The Role Of Pleasure In The Happy Life

The Role Of Pleasure In The Happy Life Choose two philosophers covered so far and use their work to discuss the role of pleasure in the happy life.   I choose to pick Epicurus as one of the philosophers to be discussed because he is one of the most important figures in philosophy to be discussing on the topic of pleasure, it is interesting to discover just which category does Epicurus belong to. Was he just an ethical hedonist? Asserting merely that human actions ultimate purpose is to bring us happiness and that should be the only purpose or goal we serve or to achieve while adhering to doing good in the process .Or is he something else, something more profound? Epicurus is without a doubt, a hedonist, however he is somewhat of a different kind of hedonist, he draws a distinction between intense physical pleasure, and he also states that if one engages in intense physical debauchery too much, its going to end up hurting you. Epicurus promotes the idea of ataraxic that is: having the peace of mind, free from stress or turmoil, he proposes that physical indulgences in eating ,drinking, or sex orgies, can bring more negative consequences than pleasure, but mental pleasures, like listening to music, discussing philosophy with your friends etc, can last for as long as you want to with no negative consequences.For Epicurus, mental pleasure carries a greater pleasure and value than physical pleasure, he also further classifies active pleasure and passive pleasure. For example, you want to eat because you are hungry or drink because you are thirsty and then the passive pleasure, such as freedom from anxiety and pain. Epicurus thought passive pleasur e was more important than indulging in active pleasure, for example, a true epicurean delight would not be having an orgy, but instead researching scientific questions, perhaps. Epicurus concept of pleasure was twofold: in the opinion of researchers, Epicurus distinguished two kinds of pleasure- a static pleasure or a pleasure in a state of rest and a kinetic pleasure or a pleasure in motionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦an Epicurean by the name of Lucius Torquatus, gives a definition of two different kinds of pleasure, one of which suavitate aliqua naturam ipsam movet et iucundi-tate quadam percipitur sensibus, thus being a pleasure in motion, while the other, static pleasure, percipitur omni dolore detracto. Here Torquatus draws a distinction between two different states to either of which, in his opinion, the notion of pleasure can be applied firstly, a state presupposing active stimulation of pleasant sensations and secondly, a state negatively defined as the absence of pain and suffering. Epicurus referred to as kinetic those pleasures which accompany the process of satisfying ones desires and regarded as static pleasure the state experienced when the desires are sati sfied. In another place he gives a quotation from Epicurus about pleasures accompanying gustatory, auditory and visual sensations, and this time he regards these pleasures as pleasures in motion, speaking now about physical motions in the sensory organs. Besides, the traditional interpretation of kinetic pleasure contradicts Epicurus idea that it is impossible simultaneously to experience pleasure and pain; for example, if a man is feeling pleasure while satisfying his hunger, then, apparently, at the same moment pleasure has to be accompanied by pain from hunger that has not yet been fully satisfied. (Nikolsky, 2001) Epicurus believed we can all find a way to be happy, the problem is simply we are looking at the wrong place, unlike many philosophers, Epicurus idea of happiness actually sounds rather fun, he didnt think we should feel guilty about wanting to feel a pleasurable and enjoyable life, we seem to be thinking the key to happiness is really pretty easy, that is having a lot of money. But before we reach for our wallets, Epicurus wants us to stop and think.Epicurus was committed to a life of happiness, he likes sex, laughter and beauty but he points out that happiness is rather a tricky issue and a philosopher might help you find it than a credit card ever could. Epicurus was in favor of pleasure at all, short of many of his many Greek contemporaries, his philosophy became synonymous with a luxurious eating lifestyle. Epicurus said that pleasure was the most important thing in life, but if we analyze Epicurus we actually found that he lived simple, far from a luxurious life, having survived on breads and plain water as a way of life, Epicurus thought we dont really know what we need and so forth prey forth to many substitute desires, such as spending lavishly on a shopping spree. But often according to Epicurus, the key to pleasure comes pretty cheap, the first one is friendship, he stated that friendship is a major source of happiness, but in order to achieve that, one needs to live with his friends at all times, the second thing Epicurus thought we need is freedom, Epicurus left Athens with his friends and started a commune, according to Epicurus, we must free ourselves from the prison from everyday life politics, their lives were simple, but at least they enjoyed their freedom in their self-sufficient ways. The last ingredient is an analyzed life by which he meant a life in which we take time off to reflect on our worries, to analyze what was troubling us, our anxieties can be diminished if we give us time to think things through, and to do that ,we need to take a step back from the noisy commercial world. According to Epicurus, as long as you have enough money to sustain the basic sustenance, that is more than enough to have pleasure in a happy life, Epicurus states that even bread and water can confer the highest possible pleasure when they are brought to hungry lips. Obviously, Epicurus means by this the state of satiety, but he does not in any way separate it from pleasure from eating and drinking that leads to this state.