Congress, n.d. Web. 21 Apr. 2014. Kallen, Stuart A. Food Safety. Detroit: Greenhaven, 2005. Print. "Meat Industry." Encyclopedia Americana. Grolier Online, n.d. Web. 14 Mar. 2014. "Meatpacking in America: Still a Jungle Out There? . NOW |." PBS. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Mar. 2014.