( Nikolsky, 2001) so if we are so easily satisfied, why arent we happy? The answer is seductions in which our goal to become happy and live a pleasurable life become influenced. When we are quickly lured by bright lights and fancy clothing, our desires are subconsciously detoured in our search for pleasure. Thus, the Epicurean view of the physical nature of pleasure as a whole varies little from that of other philosophers: in Epicurus opinion, pleasure is experienced when the atoms of a human body, acted upon by a certain force, find themselves in their proper places, i.e.à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦when the organism attains its natural state under the effect of some influence. Epicurus links pleasure not only with the process but also with the result of restoration, i.e. with the natural state which the organism attains. (Nikolsky, 2001) Next, I would like to refer to a famous philosopher by the name of Aristotle as my second candidate. For Aristotle however, the idea of pleasure and happiness comes from what is considered favorable, what is considered as good. The concept of virtue comes into place here, and we must have these virtues in order to achieve eudaimonia which is the Greek word of happiness .For Aristotle, a prime criterion to living a happy or pleasurable life is to find out what are the ultimate goal or purpose, and thus the way to be happy. Aristotle proposes 3 points, it has to be self-sufficient, it has to be a final goal and it has to be attainable. In this case, one has to develop the virtues in order to achieve a happy life, virtues are themselves the means to an end. Aristotle clearly distinguishes himself from the hedonists when he claims that there is no such thing as undifferentiated pleasure. Pleasure cannot serve as the final goal of our actions because pleasure is not one thing, i.e., the word pleasure as applied to specific instances of pleasure is not univocal. Pleasures differ in nature just as the activities which they accompany differ in nature. The pleasure which we take in eating is simply the same kind of thing as the pleasure which we take in thinking. They are simply different kinds of pleasures and as such it seems that there can be no comparison between them as pleasures. Yet Aristotle clearly believes that such a comparison between different pleasures is possible. He speaks of contemplation as being the most pleasurable activity. But if Aristotles critique of hedonism rules out the possibility of saying that contemplation brings with it a greater amount of pleasure than does eating ( since these pleasures differ qualitatively a nd not quantitatively), what can he mean by saying that contemplation is the most pleasurable activity? (Gonzalez, 1991) According to Aristotle, our ultimate goal is happiness, that is our telos, and happiness is in itself the ultimate good, the ultimate thing we should strive for. In book 1 of Nicomachean Ethics by Aristotle, he states that while happiness is self-sufficient in itself, there is varying degrees of happiness, if we indulge our senses in sensual pleasure, that is considered superficial and on the same level as animals, it is important to consider happiness as not as one brief moment but rather as a whole integral lifelong process. On a side note, Aristotle regards happiness as an activity rather as a state, in order to be happy and live well, one need to have the right virtues to incline towards a certain disposition, a certain lifestyle. In chapter 4 of book 10 Aristotle describes what constitutes a sensation which is most perfect or complete and therefore most pleasurable: there is a corresponding pleasure for every sensation and similarly for thought and contemplation: the most pleasurable activity will be the most complete and the most complete will be the one which takes place between a well-disposed subject and the best of those objects which are proper to it.Pleasure completes the activityà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦The activity of sensation will be most complete when its subjective and objective conditions are the best possible. It is important to recognize that the superlative here implies the possibility of degrees in the completeness and pleasure of an activity. Aristotle is not claiming that an activity can be complete and pleasurable only if it satisfies certain conditions; he is instead claiming that these conditions must be satisfied in order for the activity to be most complete and most pleasurable. (Gonzalez, 199 1) For Aristotle, The question traces back to why we want to be happy, why we want to be virtuous? Why is happiness the ultimate telos? To illustrate, we spend our money on things which we fancy to get pleasure, it all boils down that all our daily activities focus on one and only one purpose, that is to be happy .But happiness itself is a rather intriguing and complex concept, and Aristotle states only through exercising our rational soul, through a life of contemplation as our activity, can happiness be found, and that is what distinguishes us from the animals. In Book 10 of Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle further goes into depth why he thinks contemplation is the ultimate rational answer to pleasure and happiness. The way Aristotle sees things is different, for example, when you encounter an object or entity, would you consider it in aspect of its purpose, or its functions or the process that the object undergoes? Aristotle views everything as telos, he believes everything serve some kind of telos or purpose, he thinks the telos of a plant is to keep growing from the intake of nutrition, the telos of life, so what distinguishes us from plants and animals is in our ultimate telos to contemplate and behave accordingly, to employ the rational faculty of the soul, and this in turn consists of the study of modern day philosophy, as an example. The pleasures involved in the activities are more proper to them than the desires; for the latter are separated both in time and in nature, while the former are close to the activities, and so hard to distinguish from them that it admits of dispute whether the activity is not the same as pleasure. (Manser ,1960)

The Art Of Theater :: essays research papers

The Art of Theater Neither a book nor a work, but an energy   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Theater is the most remarkable art of life. It is a collaborate art combining different people into one solid group in which they work together harmoniously in order to portray a certain idea, concept, or piece of art. Theater deals with various forms of emotions and is most commonly expected to leave a trace or stimulate sentiments on the audience. The mind plays a big role in theater, for the art lies within our imagination. Our mind stimulates many different types of strong emotions such as power, anger, joy, and more. These intangible feelings created by our mind, are the reason why theater the most noteworthy art of life.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Theater â€Å" is neither a book nor a work, but an energy â€Å". Theater is considered to be an energy because it is a calculated act from beginning to end. A piece of theater only lasts for a specific period of time. It has a beginning, middle, and an end. Furthermore, every theatrical piece has a predestined conclusion. Implying that the audience is most often aware of what will happen at the end of the play, yet the art of it is to keep them focused and interested until the very end. Furthermore, unlike other modes of communication, in theater one cannot go back and see a certain scene. A theatrical act takes place in the present, has an ending, and becomes part of our past. Theater is a challenge to our mind, for it makes us think and allows us to use our imagination. During a theatrical act, we are projected into a world of fantasy and imagination, a world that only lasts for a certain period of time. A period of time in which one feels pain, joy, hatred, or love. This is reinforced by the direct contact between the actors and the audience stimulating more personal emotion between different individuals. In my opinion, the art of theater is one of the most empowering factors in ones life.

Themes in the Novel and Movie Adaptation of James Cain’s Mildred Pierce

Themes in the Novel and Movie Adaptation of James Cain’s Mildred Pierce In contemporary film making, â€Å"Hollywood-ization† generally refers to the re-creation of a classic work in a form more vulgar and sexually explicit than the original in an effort to boost movie attendance. After all, sex and violence sell. However, from the mid-1930’s to the 1950’s, â€Å"Hollywood-ization† referred to the opposite case where controversial books had to be purified to abide by the Production Code of 1934.[1] This occurred to many of James Cain’s novels as they moved from text to the genre of â€Å"film noir.† As has been said about Cain’s The Postman Always Rings Twice, â€Å"The property, bought several years ago, was kept in the studio’s archives until now because of [Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer’s] â€Å"inability to clean it up.†Ã¢â‚¬ [2] The sanitation of Cain’s novels greatly took from the strong themes of female emotional and financial independence that were rarely addressed at that t ime as they were adapted for the screen. James Cain’s Mildred Pierce, published in 1941, explored issues that plagued the domesticated woman amidst the social upheaval caused by the Great Depression of the 1930’s and suffered from the rule of the Production Code. As Mildred Pierce’s first marriage with Bert Pierce disintegrates, she is confronted with the responsibility of supporting her two children while creating opportunities for financial independence despite having no skills or education. She becomes a successful restaurateur through the careful manipulation of the men around her only to become the slave to the desires and whims of her eldest daughter, Veda. According to David Madden, the story of Mildred Pierce is â€Å"a powerful and suggestive study of social inequity and ... ...rs, again: The Postman Always Rings Twice,† Literature/Film Quarterly (2000): 41. [3] Madden, David, James M. Cain (Twayne: 1970) 68. [4] Oates, Joyce Carol, Tough Guy Writers of the Thirties (London: Southern Illinois University Press, 1968) 110 [5] Farrell, James, Literature and Morality (New York: The Vanguard Press, Inc, 1945) 89. [6] Madden 148 [7] Farrell, James, 88 Work Cited 1 Encyclopedia Britannica Online www.search.eb.com/bol/topic?eu=119926&sctn=6. 2 Biesen, Sheri Chinen, â€Å"Raising Cain with the censors, again: The Postman Always Rings Twice,† Literature/Film Quarterly (2000) 3 Madden, David, James M. Cain (Twayne: 1970) 4 Oates, Joyce Carol, Tough Guy Writers of the Thirties (London: Southern Illinois University Press, 1968) 5 Farrell, James, Literature and Morality (New York: The Vanguard Press. Inc, 1945)

Comedic Violence in The Medea, The Oresteia, and Antigone Essay

Comedic Violence in The Medea, The Oresteia, and Antigone      Ã‚  Ã‚   Almost no Greek tragedy escapes the use of violence. The Medea, The Oresteia, Antigone, and other classic works of Grecian tragoidia all involve huge components of violence in many prominent places, and for all of these stories, violent action is an integral part of the play. Medea, especially, is a character worthy of note in this regard; her tumultuous life can be plotted accurately along a path of aggression and passionate fits, and her bloody history lends tension and ascendance to the cathartic events of the gripping Medea. In contrast to this turbulent streak of brutality in Grecian tragedy stands the world of Greek comedy. Violence in comedy is just as much a part of the plot as it is in tragedy; however, this superficial parallel ends the similarity between the two types of stories. Violence in a comedy has its own motives, its own consequences, and its own types of influence, and these differences accumulate to bring a whole new, non-tragic light to the ideas of violence and action in the overall storyline. Between Greek tragedy and comedy, every aspect of violence is different, and the ramifications of this disagreement are far-reaching.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   A first comparison of violence between The Medea and Lysistrata leads to an important and ironic conclusion. In The Medea, violence is a pivotal component of the story's message. Medea herself is easily the most physically violent character in the story, and her methods in its plot resort to pain and death when there is conflict in need of resolution. Despite this, the actual tension in the story is not born of violence; rather, it is born of love and social strife. Jason, Medea's husband, is taking a n... ...akes something a comedy and what makes something tragic.    Works Cited    Aeschylus the Oresteia trans. Robert Fagles, New York: Penguin Books, 1976.    Antigone by Sophocles. Translated by R. C. Jebb. no pag. http://classics.mit.edu/Sophocles/antigone.html    Euripedes. Medea, in Euripedes I. Ed. David Grene and Richmond Lattimore. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1955.    Goldhill, S. Reading Greek Tragedy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.    Heidegger, Martin. "The Ode on Man in Sophocles' Antigone." In Sophocles: A Collection of Critical Essays, edited by Thomas Woodard. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1966.    Lucas, F.L. Euripides and His Influence. NY: Cooper Square, 1963.    McDermott, E A (1989) Euripides' Medea: The Incarnation of Disorder. Pennsylvania State University:USA

Huck Finn Literary Criticism

In Huckleberry Finn, Mark Twain portrays his main character and the novel’s namesake, a deeply complex individual, even as a child. He has obvious abandonment issues and continues to struggle with finding his place in society. Huck starts by trying to fit in with Tom and a band of young boys, but eventually finds true companionship in a slave named Jim. Huck continues in his struggles as his moral beliefs conflict with the moral beliefs of the society of his time.This conflict comes from Huck being so immersed in a society that he does not seem to belong in, all while still trying to find a place that he does belong. According to Harold Bloom and Leslie A. Fiedler, â€Å"The moral crisis of the book is created by the constant disjunction in the mind of Huckleberry Finn between what he thinks he ought to do, and what he is aware that he must do† (Bloom and Fiedler 25-39). This is seen throughout the novel, as Huck struggles with following society or following his heart.A nother critic, Gemma Marshall, makes a point very similar to Bloom and Fiedler, saying, â€Å"Through the character of Huck and his internal debates, we see the conflict between what is morally right and what is legally enforced† (Marshall). At one point in the novel, Huck, himself, says: [The Widow Douglas] told me what she meant–I must help other people, and do everything I could for other people and look out for them all the time, and never think about myself†¦.I went out in the woods and turned it over in my mind a long time, but I couldn't see no advantage in it–except for the other people; so that at last I reckoned I wouldn't worry about it any more, but just let it go. (Twain) This statement, which completely supports the views of both critics, does not come from Huck being a selfish individual. Rather, it comes from him struggling to survive. Once Huck meets Jim, it is seen that he does put Jim first in many occasions, because at that point, he can afford to.Earlier in the novel, he could not let his blooming moral compass get in his way of survival. This moral conflict also contributes to Huck’s disregard for the law and his reasons why he does so throughout the novel. Earlier on in the novel, Huck is seen trying to fit in by joining Tom’s gang even if that meant killing people. At that point in the novel, one might say that Huck agreeing to this was just out of loneliness and wanting to belong. As the novel progresses, however, Tom’s actions seem to become more and more aggressive. As Bloom says, â€Å"Tom's scheme for stealing way a Negro whom he knows to be free is not only sadistic but thoroughly immoral. † Though to readers Tom’s actions might seem immoral, he is simply acting as a product of his society. Just as Huck was trying to fit in with Tom by agreeing to join his gang, Tom is trying to fit into his society by following the normalcies that have been exposed to him. Based on this point, Bloom goes on to say that there â€Å"is nothing any more ridiculous about what Tom does than there is about what society inflicts on them every day† (Bloom 25-39).Readers, therefore, cannot judge the moral level of the characters based on today’s moral code, but rather of the moral code of the society that these characters were placed in. As the novel progresses, however, Huck begins to become aware of the morals in society, but chooses to go against them anyway. Bloom argues: It never enters his head for a moment that protecting Jim against recapture is anything but wrong; for he has no abolitionist ideas and questions the justice of slavery no more than did Aristotle.He considers, however, that as an outcast he has little to lose. (Bloom 25-39) If Huck is becoming aware of the morals of his society, yet is still choosing to go against them, this can mean that Huck is subconsciously forming his own moral code. Even though he knew that helping Jim was wrong, h e must have felt, some place down in his heart, that it was right. Otherwise, why would he risk his own life to do so in the first place? In a society full of moral confusion, the one character â€Å"is presented as intelligent, analytical, [and] highly moral† is Jim (Marshall). Does Jim not make for a far more suitable role model than the drunkard Pap? † Marshall asks. He does, in fact, as he goes as far to create a home for Huck, that Pap never did. As unconventional as it may be, Jim and Huck become a family, with the river as their home. As they travel up the rive â€Å"it gradually becomes clear that the two characters leave the constraints of society behind them and create their own world on the water- it is within this world that the influence of societal values are suppressed in favour of a more logical, practical system of values† (Marshall).It is along this journey that Jim teaches Huck what values are really important in an individual, regardless of wh at society says is correct. He teaches Huck what it means to value another person’s life as much as one value’s his own. It is easy to see the moral complexities in this novel reading it through a modern lens, especially in the case of Huck. Readers are constantly struggling with whether nature or nurture will come out victorious: will Huck rise above his society because he was born with the ability to think beyond what he sees in it or will society’s pressures cause Huck to break?Contemporary reviews of the novel were also asking this question. On February 20, 1885, a review was published in The Hartford Courant. It’s author asked, â€Å"What, for instance, in the case of Huck, the son of the town drunkard, perverted from the time of his birth, is conscience, and how does it work? † This show how contemporaries of Mark Twain were able to see and appreciate the moral complexities of his novels and his characters just as easily as readers can today. The whole study of Huck's moral nature is as serious as it is amusing, his confusion of wrong as right and his abnormal mendacity, traceable to his training from infancy, is a singular contribution to the investigation of human nature,† the author of the review goes on to say. The fact that the author uses the term â€Å"confused† by the author of that review is an interesting one. It implies that while Huck may think of his actions as wrong, as determined by his society, his actions actually prove Huck’s ability to think in morally superior terms of his society.Had a Southerner written this review, it may not have had the same implications. As a Northerner, who likely had much stronger anti-slavery views than a Southerner, wrote this review it makes it easier for him to appreciate the development of Huck’s moral code, despite what society was telling him. All three sources of criticism are in agreement about the moral difficulties faced by Huck throughou t the novel. They also all agree that Huck is put at odds with his society because of his moral character, whether he views himself as moral or not.Since the two pieces of literary criticism are quite modern, it is not surprising that the critics are able to look at the novel and pinpoint all of the complexities that are entangled in this novel and in the life of Huck. Since a Northerner wrote the contemporary review, and Northerners were obviously more progressive in the ideas of abolition and anti-slavery than Southerners of the time, that could explain the level of forward thinking presented in the review.All three reviews also agree that Huck’s main conflict throughout the novel is that between himself and society. This is what causes him to set forth North in search of a place where he may belong. Luckily, however, throughout this journey he was able to find his sense of belonging right there with Jim. At the very end Huck reconciles with the fact that without Jim, Huck has nothing, as he does not belong to this society. He finds harmony by deciding to head west. Works Cited Bloom, Harold, and Leslie A.Fiedler. â€Å"Huckleberry Finn: Faust in the Eden of Childhood.. †Ã‚  Bloom's Major Literary Characters  (2004): 25-39. EBSCOHost. Web. 17 Feb 2013. Hartford Courant 20 Feb 1885, Page 2. Web. 18 Feb 2013. www. etext. lib. virginia. edu/twain/harcour2 Marshall, Gemma. â€Å"Literary analysis: Controversial themes in Huckleberry Finn, by Mark Twain. †Ã‚  Helium: Where Knowledge Rules. 05 Dec 2008. Web. 18 Feb 2013. Twain, Mark. The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Ed. Guy Cardell. New York: Penguin Classics, 2002. Print.

Psychoanalytic Theory Essay

Sigmund Freud has been one of the most prominent personalities in the field of psychology. He has contributed numerous theories in this particular field that are being studied and used even up to the present time. The most notable among his works are the personality theory, psychosexual stages of development, and defense mechanism. According to Sigmund Freud, personality is made up of three elements that he elaborated in his theory of personality. These elements are the id, the ego, and the superego, which collaborates together in order to form complex behaviors of human beings (Van Wagner, 2005). The id is an element of an individual’s personality that exists since birth. This component of personality is characterized by primitive behaviors that operate unconsciously through the person’s involuntary instincts. Id operates under the pleasure principle, which functions for the immediate satisfaction of needs and desires. The id is the cause of psychic energy and thus, it is considered as the main aspect of human personality (Van Wagner, 2005). The ego is the element of personality that focuses on reality. Ego is developed from the id, which makes sure that the primitive behaviors coming from the id can be shown in social acceptable behaviors that coincide with the real world. This operates under the reality principle because it sees to it that the instincts coming from the id is regulated so that it would be appropriate in the real world (Van Wagner, 2005). The superego is the last element of the personality theory to develop. This is the aspect of the personality theory that holds the moral values and standards of an individual. Superego represents the morals a person acquires from his/her parents and the society. This is also known as a person’s sense of right and wrong (Van Wagner, 2005). Freud believes that to be able to comprehend the adult behavior of a person, it is necessary to analyze his/her experience as a child. Due to this the psychosexual stages of development was created (Queen, 2001). The psychosexual stages are composed of the oral, anal, phallic, latency, and genital stages. The oral stage takes place from birth to 18 months. It is linked with linked with the desire to â€Å"incorporate† objects in the mouth. This is followed by the anal stage that happen from 18 months to three years. The anal stage is when the child takes pleasure in defecation wherein his/her anus is considered as an erotogenic zone (â€Å"Freud’s Psychosexual Stages of Development†, 2004). Next, is the phallic stage where the individual moves satisfaction from the anus to the genitals at the age of three to seven. It is referred to as the phallic stage because as Freud argues it is the male organ which is important in this stage. Furthermore, the individual takes on the latent period where sexual concerns are still considered but this is in accordance with the society he/she moves in which occurs from seven to twelve years of age. Lastly, the genital period, which occurs from twelve years to adulthood and is the time when attraction towards the opposite sex is developed. As stages are completed the person could balance different aspects of life (Quigley, 1998). There are eight defense mechanisms that are proposed by Freud. These are sublimation, repression, denial, projection, reaction formation, isolation, regression, and defense against effect (Hentschel et al. , 2004). The discussions made above concerns the psychoanalytic theory of Sigmund Freud. More specifically the parts of personality, the psychosexual stages of development, and defense mechanisms were presented.

I Should Pass This Class Because Essay

I Need to pass my Eng 096 writing in order for me to move on to the next level of my education. I am doing computer science as a major at a college, and in order for me to get into the program I need to pass english 101 and college level math, so I made an effort this summer and took a placement test,which I placed into english 096 writing class.This class is hard to learn,its also expensive, and it takes a lot of time and needs a lot of attention before you can pass it. First let me start by saying, this class is so hard for me, because i haven’t been in school for the past 10 years.And also I forgot about all the stuff I learned when I was in highschool, so this is like a fresh start for me. I Am doing my best to pass this class by Paying attention when the instructor is teaching because i remember in high school my teacher told me the only way you can pass class is based on three things. by paying attention, coming to class on time,and doing all homework on time. Secondly I didn’t know school could be so expensive until i started this class. The tuition alone is a lot of money plus the books and the time that you spend in class are all money that am losing because my class starts at 7:00 pm every Monday and my job was suppose to end at 10:00pm on Mondays, but I cut some of my working hours so I can make it to class on time. Lastly I spend at least two hours a day out my very busy shedule life to do some studies for this class. During this time I lock myself in a room by myself so I can concentrate because I don’t want to go to school without my homework being done or without being ready to take in the new stuff. With all the effort I put in this class, I think I should pass this class because if i don’t it will be a big loss for me, I wouldn’t be able to pursuit my goal of becoming a computer scientist, I would lose a lot of money, and lastly all the time I put in will just be a waste of time.